This afternoon at the Tech Policy Central forum, a panel of stakeholders discussed before a standing-room-only crowd a long-awaited “net neutrality” order announced last month by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

The term “net neutrality” refers to the general principle that all content available on the Internet should receive equal precedence, such that Internet service providers (ISPs) do not discriminate between different types or sources of traffic. The FCC’s order, announced last December 27, sets forth new net neutrality-like rules. It requires that wireline (as opposed to mobile) broadband providers may not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices, and it prohibits unreasonable discrimination. In a partial victory for wireless carriers, the rules for mobile broadband are narrower, requiring only that providers may not block lawful websites or applications that compete with the provider’s voice or video services. An important aspect of the order is a fairly strong rule requiring a new degree of transparency about how providers conduct network management.

The actual rules articulated in the order are fairly short and read more as high-level principles than detailed instructions. Throughout the order, the FCC promises to monitor the situation and respond to situations as they arise, an approach that several panelists termed “watch and see” — a step stronger than “wait and see.” As David Sohn of the Center for Democracy and Technology remarked, “This establishes FCC as the cop on the beat. But how that role plays out over time is an ongoing process.”

There weren’t any real surprises in the panelists’ positions:  Google supports the FCC’s order, as does CDT; AT&T is “comfortable with the order”; and Verizon does not support it. James Cicconi of AT&T and Tom Tauke of Verizon both complained that, among other things, Internet providers are being singled out while other parts of the Internet ecosystem, such as Apple’s app store, have far more leeway to discriminate. David Sohn from CDT suggested that because the rules are so high-level, it would have been feasible to treat wireline and wireless equally.

Neil Fried of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce launched a blistering and at times bombastic critique of the order, calling the FCC “the Ministry of Truth” and promising that his Committee would hold hearings on the substance of the order, the FCC’s authority, and the rulemaking process. Fried conceded, however, that any Congressional action would have to be signed by President Obama or get enough votes to override a veto.

Despite all the attention that the FCC’s order has generated, everyone agrees that this is just the first major step in an iterative process; the FCC seems firmly committed to an open network and transparency, but how that commitment plays out over next few years remains to be seen.