Fans of the indiscriminate information super highway on both sides of the pond will be disappointed to learn that US ISP Cox Communications has announced bandwidth management plans while the UK government recently spoke out against the principles of net neutrality.

Cox Communications, the United States’ third largest ISP, has broached an unhappy topic with a recent update to their site which announces impending bandwidth management plans. The proposed congestion management system will ensure that “time-sensitive Internet traffic” is delivered without delay. In exchange, services like Usenet, uploads and peer-to-peer may be temporarily delayed to achieve timely delivery of prioritized traffic.

Like Comcast which has already begun protocol-agnostic bandwidth management trials, Cox cites the consumer experience as the driving force behind their plans. “Management of occasional congestion is just one aspect of intelligent network management, which allows Cox to provide customers the best possible Internet experience,” the update reads. “We also manage our network for the safety and security of our customers, by blocking spam and helping to make our customers less susceptible to viruses and other online hazards.”

While Cox Communications was quick to address potential questions and concerns from customers, they have been decidedly less revealing about their chosen mechanisms. The update contains no technical information regarding the method by which traffic is analyzed to assess its time sensitivity. This uncertainty has roused suspicion in internet watchdog groups such as Free Press which has expressed skepticism regarding the plan.

“My initial thoughts are caution and skepticism based on past history with cable companies in this respect,” said Free Press Policy Director Ben Scott. “But I’d like to withhold judgment until I know a little bit more, find out what they have in mind beyond the generalities, beyond what they have on their website.”

The looming congestion management trial is expected to begin in the Arkansas and Kansas markets and may be deployed to other regions later in the year.

Hopping across the Atlantic, UK Communications Minister Lord Carter has spoken out against legislation which even remotely resembles net neutrality bills which have appeared in US Congress in recent months. The Communications politico delivered a Digital Britain report in which he believes charging content providers for guaranteed service levels could promote investment and innovation.

“Net neutrality is sometimes cited by various parties in defence of internet freedom, innovation and consumer choice,” the report reads. “The debate over possible legislation in pursuit of this goal has been stronger in the US than in the UK.

“Ofcom has in the past acknowledged the claims in the debate but have [sic] also acknowledge that ISPs might in future wish to offer guaranteed service levels to content providers in exchange for increased fees.

“In turn this could lead to differentiation of offers and promote investment in higher speed access networks. Net neutrality legislation might prevent this sort of innovation.”

Carter’s proposal would permit ISPs to charge content providers increased fees to ensure timely or prioritized delivery of user-requested traffic. Sites that cannot afford to pay for priority delivery would play second fiddle to firms with quid to spare. This sort of system has sparked resentment in the United States as tiered service levels operate independently from and supersede a customer’s bandwidth package. Firms unable to levy the funds would be delivered to consumers at a slower rate, regardless of a customer’s downstream bandwidth.

While savvy UK citizens and Internet watchdog groups are already in an uproar, the infamously lucrative BBC is clamoring for the tiered service levels so long as it can pass the fees onto consumers.

In a recent interview, BBC iPlayer chief Anthony Rose suggested an optional high quality iPlayer charge on top of broadband subscriptions.

“What we need to do is to create the iPlayer services at different quality levels and then let ISPs offer different bandwidth propositions to users,” he said.

“For example, the user can get a good quality iPlayer service for, say, £10 a month but for £20, a much better iPlayer quality would be available.”

With US companies signing on to congestion management techniques and the UK rejecting neutrality clauses outrightly, it can be assured events in this controversial arena are far from over.