Talk of BitTorrent filtering shows confusion reigns

You may have seen elsewhere what appeared to be almost a throwaway line by Stephen Conroy: That BitTorrent filtering is now feasible.

Technology is improving all the time. Technology that filters peer-to-peer and BitTorrent traffic does exist and it is anticipated that the effectiveness of this will be tested in the live pilot trial.

What I can tell you is that, assertions by some software vendors aside, the technology does not exist to filter BT in any sensible or effective way, and attempts to so would have a massive impact on Internet service. The majority of Internet traffic is now BitTorrent, and the way it works - where the data packets arrive in essentially random order from dozens of peers distributed around the world - is to all intents and purposes immune to meaningful filtering.

It's definitely possible to throttle BitTorrent traffic - all BitTorrent traffic - but that is clearly not the same thing. So what is going on here?

I hardly need to point out this highlights a degree of disarray inside the Minister's office. The policy is not even close to being nailed down even as the trial is about to begin. Despite assertions that the mandatory filter will only apply to "prohibited" content (not illegal, mind you) and won't expand over time, at the 11th hour we have a major new technology announcement seemingly added as an afterthought to a blog comment. Is the hypothetical torrent filter only supposed to apply to illegal material? How will such material be identified - is there a blacklist of torrent trackers? If there was, how would that work in the real world when the traffic is all between peers? Government policy needs to make more sense than this!

This also demonstrates just how poor the advice is that the Minister is getting. For many reasons, it's clear a Government Minister should not be let near a microphone or a keyboard unless they have been properly briefed. Obviously nobody in Conroy's office understands the Internet to the level of detail sufficient to formulate and defend policies that affect our Internet infrastructure. Anyone with experience in the nitty-gritty of Internet networking could have explained the difficulties to the Minister. If somebody did, he ignored or misunderstood. In any case, Australia loses.

Please, Minister. Stop ignoring the correct advice that has been offered to you from the community and industry. If you must persist with this dreadful policy, at least show the electorate enough respect to present a proper policy document that informs (us and an increasingly frustrated Internet industry) about what we are in for.