<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Deep Packet Inspection and Internet Privacy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.privateproxysoftware.com/Blog/internet-privacy/deep-packet-inspection-and-internet-privacy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.privateproxysoftware.com/Blog/internet-privacy/deep-packet-inspection-and-internet-privacy/</link>
	<description>Anonymous Proxy Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon,  9 Nov 2009 00:16:00 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.privateproxysoftware.com/Blog/internet-privacy/deep-packet-inspection-and-internet-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:34:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.privateproxysoftware.com/Blog/?p=377#comment-58</guid>
		<description>It&#039;ll be interesting to see what Congress comes up with. From my experience, a lot of customers may not support DPI, but they&#039;re probably in favor of some of its outcomes -- better network quality, etc. Obviously, DPI isn&#039;t only used for snooping, but can be an effective tool at minimizing bandwidth abuse and maintaining the quality of an Internet network for the majority of users. But, it&#039;s hard to say where the line is actually drawn. If an ISP can detect and block a certain type of file or application, then whose to say it won&#039;t intentionally slow certain VoIP or video traffic in an effort to push business to their voice and video services. This dilemma has been one of the motivations driving our company to develop technology that provides the positive effects but doesn&#039;t rely on DPI or snooping to do so. I think once people start to realize that it&#039;s not a simple choice between deep packet inspection or crappy service, and that there are other options available, the backlash against DPI will get even stronger.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;ll be interesting to see what Congress comes up with. From my experience, a lot of customers may not support DPI, but they&#8217;re probably in favor of some of its outcomes &#8212; better network quality, etc. Obviously, DPI isn&#8217;t only used for snooping, but can be an effective tool at minimizing bandwidth abuse and maintaining the quality of an Internet network for the majority of users. But, it&#8217;s hard to say where the line is actually drawn. If an ISP can detect and block a certain type of file or application, then whose to say it won&#8217;t intentionally slow certain VoIP or video traffic in an effort to push business to their voice and video services. This dilemma has been one of the motivations driving our company to develop technology that provides the positive effects but doesn&#8217;t rely on DPI or snooping to do so. I think once people start to realize that it&#8217;s not a simple choice between deep packet inspection or crappy service, and that there are other options available, the backlash against DPI will get even stronger.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
