Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Level3 is without peer, now what to do?

cringely.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 392 posts

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

#71

Post by dpcx »

droopybuns wrote: post #50

So on the one side is the fat-cat ISP who doesn't want to make expensive capital investments ih their transport. And on the other side is the fat-cat vc funded video content providers, who don't want to pay for the their mp4-based saturation of all the pipes. This is a negotiation. There are two active media campaigns that are trying to gin up our anger against The Other Guy (tm) as part of their negotiations. I just…

Unless I'm mistaken, by paying for an internet connection, the "fat-cat vc funded video content providers" are paying for "their mp4-based saturation".

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

#72

Post by chimeracoder »

ep103 wrote: post #59
klodolph wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would also give the CDNs a fair amount in customer support calls, bad publicity, and make their paying customers angry about lost business.

I don't know about bad publicity though. To each customer support call simply say, Comcast has broken their contract with our CDN. Please call comcast. Considering Comcast is one of the two most hated companies in America right now, by a _huge_ margin, people will easily believe that, especially since in this case, it would be true. Level3 et all are enabling this behavior.

> Considering Comcast is one of the two most hated companies in America right now, by a _huge_ margin

And Time Warner is the second: http://bgr.com/2014/05/20/comcast-twc-customer-satisfaction-...

Nobody likes the cable companies. It would be very easy for someone to capitalize on that hatred to win public support for net neutrality; it's just a matter of crafting the right campaign.

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

#73

Post by aroch »

[deleted] wrote: post #54
mhandley wrote: post #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.

[deleted]

> The solution to this will be worked out by the free market slowly but surely. The CDNs will eventually wise up - like Google - and get into the ISP business.

CDN are in the ISP business.

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

#74

Post by api »

zanny wrote: post #62
api wrote: post #25

While I agree with the general thrust of the article, there is one fallacious argument here. Cringely argues that cable breaks even and money is made on the net, but that's an artificial distinction. What if cable disappeared? Would they still make money if they had to pay for the upkeep of the network with only Internet fees? The desperation and risk of this game of chicken convinces me that the answer might be "not…

The problem with your later analogy is that there was minimal gating to opening a gas station if the local tack vendor started trying to extort the local populace to maintain a dying business model. That is why, usually, capitalism works in these situations - if the status quo is exploiting its customers, you can create a competitor because there is profit between the extortion and the break even. With ISPs, or any g…

You're referring to the concept of a natural monopoly, which is problematic for anarchist and libertarian versions of capitalism. There are certain markets that inherently favor monopoly for physical constraint reasons. Utilities are the classic example.

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

#75

Post by diminoten »

signet wrote: post #13
diminoten wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Level3 is dropping packets because $BIG_CABLE_ISP doesn't want to upgrade their cross-connects at the exchange points. Level3 sounds happy to increase this capacity, they are saying that the cable ISPs aren't negotiating with them to provide more bandwidth at these choke points. It's not Level3's job to pay for $BIG_CABLE_ISP's infrastructure, when it's their own customers who are requesting the traffic over these li…

But isn't that the point? Level3 is capable of handling more traffic but the ISPs are not. So what?

It sounds like Level3 wants to enter into bigger-money contracts with the ISPs but the ISPs don't want to, so Level3 is appealing to the masses to help them rake in extra cash (to justify the expenses they've incurred upgrading their equipment).

Why does Level3 get the benefit of being David here? IT just seems like they're trying to leverage the net neutrality debate to get themselves more favorable peering contracts with ISPs, which in a twist of irony, is exactly the kind of thing which goes against net neutrality in the first place (why are Level3's packets so special anyway?).

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

#76

Post by awor »

keehun wrote: post #42

Maybe I'm naïve beyond any recognition, but shouldn't the ISP's or whoever is peering charge based on the bandwidth amounts? It sounds like they have a flat-rate contract with each other and now they're charging more?

From the article, it seems like the "flat-rate contract" the ISPs have for peering with L3 is $0.

The issue that L3 is raising, is that the equipment/appliances that the ISP has installed in these peering arrangements are insufficient to keep up with the amount of traffic which the ISP's customers are requesting, and L3 is attempting to provide.

If the ISPs were to upgrade their peering equipment to handle their customer's requests, there would be no issue.

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

#77

Post by mattmcknight »

signet wrote: post #6

If a customer is paying for an internet connection, they are paying for access the full internet, to the best of their ISP's abilities. This is the net neutrality law we need: ISPs should be compelled to upgrade their backbone links as they become congested, to satisfy their customer's demand. Congestion can be easily monitored and often these peerings are "free". (Yes there is a non-zero cost to increase switch and…

We probably need pricing more directly based on bandwidth consumed, maybe with peak hour pricing, as opposed to just based on "speed" with high bandwidth caps.

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

#78

Post by burke »

droopybuns wrote: post #50

So on the one side is the fat-cat ISP who doesn't want to make expensive capital investments ih their transport. And on the other side is the fat-cat vc funded video content providers, who don't want to pay for the their mp4-based saturation of all the pipes. This is a negotiation. There are two active media campaigns that are trying to gin up our anger against The Other Guy (tm) as part of their negotiations. I just…

I find it a bit offensive that this can be accurately viewed as a negotiation.

This is like demanding the supermarket buy your grocery delivery business a larger van when the toilet paper manufacturer starts selling larger packs.

It's arrogant, and violates the proper division of responsibilities. It only might work because of local monopolies. Netflix is already paying for traffic to Level3. ISPs need to upgrade their infrastructure and increase prices if it's too expensive.

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

#79

Post by jonknee »

JTon wrote: post #55
mhandley wrote: post #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.

Too risky, no? If Comcast said the problem was not with their network, but with bit CDNs. Customers would shift their rage towards them instead. The whole thing would turn into a PR pissing match

I'm going to go with customers being mad with who they send a big check to every month (e.g. Comcast). 99% of people only know about their ISP, not their ISP's providers.

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

#80

Post by coldpie »

chimeracoder wrote: post #72
ep103 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about bad publicity though. To each customer support call simply say, Comcast has broken their contract with our CDN. Please call comcast. Considering Comcast is one of the two most hated companies in America right now, by a _huge_ margin, people will easily believe that, especially since in this case, it would be true. Level3 et all are enabling this behavior.

> Considering Comcast is one of the two most hated companies in America right now, by a _huge_ margin And Time Warner is the second: http://bgr.com/2014/05/20/comcast-twc-customer-satisfaction-... Nobody likes the cable companies. It would be very easy for someone to capitalize on that hatred to win public support for net neutrality; it's just a matter of crafting the right campaign.

This is why I'm so disappointed to see the small-medium ISPs hop right in bed with Comcast and co-sign anti-net neutrality letters:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/05/top-isps-threaten-to...

With the national attention this issue is getting, this is a tremendous marketing opportunity to take customers away from the big dogs.

Post reply on HN