nanog mailing list archives
Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:16:27 -0600
On 11/29/2010 5:59 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
No one will ever be in ratio compliance with an eyeball dominant network. Ever. Period. It's not possible via technology and TOS. Enforcing it as an eyeball network just forces content providers to aquire eyeballs, e.g. compete with you. That's bad business.
The NSPs generally don't do non-transit peering unless traffic loads are high enough to justify it. That said, CDNs are the same. Google doesn't want to peer privately with someone who doesn't do enough traffic to justify the cost of the port, haul, support, etc.
The ratio of which way bits are flying are really irrelevant when peering, and as you say, tends to be more ego than anything. The key, and what everyone wants is "Someone paying me talks to someone I don't have to pay." Doesn't matter if it's CDN talking transit to an eyeball network or eyeballs paying for transit to access a privately peered CDN. What you don't want is 2 entities talking to one another through you without you making a dime.
Jack
Current thread:
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions, (continued)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Brandon Galbraith (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions William Warren (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Brandon Galbraith (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Kevin Blackham (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Jeffrey Lyon (Nov 30)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Matthew Moyle-Croft (Nov 30)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Phil Bedard (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Seth Mattinen (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Ingo Flaschberger (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Leo Bicknell (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Jack Bates (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Seth Mattinen (Nov 29)
- RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions Ben Butler (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Jon Lewis (Nov 30)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Justin M. Streiner (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Owen DeLong (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Seth Mattinen (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Christopher Morrow (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Leo Bicknell (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Joe Provo (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Leo Bicknell (Nov 29)
- Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions Jeff Wheeler (Nov 30)