nanog mailing list archives
Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
From: Dave Temkin <dave () temk in>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 17:57:58 -0400
Hi Richard, You may be confusing Idaho for Portland, but either way we are constantly adding new POPs and Portland is a great example of us bearing the cost that ISPs were bearing before to haul traffic from Seattle or San Jose. I would consider that a great success. Regarding Comcast in SF, they do not interconnect with other networks there, otherwise we'd probably hand off in the city. The interconnect locations are not always our choice. On Friday, July 11, 2014, Richard Bennett <richard () bennett com> wrote:
Actually, there are some examples of this, and I'm surprised Mr. Temkin didn't point them out. I've been told by rural telcos (RLECs) that there's a consolidated mini-exchange in Idaho that was originally built with some support from the state in order exchange phone calls within Idaho that would otherwise have to be sent to Denver or Seattle for interconnect. The RLECs subsequently used the facility for peering between their broadband networks, and at some point Netflix, at its own expense, installed some of its proprietary servers and paid for a circuit to Seattle. The part that excited the RLECs was Netflix footing the bill to move its traffic from Seattle to Idaho. The RLECs told me they're not overjoyed by the cost of moving all that traffic 50 miles on their own networks, but it beats moving it all the way from Seattle. I thought that was funny since Comcast moves Netflix traffic 100 miles from their nearest exchange point in San Jose to my home in the East SF Bay. Looking at the traceroute, it all passes through SF, but Netflix doesn't have facilities there. Richard On 7/11/14, 9:50 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:I’m always surprised that folks at smaller exchanges don’t form consortiums to build a mutually beneficial transit AS that connects to a larger remote exchange. For example, if your 19 peers in Denver formed a consortium to get a circuit into one (or more) of the larger exchanges in Dallas, Los Angeles, SF Bay Area, or Seattle with an ASN and a router at each end, the share cost of that link an infrastructure would actually be fairly low per peer. Owen-- Richard Bennett
Current thread:
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix, (continued)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 13)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Jay Ashworth (Jul 13)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 14)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Jay Ashworth (Jul 14)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 14)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Jay Ashworth (Jul 12)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Owen DeLong (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Scott Helms (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Owen DeLong (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Richard Bennett (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Dave Temkin (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix John Osmon (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Sam Silvester (Jul 10)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Jim Popovitch (Jul 10)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Paul S. (Jul 10)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Matthew Petach (Jul 10)
- RE: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Vitkovský Adam (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Dave Bell (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Dave Temkin (Jul 11)
- Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Miles Fidelman (Jul 11)
- RE: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix Ahad Aboss (Jul 11)