Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity

[Richard Bennett <richard () bennett com>]

In fact Netflix is asking to connect to eyeball networks for free:

http://blog.netflix.com/2014/03/internet-tolls-and-case-for-strong-net.html

" Strong net neutrality additionally prevents ISPs from charging a toll 
for interconnection to services like Netflix, YouTube, or Skype, or 
intermediaries such as Cogent, Akamai or Level 3, to deliver the 
services and data requested by ISP residential subscribers. Instead, 
they must provide sufficient access to their network without charge."

This isn't the traditional understanding of net neutrality, but this is 
the beauty of murky notions: they can be redefined as the fashions 
change: "You've designed your network to handle the traffic demands of 
web browsing? That's cute, now rebuild it to handle 40 times more 
traffic while I sit back and call you a crook for not anticipating my 
innovation."

Very wow.

RB


On 7/27/14, 9:49 PM, Matt Palmer wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 09:08:17PM -0700, Richard Bennett wrote:
> > I don't think it's conflation, Joly, since the essence of NN is for
> > the eyeballs to pay for the entire cost of the network and for edge
> > providers to use it for free; isn't that what Netflix is asking the
> > FCC to impose under the guise of "strong net neutrality?"
> In a word: no.  Net neutrality is about everyone paying their own way to get
> their packets to where they want them to go.  Netflix doesn't get to use the
> Internet "for free"; they pay a whole heck of a lot each month to L3 and
> Cogent.
>
> - Matt

--
Richard Bennett
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy
Editor, High Tech Forum