Goodbye Net Neutrality :(
Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
161–170 of 351 posts
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's already the case if you want websites like ESPN3 or NBC Sports Live Extra.
You don't have to pay extra for those services though. They come with your cable subscription.
You have to pay extra for a vestigial cable TV subscription because your broadband subscription isn't sufficient to access websites on the internet. Or you have to switch from a perfectly good ISP to an ISP that cooperates with the cable TV mafia.
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not when their competitors will do the same. Heck, what competitors? Many areas only have Comcast service!
>> "Many areas only have Comcast service!" Do a lot of people in the US only have access to one or two ISP's?? If so why? I'm in a not particularly urban part of Ireland and I can choose between at least 5 ISP's, decent speeds, and a good variety of prices.
[deleted]
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#164Not entirely sure why this is such a big deal. Peering agreements happen all the time. Lots of large services peer directly with consumer ISPs because it's cheaper and more efficient than using intermediary transit. This has nothing to do with net neutrality. Comcast is not throttling or discriminating traffic in any way (at least not publicly). This is a peering dispute settlement. Does this affect competitors to Ne…
Comcast is a residential ISP. What possible traffic could there be to flow out of their network, other than requests for other data? By that logic, everyone has to pay to peer with Comcast because "Ha ha, we have all the customers. Darn, it sure is a shame that our customers don't have any data to send to you. Darn it, we really wish we could do free peering, but we just can't, aw, darn it. [cue South Park cable comp…
Neither Comcast nor Netflix are trying to operate a non-profit, it's a payment dispute between two large companies who disagree over who should pay. You could just as well argue that Netflix was letting Cogent / Comcast fight it out instead of directly peering with ISPs which benefits customers.
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would Verizon want to spend 10 million wiring up your neighborhood and potentially not get you as a customer in an area where Comcast has already spent 10 million to do so? Also why should Comcast be forced to let competitors use their infrastructure they've spent massive amounts of money on building and maintaining?
Little bit from my sibling response and a little bit more from the fact that they drained the ratepayers, government (through tax credits and accelerated depreciation), and the USF to the tune of $200 billion to provide universal broadband access (which they didn't do.) We paid for the network, anybody selling transit across it should be able to use it.
Who agreed to pay for what, where?
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#166This is actually good for Netflix and terrible for any competition. While Netflix probably has to hand over a bit of money, they are in a much better position to do so than any of their competitors as they're the biggest. In effect this creates a massive entry barrier into the video streaming market. You will now likely need to set up a massive infrastructure and pay massive bribes to various internet providers to be…
Once you pay the danegeld you never get rid of the dane.
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
The deal was a paid-peering deal, which would likely drive down Netflix costs. We don't have any information on whether net neutrality was harmed. Hopefully netflix will provide information on this. Peering is a practice where two sides agree to maintain their side of the infrastructure and not charge for metered bandwidth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peering
Why do you think it would drive down Netflix costs? In old world there were a dozen of "tier1" providers who would all peer with each other more or less settlement free. It is conceivable that one of these providers (I think it was Cogent in this case) was offering " low rates " to take Netflix traffic and deliver that traffic to Comcast over their settlement free peering. As traffic flow between Cogent and Comcast w…
The contention was that the change in traffic caused by the Netflix flows put Comcast & Cogent's peering out of balance.
Generally speaking settlement free peering requires that the arrangement be mutually beneficial. If the traffic exchange becomes inequitable then the side that disproportionately benefits would need to pay to cover it.
In this case Cogent was sending vastly more traffic towards Comcast than they were receiving (because of Netflix) so they were the misbehaving party.
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#168Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#169[deleted]
Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's already the case if you want websites like ESPN3 or NBC Sports Live Extra.
You don't have to pay extra for those services though. They come with your cable subscription.
You do pay extra. Your cable company passes along the cost of ESPN subscription to you, regardless of whether or not you want it.