DISQUS

Undeniably, it's a good thing for local ISPs to cache frequently requested material for their users. It just makes sense, for both parties. And if an ISP wants to charge for preferential _caching_ on top of neutral service, that's fine, too. The problem is if ISPs are allowed to _require_ content providers who are not their direct customers to pay a fee simply to cross the ISP's network. That's what the whole network neutrality debate is about--it's not about whether or not users should have the option paying more for better service, but rather that they have to make separate agreements with everyone that might pass their packets, instead of the ISPs taking care of arranging the peering agreements and then passing on the costs to their _direct_ customers.