Live data from Hacker News

Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

cringely.com

31–40 of 392 posts

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#31

This wouldn't happen if those ISPs didn't have local monopolies. Networks should be opened by selling traffic wholesale to other companies so that they can compete for subscribers on those networks. The network owners would have more than enough money for upgrades and if they don't, downlevel ISPs will sue them.

I'm not making a claim about the veracity of the counter argument to this, but it is easy to state. If network providers had to sell traffic wholesale to other companies, they would have less incentive to upgrade them as those networks then become pure commodities. Right now the local monopolies can use their networks to sell high margin services (cable) bundled with low margin services (internet traffic). If they ha…

> they would have less incentive to upgrade them as those networks then become pure commodities

Pit DSL against cable, as has happened in the UK. The POTS network is owned by one company (BT) and the cable network by others. Retail customers generally have a choice of connecting to the Internet by either. BT (POTS network owner) are required to sell traffic wholesale to competitor ISPs (who then buy their own transit). This seems to work very well here, and DSL upgrades continue.

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#33

Except it’s actually right (not wrong) because those bits are only coming because customers of the ISPs — you and me, the folks who have already paid for every one of those bits — are the ones who want them. What is the source of the notion that, because you paid for your consumer broadband, all bits are paid for and the charge for carrying them cannot be split with the other side of the connection? Why is it so biza…

The "other side" of those bits is paying their internet service provider. They pay their ISP, you pay your ISP, why should they also have to pay your ISP?

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#34

Somebody has to pay the money to upgrade the equipment and bandwidth available at these exchange points. The very reasonable argument in this article is that the ISPs should pay that cost, which seems reasonable given that their customers are demanding it. It sounds like the ISPs are playing a game of chicken, trying to see if their peers like Level3 will throw money in to pay for the ISP to upgrade its equipment and…

The ISPs aren't dropping the packets, Level3 is. From the article linked to in the blog: "A port that is on average utilised at 90 percent will be saturated, dropping packets, for several hours a day. We have congested ports saturated to those levels with 12 of our 51 peers." "We"in the quote is Level3. They're dropping the packets. Why do the ISPs have to pay for Level3's dropping of packets? Shouldn't the ISPs repl…

I don't really think your comment makes sense, if you and I are juggling balls and suddenly you throw up your hands and shout "I can't take any more balls" do you think I should pick up more balls and throw them at your face or should I leave them on the ground (which in this analogy would be level 3 dropping the packets)

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#35
1. Peering is based on equal traffic both ways. At the moment we tend to download gigabytes with a few bytes of request. As video-communications really takes off (yes chicken and egg - see below) this will get lost in the noise

2. rise of ad-hoc local networks This might come out of mobiles, this might be me dreaming, and it might come with sensible home router designs, but ultimately most of the traffic I care about probably originates within 2 miles of my house - my kids school, traffic news, friends etc

A local network based on video comms - that will never happen. just like mobile phones.

3. electricity and investment In the end this is down to government investment. Let's not kid ourselves, gas, water, electricity, railroads, once they passed some threshold of nice to have into competitive disadvantage not to have, governments step in with either the cash or the big sticks.

Fibre to the home, massive investment in software engineering as a form of literacy, these are the keys to the infrastructure of the 21C and it's a must have for the big economies, and it's a force multiplier for the small.

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#36
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not making a claim about the veracity of the counter argument to this, but it is easy to state. If network providers had to sell traffic wholesale to other companies, they would have less incentive to upgrade them as those networks then become pure commodities. Right now the local monopolies can use their networks to sell high margin services (cable) bundled with low margin services (internet traffic). If they ha…

> they would have less incentive to upgrade them as those networks then become pure commodities Pit DSL against cable, as has happened in the UK. The POTS network is owned by one company (BT) and the cable network by others. Retail customers generally have a choice of connecting to the Internet by either. BT (POTS network owner) are required to sell traffic wholesale to competitor ISPs (who then buy their own transit…

That describes almost precisely how the US system works.

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#37

Except it’s actually right (not wrong) because those bits are only coming because customers of the ISPs — you and me, the folks who have already paid for every one of those bits — are the ones who want them. What is the source of the notion that, because you paid for your consumer broadband, all bits are paid for and the charge for carrying them cannot be split with the other side of the connection? Why is it so biza…

Err... because the contract you make with your ISP is not "I'll pay for outbound packets, inbound are free because somebody else is paying for that." The contract is "I pay for this much maximum bandwidth in each of two directions, and you make a good effort to deliver my packets and return what gets sent back."

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#38

Somebody has to pay the money to upgrade the equipment and bandwidth available at these exchange points. The very reasonable argument in this article is that the ISPs should pay that cost, which seems reasonable given that their customers are demanding it. It sounds like the ISPs are playing a game of chicken, trying to see if their peers like Level3 will throw money in to pay for the ISP to upgrade its equipment and…

The problem is that it's easier to compete with Level3 than with Comcast, because while it's incredibly hard to build a backbone provider, it's nearly impossible to build an ISP. This asymmetry is making Comcast bold. They think that eventually competitors to Level3, Netflix, etc., will take advantage of their poor connectivity, pay them, and reap the rewards. They might be right.

It could just as easily be the case that nobody's going to put however many dollars into building out a nationwide infrastructure that's completely dependent on future goodwill from Comcast et al, in light of their current behavior.

Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I think Level3 wins here just because most people have no idea who they are or what the 'internet backbone' is. "My netflix is slow!" => Netflix's problem. "My internet is slow!" => Cable company's problem.

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#39
Would be very interesting to see what happened if the big CDN providers just depeered Comcast for 24 hours. Would certainly cost Comcast a fair amount in customer support calls, bad publicity, and properly bring the debate to the general public.

Re: Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

#40

1. Peering is based on equal traffic both ways. At the moment we tend to download gigabytes with a few bytes of request. As video-communications really takes off (yes chicken and egg - see below) this will get lost in the noise 2. rise of ad-hoc local networks This might come out of mobiles, this might be me dreaming, and it might come with sensible home router designs, but ultimately most of the traffic I care about…

> As video-communications really takes off (yes chicken and egg - see below) this will get lost in the noise

Aside from the chicken and egg problem, I don't think you ever get to a point where that really is the case. Not because video comms never take off, but because even when it does its a small share of content delivery and the net is still wildly asymmetrical.

Post reply on HN