Live data from Hacker News

Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

online.wsj.com

181–190 of 351 posts

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#181
post #167
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 we…

Consumer ISPs always have received more traffic than they send, it's the nature of the service they provide. I'm not sure that the settlement free peering model used by upstream providers makes sense when applied to ISPs.

I'll admit my knowledge of peering is minimal, but consumer ISPs have always been something of an anomaly if memory serves. The traffic flow is highly one sided, but peering with consumer ISPs is obviously necessary if you want to actually reach consumers.

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#182
post #132
post #97

Earlier 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…

Peering agreements existed in the form they did because of the underlying assumption that traffic would be roughly symmetric. Services like Netflix that send massive amounts of traffic in a single direction violate this assumption.

This is one of the underreported issues in the whole net neutrality debate. In the late '90s I worked in the WAN engineering group doing capacity planning at a big regional CLEC, which actually was a Tier 1 backbone provider. It was widely assumed in the industry that the flat rate pricing model -- pay $X for Y "guaranteed" bandwidth -- was living on borrowed time and would be replaced by actual usage-based pricing, paying for packets like you pay for gallons of water. The flat rate model only worked because we generally could keep available capacity well ahead of demand. We could do that because we were adding customers like crazy, and customers sucking down high bandwidth were outliers. If those prerequisites ever changed we'd be screwed.

Well, here we are in 2014 and ISPs like Comcast are not adding customers like crazy anymore, because most of the people who want high-speed data from them already have it. But the customers they do have are, on a per capita basis, using much more bandwidth now than they were five years ago. And this is only going to get worse. The nightmare scenario is basically upon us: capacity requirements are climbing faster than ever, but those requirements are no longer being driven by customer acquisition. Which means either the ISPs eat the cost of upgrading their infrastructure (ha!) -- or they raise rates.

But wait, doesn't Netflix pay for all their bandwidth already? Well, probably not: unless industry practices have changed drastically, even those backbone trunks are actually oversubscribed. If you pay for (say) a DS3 line, there's an implicit assumption that you are not going to be pumping 44.736 Mbit/s through it 24/7. Netflix breaks that assumption.

I don't know quite what the solution here is, and I certainly don't want the kind of dystopian "the ISP only gives you access to web sites that you pay for" future the sharpest critics paint. But I don't see this as a step toward that dystopian future. What I see it as is the ISPs trying to figure out how to work usage into pricing models without saying "screw it" and actually adopting a usage-based pricing model.

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#183

And so the precedent is set. This is the direction I see things going: For $70 a month from Comcast you can get Amazon, Google, and Facebook. For only $10 more a month you can add Netflix and Spotify. Want Pandora? Sorry, you'll have to switch to AT&T for that. The broadband providers are used to this type of packaged service given their history as cable television providers. It's how they make their money beyond pro…

If this is a problem, then build physical infrastructure so your business isn't dependent on someone else's pipes. If states and municipalities put up roadblocks to it, then let's focus on tearing down those roadblocks. I think it's ridiculous and self-serving for internet companies to complain about this. Getting bits to customers is a critical part of any online business. You can either do it yourself, or pay someo…

Will amazons' customers be okay if UPS charged an additional fee to amazon's customers to receive their packages?

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#184
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, my building here in NYC, I can get Time Warner or DSL (Verizon or from a reseller). That's it. Lots of us are stuck with 1 or 2 crappy options. I have overpriced Time Warner and a Verizon hotspot as a backup because the TW cable connection goes down about once a month. The other option is DSL which is too slow to do work and was down a week of my 30 day trial when I checked it out years back. Keep in mind that…

I'm in Austin, TX. We have two FTTH providers (AT&T, Grande). Grande offers 1Gbps now, AT&T is 300Mbps now, 1Gbps this summer. Time Warner offers 300Mbps now (DOCSIS). Google fiber is being deployed this year (1Gbps).

Yeah, funny world - once one decent internet provider pops up in an area (Grande, presumably, and now the thread of Google Fiber too), all the other classic providers seem to provide the best service they offer throughout the country. AT&T doesn't offer that in 95% of their territory in the US (so like 99% of the US can't get it), and the same goes for Time Warner. If any area has decent internet options, it's not because of a classic / well known broadband ISP, it's only because of some small independent ISP that forced a local market to be competitive.

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#185

Not 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…

While Comcast is primarily a residential ISP they do have a non-inconsequential number of transit & business customers that have more balanced or outbound heavy traffic flows. It most certainly isn't enough to balance out the residential traffic but they are trying to grow that end of the business.

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#186

And so the precedent is set. This is the direction I see things going: For $70 a month from Comcast you can get Amazon, Google, and Facebook. For only $10 more a month you can add Netflix and Spotify. Want Pandora? Sorry, you'll have to switch to AT&T for that. The broadband providers are used to this type of packaged service given their history as cable television providers. It's how they make their money beyond pro…

If this is a problem, then build physical infrastructure so your business isn't dependent on someone else's pipes. If states and municipalities put up roadblocks to it, then let's focus on tearing down those roadblocks. I think it's ridiculous and self-serving for internet companies to complain about this. Getting bits to customers is a critical part of any online business. You can either do it yourself, or pay someo…

So if I need to drive to a customers site I should build my own interstate?

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#187

And so the precedent is set. This is the direction I see things going: For $70 a month from Comcast you can get Amazon, Google, and Facebook. For only $10 more a month you can add Netflix and Spotify. Want Pandora? Sorry, you'll have to switch to AT&T for that. The broadband providers are used to this type of packaged service given their history as cable television providers. It's how they make their money beyond pro…

If this is a problem, then build physical infrastructure so your business isn't dependent on someone else's pipes. If states and municipalities put up roadblocks to it, then let's focus on tearing down those roadblocks. I think it's ridiculous and self-serving for internet companies to complain about this. Getting bits to customers is a critical part of any online business. You can either do it yourself, or pay someo…

Internet companies already pay for their access: they pay their own ISP and hosting bills, just like Amazon pays UPS to ship packages.

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#189
post #45

Wow, Netflix has decided to negotiate with the terrorists? I'm pretty disappointed. Edit: Having read more of the non-paywalled version, I have to say I think they're shooting themselves in the foot, even if Comcast was offering a better price than Cogent. It sets a terrible precedent, and gives Comcast the leverage to bump the price extortionately at the end of the deal.

> negotiate with the terrorists? The term you should be looking for is “paying the danegeld”: That if once you have paid him the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane. — Dane Geld, Rudyard Kipling

That sounds like an old-fashioned term for this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_racket

Re: Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Web Traffic Jam

#190

And so the precedent is set. This is the direction I see things going: For $70 a month from Comcast you can get Amazon, Google, and Facebook. For only $10 more a month you can add Netflix and Spotify. Want Pandora? Sorry, you'll have to switch to AT&T for that. The broadband providers are used to this type of packaged service given their history as cable television providers. It's how they make their money beyond pro…

If this is a problem, then build physical infrastructure so your business isn't dependent on someone else's pipes. If states and municipalities put up roadblocks to it, then let's focus on tearing down those roadblocks. I think it's ridiculous and self-serving for internet companies to complain about this. Getting bits to customers is a critical part of any online business. You can either do it yourself, or pay someo…

Both consumers and companies like Netflix already pay the infrastructure to transport those bits. The consumers pay their ISP to send and receive bits and the companies pay their ISP to send and receive bits.

The more apt analogy would be if UPS decided to make Amazon packages ship super slow unless Amazon payed extra fees to "upgrade" the shipping speed back to average.

Post reply on HN