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

81–90 of 392 posts

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

#81

Post by talmand »

spindritf wrote: post #57
spankalee wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not, because the other side also paid for it to their ISP, CDN, or the build-out and operation of their own CDN. What Comcast and friends are asking for is a _third_ payment, just because. And don't be mistaken, if they win this battle they will start looking for the fourth payment, which is from their customers for faster service to "premium" sites like Netflix, HBO, iTunes, etc.

because the other side also paid for it to their ISP, CDN, or the build-out and operation of their own CDN. That's like saying that you should be able to park for free because you paid for your car, all the taxes on it, and the fee for issuing a driving license. Paying your ISP doesn't necessarily grant you unlimited access to every other network on the Internet. There is no God-ordained fee structure here. It can be…

I'm sorry, your comparison doesn't work for me. I don't see how those even remotely compare.

What I was actually sold from my ISP and I'm currently paying for was indeed unlimited access to everything on the Internet. It's called an Internet connection and that's how I interpret what I'm paying for.

If the bill can be split between me, my ISP, and Netflix then I want my bill lowered if my ISP is going to charge Netflix to deliver bits I requested. But I won't be holding my breath over that negotiation happening.

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

#82

Post by rlpb »

robk wrote: post #58
rlpb wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

British DSL is far worse than cable in my experience. Virgin's cable & fiber offering is massively faster and has a wider footprint than DSL products I've seen.

> British DSL is far worse than cable in my experience.

Define "worse". What ISP were you using?

From a peering point of view as described in the article, there are a large number of ISPs buying transit and then selling Internet connections through BT-provided last mile DSL lines. I never suffer from peering congestion, since my (DSL) ISP pride themselves on not having any.

For the link from my local exchange to my ISP, there are multiple options, too, and my ISP monitors congestion on my line closely. I currently have no congestion there, either, and if I did, there are multiple providers available (thanks to LLU): http://revk.www.me.uk/2014/02/bt-21cn-not-fit-for-purpose.ht...

The only issue with DSL in the UK is the (mostly analogue) quality of the DSL line itself, and the way that BT (the company with the monopoly on POTS lines) manages them. And perhaps the pace of upgrades (eg. to fibre to a street cabinet and copper from there, instead of copper all the way from the exchange), but upgrade rollouts are happening (and fibre to the cabinet is already available to me).

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

#83

Post by morgante »

mattmcknight wrote: post #77
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.

Don't buy into the cable PR. They have incredibly high margins and could easily make upgrades without further gouging customers.

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

#84

Post by CocaKoala »

diminoten wrote: post #52
fooqux wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Also, dropped packets isn't the end of the world. In TCP at least, the packets just get resent. Depends on what the application is, and how many are being dropped. True, standard HTTP can in theory even still work with 99% drop rate (if you're willing to wait long enough) but Netflix, multiplayer games, and any other application you can think of that demands either high-bandwidth or low-latency aren't going to work.…

Streaming services utilize a buffer, so no , it isn't the end of the world if packets are dropped. The buffer gets used while the packets get retransmitted. As for multiplayer games, most use UDP, and the ones that use TCP tend to use some tricks that allow for a certain amount of latency. This is why the Internet isn't currently down, even though this is currently a problem. No widely used Internet-based technology…

Twitch.tv, justin.tv, youtube. That's off the top of my head and I'm confident there are more than I'm missing. There are plenty of video streaming services; not all of them are as large as netflix, but to say "Netflix is a unique case" is pretty weird.

And dropping packets isn't the end of the world, but it's certainly not good. Should we just ignore a problem just because the world isn't ending?

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

#85

Post by Spooky23 »

klodolph wrote: post #53
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.

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

Local Television stations and sports teams have successfully used this as a way to get cable companies to fold over contracts for carriage.

Everyone despises cable companies, most of the angst would go their way. After all, 9/10 people don't know what a CDN is!

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

#86

Post by Spooky23 »

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

Ask your mom who her favorite CDN is.

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

#87

Post by talmand »

spindritf wrote: post #26
wging wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case, the difference is that broadband subscribers are not being sold a magazine which they know will contain ads--they are being sold a full connection to the internet! That's the precedent, that's what we think we're getting for our money.

What does full connection to the Internet mean? No ISP can guarantee it because any other independent network can drop traffic at will. And the Internet is just a bunch of independent networks. The service you believe you paid for doesn't and cannot exist. I can filter out all Comcast IPs on my firewall tomorrow if I feel like it. Many people actually do it to third world providers.

There's a difference between bits not being delivered because of the originating server failing to deliver and my ISP actively preventing delivery.

"Unlimited Internet" has already been established in sales pitches for years, the language defined once people understood the concept of bandwidth caps. "Unlimited" means you have unlimited "access", not unlimited "bandwidth". This has been the industry's very own sales pitch for years.

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

#88

Post by stonemetal »

[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]

content delivery networks (Hulu, YouTube, Netflix, etc) , on the other hand, are constantly at risk of being replaced.

L3 is a CDN, Hulu is not. Hulu hires a CDN to get their data out there. CDNs are basically ISPs that provide high bandwidth with low latency by providing a distributed cache. Netflix has gotten in to the CDN business because at their scale none of the CDNs have been able to keep up with demand, or were not willing to pay for peering with last mile ISPs.

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

#89

Post by CocaKoala »

diminoten wrote: post #75
signet wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

What? Level3 isn't appealing to the masses to help them rake in extra cash. They don't need to.

Do you think Level3 just throws data at Comcast nonstop, and Comcast is helpless to stop it? Customers of Comcast ask for data that Level3 is trying to provide; Comcast can't handle the bandwidth. But the only reason the data is flowing is because the customers of Comcast want it; it's not like Level3 is forcing Comcast to accept it.

Why is Level3 obligated to pay for upgrades to Comcast's infrastructure to satisfy demands placed on Comcast by Comcast's customers?

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

#90

Post by talmand »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #28
spindritf wrote: post #17

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…

> There is nothing fundamentally wrong with charging both sides. You may prefer a different fee structure but a better argument than "I already paid for it!" is necessary. Fair enough. Eminent domain can also be used to seize the cable plant and put it under ownership of a non-profit/municipal broadband provider, who won't gouge those who request/send bits. The knife cuts both ways.

That's been attempted. Many municipals have tried to roll out their own broadband to be sued by the industry to prevent it.

Although eminent domain is an interesting argument, not that I agree with it necessarily.

Post reply on HN