As the debate over "network neutrality" becomes a driving force in telecommunications legislation on Capitol Hill, the information technology community is split.

Call it geek versus geek.

The dispute about whether the Bell telephone and cable companies must be barred from charging Internet companies for speedier delivery has clinched a raw nerve in Silicon Valley.

The business battles are only part of the struggle.

EBay, Google and Yahoo are at odds with neighbor Cisco Systems. The former are pure Internet companies and sell directly to individual consumers. Cisco, the original networking company because its routers powered the Internet protocol, sells its products to consumers and telecommunications carriers.

There is fundamental disagreement among the Internet's eminences grise.

The Internet has gotten where it is today as a result of open access, said Google Chief Internet Evangelist Vint Cerf, who has taken the lead arguing for neutrality rules.

Cerf was a creator of the protocol upon which the Internet runs, and is widely considered the Internet's "father." He was with MCI for more than a decade, and joined Google last year.

Cerf and pro-neutrality compatriots see rules as necessary to stop Bell and cable domination over the last mile of telephone wires to consumers. They say innovation is at stake.

"If Google had to get permission from a [Bell company to offer its content], it is doubtful that it would have been able to do it at all," Cerf said.

Many other technologists are with him — including former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt, networking consultant David Isenberg, Stanford University law professor Lawrence Lessig and Internet telephone entrepreneur Jeff Pulver.

Hundt has been writing online about the subject at the TPMCafe Web log. He sees neutrality rules as essential so the Internet "doesn't become subjected to a variety of proprietary claims." Declared Hundt, "That space in the U.S. cannot be jeopardized by the lack of a public thoroughfare."

But other policy wonks disagree. Dave Farber, a computer science professor at the Carnegie Mellon University who was instrumental in the early involvement of the Defense Department and National Science Foundation in computer networking, believes Cerf's neutrality rules could stifle Web advances in the Internet.

"As one of those who has been involved with the Internet since its earliest days, I do think it is getting old," Farber said on his widely read e-mail list. Some consider Farber the Internet's "grandfather."

"We don't want to inadvertently stall innovation in these areas by imposing rules or laws the implications of which are far from clear," Farber said. "The technology, operations and management of the Internet's functions are very complex, and we must be aware of the likelihood of unintended consequences with respect to federal regulation or legislation."

Farber's cautionary words are supported by Massachusetts Institute of Technology senior research scientist David Clark, futurist George Gilder, former FCC Chairman Michael Powell and Vanderbilt University law professor Christopher Yoo.

Powell said at a recent Pulver-Isenberg conference that neutrality rules would work against innovation — because they would empower incumbent telecom providers that currently enjoy top strength at agencies like the FCC.