Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality

["Dude VanWinkle" <dudevanwinkle () gmail com>]

On 5/3/06, Greg Poirier <grep () reflexsecurity com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 15:47 -0400, Dude VanWinkle wrote:
> > So the internet is really made up of:
> >
> > 360networks
> > AboveNet
> <snip>
> > Xspedius
>
> Yes.
>
> > So comcast sells client access to the pipe they lease from Quest. This
> > connection would not be messed with, however if Google has a pipe on
> > Telstra, they may rate limit packets from Quest to Google in order to
> > force google to pay more bucks.
> >
> > Is that right? does it matter if google leases a pipe from Quest
> > rather than Telstra?
>
> No, because the point at which they're rate-limiting is before the
> packets ever hit Qwest.  The rate-limiting would occur within Comcast's
> network since Comcast owns everything from their border routers to the
> client they're selling Internet connectivity to.

So if what you say is true, Comcast (who doesnt host google in this
scenerio, and is just an end user ISP that connects people to the
content providers ISP's mentioned above) can charge google for QoS
even though their servers dont have anything to do with their network?

That sounds unlikely, since that will force google to pay every ISP on
the planet in order to to be truely accessable. Well maybe not
unlikely, but really unfair if it is true,

-JP

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.