Live data from Hacker News

FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

washingtonpost.com

311–320 of 343 posts

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#311
post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A CDN is a route, is my contention. Its value is being closer to the user. Being an endpoint that is closer to the user is not the same as being a route between that endpoint (or any other endpoint) and the user. > CDN nodes should be understood as caching routers. In some respects, yes. But in other important respects, no. For example, CDN nodes do not route traffic that does not have that node as either a source…

A new CDN node is a new privileged route. An existing CDN node is not a new privileged route. > CDN nodes do not route traffic that does not have that node as either a source or a destination. Correct. That is true of any router. Netflix did buy a new route, replacing the one they were previously buying from Cogent.

> A new CDN node is a new privileged route.

How? Adding any new node to the Internet does create new routes to and from that node, but that doesn't give those routes any privileges over other routes.

> Netflix did buy a new route, replacing the one they were previously buying from Cogent.

And the difference between the new one and the old one is that the new one only carries Netflix traffic, and only goes to Comcast customers. That is what makes it privileged, and what CDNs in general, including the CDN Netflix was previously using to distribute its traffic to Cogent, do not do.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#312
post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A CDN is a route, is my contention. Its value is being closer to the user. Being an endpoint that is closer to the user is not the same as being a route between that endpoint (or any other endpoint) and the user. > CDN nodes should be understood as caching routers. In some respects, yes. But in other important respects, no. For example, CDN nodes do not route traffic that does not have that node as either a source…

A new CDN node is a new privileged route. An existing CDN node is not a new privileged route. > CDN nodes do not route traffic that does not have that node as either a source or a destination. Correct. That is true of any router. Netflix did buy a new route, replacing the one they were previously buying from Cogent.

A CDN only carries traffic for those who’ve paid to be on it. That’s privileged, and not neutral.

If the CDN is on Comcast’s premises, or primarily feeds a single last-mile network (which would de facto be true on a local level), then same.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nationalizing anything nearly always leads to lower quality. Compare the toll roads in France to the "free" autobahns in Germany. The French toll routes are far better maintained. Another case is health care, compare an NHS experience with a hip replacement in the UK with a hip replacement in France (or the US.) In the UK, the waiting list is measured in 6+ months, while in the US or France, it is almost immediate. F…

Your argument doesn't add up. The autoroutes of France belong to the government and their semi-private companies[1]. As a counter example, all roads in the Netherlands are owned by the government - and the Dutch roads are considered to be of outstanding quality. Major roads are taken care of on a province level, smaller roads on a municipality level - however all of them have to ensure the roads are safe to travel an…

Actually most of the toll autoroutes of France are managed and operated by Vinci. Which is a shareholder owned company and most certainly not "semi-private." You're also quoting a Wikipedia article about autoroutes in general. A article, by the way, that cites no sources, unless you consider about.com a primary source.

If you were to compare the Vinci-managed ones with the state managed ones, there's a vast difference in quality.

Which, the point is that some of the autoroutes are maintained by the state, however the ones that are are privately manage are of better quality. The ones that ARE toll roads, such as the A9 are fully managed and operated by Vinci and they are exceptionally good. The A31 (Luxembourg to Beaune where it turns into the A6) on the other hand is not privately managed and it has a higher number of potholes and the overall quality is lower. The A7 from Avignon to Marseille is also privately managed and is of exceptional quality.

I'm not making the case that government-owned roads are all necessarily bad, however I am making the case that private, profit oriented roads are almost always better because they have to be -- why pay to use a bad road? Drive from Hamburg to Marseille and you can see the effects with your own eyes. I've driven all across Europe, with the exception of the Netherlands, which I will concede are probably very good. However the Netherlands can't easily compared to the United States both in terms of economy, demographics or size. Korea, for example has better internet than most of the world, but the population density is astronomical compared to the United States, so there are different economies of scale at work. The same thing goes for Dutch roads.

The interesting thing is the quality of the roads that are publicly operated toll roads, such as the New Jersey Turnpike are terrible compared to the free highways of Texas. So you do have some good government owned things, however very rarely is the government version better than a private version. Otherwise we'd be drinking Evian out of the tap instead of the chlorinated crap that passes for municipal water.

Given that a publicly managed, national internet would likely be run by some government agency along the lines of the Veterans Administration or the New York New Jersey Port Authority -- I would far prefer private infrastructure.

However, that being said, the Internet pipes almost definitely should be considered a common carrier by pretty much any definition of the word.

I'm just clearly arguing against nationalization. It worked so well for Mexico's Pemex that they are actually privatizing it. If you fill up your gas tank in Juarez vs. El Paso, you'll find the quality of the gasoline vastly different, despite the fact that they are refined from the same crude oil.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A new CDN node is a new privileged route. An existing CDN node is not a new privileged route. > CDN nodes do not route traffic that does not have that node as either a source or a destination. Correct. That is true of any router. Netflix did buy a new route, replacing the one they were previously buying from Cogent.

A CDN only carries traffic for those who’ve paid to be on it. That’s privileged, and not neutral. If the CDN is on Comcast’s premises, or primarily feeds a single last-mile network (which would de facto be true on a local level), then same.

> A CDN only carries traffic for those who’ve paid to be on it.

A CDN doesn't carry traffic at all; it hosts content (multiple copies of it in different locations) for others to carry.

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

CDNs operate servers, not routers. The servers can be located in data centers with easy connections to ISPs and transit providers, but their traffic still doesn't get privileged over other traffic coming in to the networks of those ISPs and transit providers. There are no separate routes that CDN traffic takes to a user's computer, that other traffic from sources in the same data center, or going through routers in the same data center, can't take.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#315
Who amongst the political rulers of the country, apart from Jared Polis and Ted Cruz, is fighting against this?

I don't mean populists who make vague promises about net neutrality in order to be elected, then put people in place to undermine their promises -- I mean people who are in a position to fight the FCC, and who are actively doing it.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. That's 120 days to make Title II a household word. Broadband's current classification as an information service, as if it's some sort of MovieFone for the 21st century, is so far removed from reality that the public should be in an uproar about it. Verizon itself has sought to classify its fiber buildouts under Title II so it can get fixed-rate access to existing right-of-way infrastructure, [1] on the technicali…

You really do not want broadband classified under Title II. You will get the war you want, but it will be a war everyone loses. Why do you think DSL is such a ghetto? It's because it's subject to a higher level of regulations, and nobody wants to invest money in such a highly-regulated industry: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Goldman-Sachs-Wants-Veriz... . Classifying cable broadband under Title II will definitel…

Excellent. Then, with profits gone and without telco lobbying, municipal internet will be allowed to exist, built the same way that roads and sewage.

Th Internet is too important to be left to Internet businesses.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#317
post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Time to nationalize then. I hate even thinking that, but I'd rather have tax dollars wasted than see our money funnelled to Wall Street. When capital investment into broadband is set by vote, do you think you'll be happy with the resulting level of investment?

The military relies on the Internet too, it should be politically neutral.

Not quite, the military really only cares about the SIPRnet, a construct that is thankfully completely free of the likes of AT&T, the FCC, etc. The military has never depended on the Internet normal people use. Its a great service for Bob and Joe Servicemember to be able to watch Netflux in their down time, but because its not really important to any mission in any way, they dont care.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#318
If this were a matter of prioritizing traffic on the internet backbone, then I would be in favor. There is nothing wrong with charging congestion fees.

However, in this case, we are talking about cable companies, and the bottleneck is presumably the last mile. So what these laws are really doing is enabling cable companies to extract even more monopoly rents, in the form of discriminatory pricing (even though it is the content providers that pay, the pipeline in question is closer to the end user than the content provider, and so if the issue were congestion pricing, and not discriminatory pricing, the charge would be on the end user, who is already paying).

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#319
http://hypertiger.blogspot.ca/

911 x 2 = 1822

July 3 or 7x3 =777 Charles Babbage publishes a proposal for a "difference engine", a forerunner of the modern computer for calculating logarithms and trigonometric functions.

You all are committing suicide fighting to the death to remain asleep (ignorant of Truth) to continue to enjoy the daydream (cherished delusion) you are awake (knowledgeable of Truth)

The Internet is going down at some point it's inevitable.

Qubit = YES and NO at the same time or MAYBE

Maybe eventually becomes a certainty.

That is the certainty of the uncertainty principle.

The invisible order or reality of the basic system operating in the background powers the visible chaos or fantasy of the graphical user interface believed to be reality.

At the core of the banking algorithm is the compounding interest/exponential growth/take more power than is given...or greed equation.

or Ignorance = bliss.

Your speculations over the past 2 decades amount to nothing at the logical conclusion of the reasonable assumption.

ignorance = bliss

deflation = inflation

The same as chopping down trees faster than they regrow or causing hyperdeflation...or implosion down to absolute 0 to power hyperinflation up to absolute 1 or bliss.

It's all timed by atomic clocks...every second of the fantasy you believe is reality demands exponentially more power than the previous second.

It's counting down to the absolute 0 or end point...where the fantasy daydream up to absolute 1 polarity shifts into the nightmare or reality to absolute 0

The enlightenment or illumination turns into the memory wipe of the dark age.

You all have had 2 decades to wake up...and all you did was fight to remain asleep.

at the 0 or end point you will be forced to wake up from the daydream into the nightmare.

There are those on the front lines in the war against deflation...and those sitting in the rear with the gear...goofing off.

Re: FCC approves plan to consider paid priority on Internet

#320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument doesn't add up. The autoroutes of France belong to the government and their semi-private companies[1]. As a counter example, all roads in the Netherlands are owned by the government - and the Dutch roads are considered to be of outstanding quality. Major roads are taken care of on a province level, smaller roads on a municipality level - however all of them have to ensure the roads are safe to travel an…

Actually most of the toll autoroutes of France are managed and operated by Vinci. Which is a shareholder owned company and most certainly not "semi-private." You're also quoting a Wikipedia article about autoroutes in general. A article, by the way, that cites no sources, unless you consider about.com a primary source. If you were to compare the Vinci-managed ones with the state managed ones, there's a vast differenc…

Thank you for elaborating on the French autoroutes - I was under the impression the Vinci company was semi-private.
Post reply on HN