Net Neutrality is one of those long-term geek desires that has seemed, like Starcraft II, both tantalizingly within reach and impossible to ever have. What's Net Neutrality? It's the idea that broadband carriers -- both wired and wireless carriers, that is -- should allow all legal content to travel their networks without intervening. That sounds dull, right? More lively: it's the principle that says Comcast can't hobble the speed at which Netflix or Hulu videos download on their network in order to push you toward using their Fancast Web site instead, and AT&T can't block you from using Skype because it cuts into their business. Net neutrality, most simply, is the idea that providers must be neutral carriers of content.

This has long been the way the Internet has functioned, though it's hit some speed bumps in the past few years. The FCC found Comcast guilty last year of purposely slowing traffic for high-speed customers using file-sharing programs like Bit-Torrent, but the FCC's enforcement ability is limited. Comcast has challenged the FCC in court (ruling still pending) to see whether it has to adhere to the guideline at all. In the meantime, while we Comcast subscribers struggle to get our Peer-to-Peer copies of the King James Bible and barbershop quartet recordings, the FCC remains something of a paper tiger, growling from the sidelines.

Which is something that current chairman Julius Genachowski would like to fix. Speaking today at the Brookings Institute, Genachowski neatly outlined the problem [full remarks in PDF]:

Suddenly, what sounds annoying -- a longer download time to get the season opener of "Bones"? How dare you, Comcast! -- seems threatening. What if Comcast, or AT&T, or -- does this sound familiar? -- Verizon decides to block messages from a certain campaign? If Candidate A is all for Net Neutrality, and Candidate B is all for laissez fare Internet policy, and they both have videos available online -- should you be prepared to see a "404 - Page Not Found" message at one site and a lightning fast connection at the other? Should text messages from the Open Internet Project be blocked on Verizon phones because they might convince you to take up the fight? Should Google, which supports Net Neutrality, suddenly run a little slower than Yahoo! Search, which has corporate ties with AT&T?

The current guidelines that the FCC has would, under Genachowski's proposal, be adopted as hard, fast FCC rules. No more court-room squabbling for Comcast: all broadband carriers, both wired and wireless, would have to adhere to neutral practices, or face the full wrath of a toothed-up FCC.

This is an effective, if not ideal, solution to the problem. (The best solution would be legislation on the matter, but -- as Google notes -- though momentum has built, it still seems unlikely).

The FCC has opened a new Web site, www.OpenInternet.gov, to explain and promote its Net Neutrality efforts and to collect public comment ahead of its October vote on the new rules. Check it out; if you connect successfully, thank Net Neutrality.