managed IP networks (e.g. for inter- connection of different data centers in the service provider's CDNs). But when the data is transferred over the public Internet (by using the IAS), the service providers (local or global) cannot have any prioritization regarding QoS. So, it is possible (and typical) that Internet traffic over broadband and ultra-broadband is delivered on the basis of network neutrality and the same traffic between different data centers of the service providers be exchanged over managed IP networks for which strict QoS can be guaran- teed. That provides the possibility of service providers placing CDN data centers as close as possible to end-users in different regions, and then applying differentiation of the traf- fic, then performing aggregation per traffic type (e.g. voice, video, and other data) and transferring such different traffic types between their own data centers with different QoS (e.g. by using different VPNs). In this manner, network neutrality does not prevent References service providers from improving the QoS of their services, especially with broadband and ultra-broadband Internet access offered by national telecom operators over both fixed and mobile access. Telecom operators directly influence the QoS of the OTT ser- vices by the bitrates (and delays) provided over their own networks as well as the data cap offered to end-users. Overall, sustainable ultra-broadband bitrates for IAS benefit all parties, including service providers (better QoS on average for their services over the network neutral Internet), network operators (satisfied customers, who will remain users of their services), and finally the most important (regarding network neutrality), end-users (they benefit from the higher QoS level for IAS as a whole, and for the OTT services that they use over the IAS on a network neutral basis). Overall, network neutrality provides a greater possibility for service innovations by local (i.e. national) and global OTT service providers, and that is innovation without permis