Total citations found = 44
- C. Marsden, Case Studies in Implementing Net Neutrality: A Critical Analysis of Zero Rating, April 2016, Vol. 13, Issue 1, ScriptED, available at http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/59962/1/SCRIPTed-%20Zero%20rating_formattedCM.pdf(outlining BITAG’s reports to date).
- V. Giotsas, G. Smaragdakis, B. Huffaker, M. Luckie, kc claffy, “Mapping Peering Interconnections to a Facility,” CoNEXT, Dec. 2015, available at http://conferences2.sigcomm.org/co-next/2015/img/papers/conext15-final233.pdf (citing to the Interconnection report).
- FCC, Open Internet Order, 2015, available at https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-15-24A1.doc (Citing to BITAG reports twelve times, and to BITAG as a forum twice).
- Srinivas Arukonda and Samta Sinha, “The Innocent Perpetrators: Reflectors and Reflection Attacks,” ACSIJ Advances in Computer Science: an International Journal, Vol. 4, Issue 1, No.13, January 2015 (Citing to the SNMP report).
- C. Marsden, Case Studies in Implementing Net Neutrality: A Critical Analysis, Mar. 31, 2015, TPRC 43 conference paper, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2587920 (outlining BITAG’s reports to date).
- L. Belli, End-to-End, Net Neutrality and Human Rights, pp.13-29 in Net Neutrality Compendium, Nov. 2015, (citing to Port Blocking report).
- I. Koukoutsidis, Public QoS and Net Neutrality Measurements: Current Status and Challenges Toward Exploitable Results, 2015, Journal of Information Policy Vol. 5, pp. 245-286 (citing the Port Blocking report), available at http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.5.2015.0245.
- Cogent, citing to BITAG Congestion Management report:
- J. Brodkin, During Netflix money fight, Cogent’s other big customers suffered too, Nov. 5, 2014, ARSTECHNICA, http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/11/during-netflix-money-fight-cogents-other-big-customers-suffered-too/ (describing how cogent prioritized traffic, and describing how Cogent then “claimed” their prioritization was network management in accordance with the recommendations in BITAG’s Congestion Management Report).
- D. Rayburn, http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/11/cogent-disregards-fcc-rules.html (describing same as ARSTECHNICA article).
- Google groups discussion on measurement, where Cogent admitted to the prioritization and pointed to the BITAG report on Congestion -- https://groups.google.com/a/measurementlab.net/forum/#!topic/discuss/vcQnaZJO6nQ (includes discussion from others, as well as suggestion to make it a BITAG request).
- https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r29691086-Interesting-little-Article-Cogent-admits-slowing-down-Netflix (discussion on Cogent admitting to prioritization and pointing to BITAG).
- Level3, Blog post on Interconnection, Sept. 30, 2014, http://blog.level3.com/open-internet/not-neutrality/ (describing interconnection issues, then responding that they are indeed a member of BITAG).
- Professional Information Security Association (PISA), PISA Journal Sep-2014, 2014, pp.25-27 (DDoS attacks section/article citing to BITAG SNMP Report).
- ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee, SAC065, SSAC Advisory on DDoS Attacks Leveraging DNS Infrastructure, available at https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/sac-065-en.pdf (citing to SNMP report 2x)
- Z. Anwar & A.W. Malik, Can a DDoS Attack Meltdown My Data Center? A Simulation Study and Defense Strategies, July 2014, IEEE Communications Letters, v18 Issue 7 (citing to SNMP Report).
- Kaio Rafael de Souza Barbosa, Gilbert B. Martins, Eduardo Souto, Eduardo Luzeiro Feitosa, Botnets: Caracteristicas e Metodos de Deteccao Atraves do Trafego de Rede, 2014, available at http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eduardo_Feitosa/publication/268278242 (Citing to SNMP report for ways to address DDoS botnet attacks).
- James B. Speta, An Appropriate Interconnection Backstop, 12 Colo. Tech. L.J. 113 (2014) (Citing to BITAG as a forum, “Private institutions have a role to play as well, such as the consensus-developing role of the Broadband Internet Technical Advisory Group ("BITAG")”).
- Speta, James B, The United States’ Uncertain Approach to Network Neutrality, 7 J. of L. and Econ. Reg. 1, 2014, pp. 27-43 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- Cerf, Vinton G. and Ryan, Patrick S. and Senges, Max and Whitt, Richard S., A Perspective from the Private Sector: Ensuring that Forum Follows Function (August 29, 2014). in Beyond Netmundial: The Roadmap for Institutional Improvements to the Global Internet Governance Ecosystem (William J. Drake and Monroe Price, Eds). 2014; Center for Global Communication Studies, Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, Forthcoming, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2489348
- OFCOM, Report on the Implications of Carrier Grade Network Address Translators, 2013, available at http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/technology-research/2013/cgnat.pdf (citing to BITAG Large Scale NAT report).
- L. Howard & K. Brooks, Assessing the Supply Curve in the IPv4 Address Market, 2013, http://www.wleecoyote.com/documents/IPv4-supply-analysis.pdf (citing to Large Scale NAT report).
- European Council, Steering Committee on Media and Information Society (CDMSI), Protecting Human Rights through Network Neutrality: Furthering Internet Users’ Interest, Modernising Human Rights and Safegaurding the Open Internet, 2013 (citing to BITAG Port Blocking Report).
- J. P. De Vries, L. Simic, A. Achtzehn, M. Petrova, P. Mahonen, “The Wi-Fi ‘congestion crisis’: Regulatory criteria for assessing spectrum congestion claims”, TPRC 2013, available at https://sites.google.com/site/jpdevries/publications (Citing to Congestion Management report, “As a rule of thumb, a network could be considered to be congested when the amount of data to be sent exceeds the capacity available; in the words of a recent engineering consensus, “congestion occurs when instantaneous demand exceeds capacity” (BITAG, 2013)”).
- B. Szoka, FCC, Net Neutrality & Antitrust (March 31, 2013), available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2242725 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- Hon. M.K. Ohlhausen, Net Neutrality vs. Net Reality: Why an Evidence-Based Approach to Enforcement, And Not More Regulation, Could Protect Innovation on the Web, Telecommunications & Electronic Media, 2013, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/telecommunications-electronic-media-net-neutrality-vs.net-reality-why-evidence-based-approach-enforcement-not-more-regulation-could-protect-innovation-web/140204ohlhausennetneutrality.pdf (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- C. Marsden, Net Neutrality Law: Past Policy, Present Proposals, Future Regulation? (October 3, 2013). Proceedings of the United Nations Internet Governance Forum: Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality, Nusa Dua Bali, Indonesia, 25 October 2013, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2335359 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- C. Marsden, Net Neutrality: Measuring the Problem, Assessing the Legal Risks (December 1, 2013). IBEI Working Papers 2013/42 Telefonica Chair Series, available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2509883 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- D. Sicker and B. Kim, Implementing an Open Internet: Republic of Korea and U.S. Perspectives and Motivations (March 31, 2013). TPRC 41: The 41st Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2242627 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- Connected Viewing: Selling, Streaming, & Sharing Media in the Digital Age, Jennifer Holt, Kevin Sanson, Eds. Routledge 2013 (book describing BITAG and its structure/processes).
- M. Berejka, A Case for Government Promoted Multistakeholderism, 10 J. on Telecomm & High Tech. L. 1 (2012) (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- J. Livingood, Considerations for Transitioning Content to IPv6, RFC 6589, April 2012, https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6589 (acknowledging BITAG’s TWG for assistance, and to BITAG’s Large Scale NAT effort).
- J. Waz & P. Weiser, Internet Governance: The Role of Multistakeholder Organizations (December 31, 2012). Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2013, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2195167 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
- K. A. Sieh and D.N. Hatfield, The Broadband Internet Technical Advisory Group (BITAG) and Its Role in Internet Governance (March 31, 2012). 2012 TRPC, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2032233 (describing BITAG as a forum and describing its reports to date).
- C. Marsden, Network Neutrality: A Research Guide (May 26, 2011). HANDBOOK OF INTERNET RESEARCH, I. Brown, ed., Edward Elgar, 2012, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1853648 (giving description of BITAG and history of Internet regulation in the U.S.).
- L Downes, Unscrambling the FCC’s Net Neutrality Order: Preserving the Open Internet – But which one?, CommLaw Conspectus, 2011 (citing to BITAG as a forum).
Websites, Blog Posts, Conference Presentations, and Industry Newsletters:
- http://icannwiki.com/BITAG (describing BITAG).
- http://www.cybertelecom.org/broadband/backboneref.htm (cite for Interconnection report as a paper or presentation on peering).
- https://www.benton.org/node/185056 (citing to and providing Exec. Summary for VoIP Impairment, Failure, and Restrictions report).
- http://www.doc4net.com/doc/607091624576 (providing copy of VoIP report).
- http://www.nojitter.com/post/240168752/voip-voice-quality-problems--recommendations (article on VoIP report).
- http://chrismarsden.blogspot.com/2014/05/bitag-6-measures-to-stop-throttling-of.html (Blog describing BITAG’s recommendations for VoIP report).
- https://kb.iweb.com/entries/46917837-Guide-to-Public-SNMP-Amplification-Issues (citing to SNMP report in a guide to public SNMP amplification issues).
- https://www.acuta.org/acuta/pdf/new1014.pdf (article in ACUTA news letter on VoIP report).
- http://www.overturenetworks.com/2013/07/29/net-neutrality-part-3/ (describing the net neutrality debate, and describing BITAG along with BITAG’s first 3 reports).
- http://www.iij.ad.jp/en/company/development/iir/pdf/iir_vol21_internet_EN.pdf (presentation from Internet Initiative Japan citing to BITAG SNMP report when describing DNS attacks).