nanog mailing list archives
Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:13:36 -0500
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:03:35 -0500, Bruce H McIntosh said:
The REAL evil in the ISP marketplace is, of course, essentially entirely unremarked-upon - ASYMMETRY. For the Internet, as such, truly to live up to its promise to continue to revolutionize the world through free exchange of ideas, information, data and so forth, Joe Average User *MUST* have the same pipes going UP as he does coming DOWN. Just as an example, my service at home is what, 50 down/5 up? That structure is less conducive to free interchange
Consider a group of 10 users, who all create new content. If each one creates at a constant rate of 5 mbits, they need 5 up. But to download all the new content from the other 9, they need close to 50 down. And when you expand to several billion people creating new content, you need a *huge* pipe down. Bottom line is that perfect symmetry isn't needed for content distribution - most people can't create content fast enough to clog their uplink, but have trouble picking and choosing what to downlink to fit in the available bandwidth. You'd be better off arguing from the basis of protocols and applications that need symmetric bandwidth (for instance, heavy use of Skype and similar, but with HD video - you'll need as big a pipe for your outbound video as you need for the inbound). Similar considerations will apply to at least some gaming models, bittorrent, and so on. You already noted the remote backup issue - keep focusing on that sort of thing.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality, (continued)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Lamar Owen (Feb 28)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Owen DeLong (Feb 28)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Keith Medcalf (Feb 28)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Owen DeLong (Feb 28)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Keith Medcalf (Feb 28)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Mike Hale (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Bruce H McIntosh (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Mike Hammett (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality John Levine (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Mark Tinka (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Bruce H McIntosh (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Scott Helms (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Daniel Taylor (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Scott Helms (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Steve Clark (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Jack Bates (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Michael Thomas (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Måns Nilsson (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Jack Bates (Feb 27)