In ur tubes, legislatin ur packetz

There are several long winded papers on the subject, but I think the wikipedia articles mostly have the highest signal to noise ratio. The articles make the most sense when read in order.

Video summary

This is a very good summary of one point of view, but omits many "facts".

Background

Skip these if you are already familiar with them.

Technical substance

The section "QoS problems" has some inaccuracies and implies that it is clear that QoS provides a poor cost-benefit. That is still a controversial issue in the networking community. The peering article is particularly important because it describes the actual current commercial system for transmitting data across the Internet. Lack of understanding of how peering works has led to much unnecessary debate. I include the end-to-end article because the wikipedia article overreaches and draws conclusions that are not in the paper. Interestingly, Lawrence Lessig and David S. Isenberg, who have strongly influenced the net neutrality debate, draw upon the same inaccurate conclusions.

The debate

You might read reported statements in this article that blatantly contradict the preceding articles. In most cases, wikipedia is accurate in both articles, and the individual that made the statement is not understanding something.

IMHO, this is one of the best wikipedia pages. It takes a very complex issue, where actors frequently do not even understand each other, and sorts it all out. No other source comes close to covering the issue.

Dessert

These are dessert for the brain.