nanog mailing list archives
Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post
From: Phil Bedard <bedard.phil () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:55:49 -0400
MSOs run expansive IP networks today, including national dark fiber DWDM networks. They all have way more people with IP expertise than they do RF expertise. Even modern STBs use IP for many functions since they require 2-way communication, the last hold-out is your traditional TV delivery. Even then most of the MSOs have IPTV installations in at least some markets. That pendulum tipped a long long time ago now. Level3 actually had to pay Comcast the last time this all came around. They gained Netflix as a customer, the ratios of traffic a "transit" provider was sending to Comcast because way out of balance, and Level3 succumbed and paid. Mainly since most of the traffic wasn't "transit" traffic, it was Netflix traffic coming off Level3 CDNs. Transit providers have "double-dipped" forever when it comes to ingress/egress traffic to their own customers. -Phil On 4/28/14, 9:05 AM, "Niels Bakker" <niels=nanog () bakker net> wrote:
Isn't this all predicated that our crappy last mile providers continue with their crappy last mile* jnanog () gmail com (Rick Astley) [Mon 28 Apr 2014, 05:08 CEST]:If you think prices for residential broadband are bad now if you passed a law that says all content providers big and small must have settlement free access to the Internet paid for by residential subscribers what do you think it would do to the price of broadband?Lower it? Right now broadband providers pay a transit provider who then get paid by content providers to carry the bits, generally because broadband providers don't want to think about running IP networks because they their skills lie more in the television part of RF networks. Content providers are offering to take out that middleman, bringing everybody's cost down. Some broadband providers think they deserve more of a free ride than others. It also happens that those broadband providers are generally already more expensive than their competitors. -- Niels. --
Current thread:
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post, (continued)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Rick Astley (Apr 27)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Niels Bakker (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Suresh Ramasubramanian (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Phil Bedard (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jack Bates (Apr 28)
- RE: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they couldenshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post bedard.phil (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they couldenshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Hugo Slabbert (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they couldenshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Justin M. Streiner (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Niels Bakker (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jean-Francois Mezei (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Phil Bedard (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jean-Francois Mezei (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Suresh Ramasubramanian (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jay Ashworth (Apr 27)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Doug Barton (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Lee (Apr 27)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Owen DeLong (Apr 27)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jean-Francois Mezei (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Owen DeLong (Apr 28)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jay Ashworth (Apr 29)
- Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post Jean-Francois Mezei (Apr 29)