nanog mailing list archives
Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity
From: Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 17:45:19 -0700
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Jim Richardson <weaselkeeper () gmail com> wrote:
I pay for (x) bits/sec up/down. From/to any eyecandysource. If said eyecandy origination can't handle the traffic, then I see a slowdown, that's life. But if <$IP_PROVIDER> throttles it specifically, rather than throttling me to (x),I consider that fraud. I didn't pay for (x) bits/sec from some whitelist of sources only.
Hey, just wait until the eyeball networks decide they can charge different amounts depending upon their view of the morality of the content being sent... #engage_fly_on_wall_of_boardroom_mode "OK, let's see...Netflix traffic, they get charged $2/mb extra, because they show adult situations and brief nudity. Pornhub show explicit material, but it's mostly boobs and butts, so we'll look the other way, and only charge them $4/mb to get past the choke point (because there's no such thing as a fast lane with QoS, there's only normal and "be glad we didn't throw it *all* on the floor"). Oh my...doublefistingdudes.com...we don't like the idea of naked dudes getting it on over our wires...for them, it's $100/mb if they want their bits to make it to our users. Guess they'll have to jack the price of their content *waaay* up. *sound of high fives all around* " #end_fly_mode Hey, if they don't have to be neutral about it, why not enforce their morality through differential pricing, while they're at it? We could even have differential pricing based on days of the week. "Oh, you want to send your movies to our users on the holy day, when they should be praying? For that privilege, it will cost you 10x what it does on any other day, for you are luring our users into vice and depravity." That "whitelist" must be sounding pretty darn tempting to some executives right about now. Forget about censoring content on the internet that they don't like...they can just bill arbitrarily high rates to let it get through. Price it high enough, and nobody will watch it anymore, and they can go to bed happy. Matt getting ready to start a mail-order DVD service that doesn't charge extra based on what you want to watch...
Current thread:
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity, (continued)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Miles Fidelman (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity William Herrin (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Richard Bennett (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Daniel Corbe (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity William Herrin (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Michael Thomas (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Richard Bennett (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity William Herrin (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Jim Richardson (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matthew Petach (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Owen DeLong (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Owen DeLong (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Richard Bennett (Jul 28)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Richard Bennett (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Matt Palmer (Jul 27)
- Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity Owen DeLong (Jul 28)