1–10 of 18 posts
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048997
Level 3’s Selective Amnesia on Peering
publicpolicy.verizon.com
Can't anyone act like adults these days? Or is this just how adults behave?
> Rather than buy the capacity they need, Level 3 insists that Verizon should add capacity to the existing peering link for additional downstream traffic even though the traffic is already wildly out of balance.
So... Verizon doesn't even claim it's impossible, or the wrong solution. L3 says they need additional peering links and is willing to pay for the cards. Both companies have spare capacity on both sides of that link. The complaint is weird too "the traffic is already wildly out of balance" - of course it is - they're an ISP! Of course the customers will download more than upload.
What's wrong with that? Could someone explain why it isn't an accepted solution?
I don't get this response. > Rather than buy the capacity they need, Level 3 insists that Verizon should add capacity to the existing peering link for additional downstream traffic even though the traffic is already wildly out of balance. So... Verizon doesn't even claim it's impossible, or the wrong solution. L3 says they need additional peering links and is willing to pay for the cards. Both companies have spare ca…
Verizon is saying that Level 3 should pay for the bandwidth (probably way more costly than the cards), since they are already getting more than they are owed in the free peering agreement.
Jesus Christ. This whole thing reminds me of when I was a kid and my divorced parents were having a legal battle over child support payments, and each one was telling me their version of how horrible the other parent was, and why they should get more money (like I had any say in the matter). It was transparently manipulative then, and it's transparently manipulative now. Can't anyone act like adults these days? Or is…
This is a rebuttal by David Young, Vice President, Verizon Regulatory Affairs to Level 3's blog regarding peering and bottlenecks [1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048997
I don't get this response. > Rather than buy the capacity they need, Level 3 insists that Verizon should add capacity to the existing peering link for additional downstream traffic even though the traffic is already wildly out of balance. So... Verizon doesn't even claim it's impossible, or the wrong solution. L3 says they need additional peering links and is willing to pay for the cards. Both companies have spare ca…
I think Level 3 is saying they'd be willing to pay for the cards, but not bandwidth, eg continue using the free peering agreement. Verizon is saying that Level 3 should pay for the bandwidth (probably way more costly than the cards), since they are already getting more than they are owed in the free peering agreement.
Verizon just wants to double dip and get more money, as a business with commitments to shareholders this is a reasonable argument, as a person that can reason it is very ignorant.
This is a rebuttal by David Young, Vice President, Verizon Regulatory Affairs to Level 3's blog regarding peering and bottlenecks [1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048997
The thing is, Mr Young, Cogent wasn't an ISP. Verizon is. Verizon will never have equal peering with any backbone.
There are some interesting points in that Ars article that I think are worth noting. For one, what is being discussed in that article is case in point what Verizon is admitting they are doing. They have the head-room to handle the bandwidth that Cogent and Level 3 could send in their direction [2]. However are specifically not adding any more interconnections and asking for someone to pay for more interconnections. Sounds like a "toll" to me.
The other point that is interesting to me is in some of the debate about net neutrality people specifically state that what they what is for ISPs to not purposely throttle traffic on their network. However, this tactic seems to be the loop-hole in that request. Meaning if Verizon never properly peers with Level 3 then they have no reason to throttle the Level 3 traffic. It is already made scarce, and throttled, by the arbitrary scarcity of the limited traffic that is allowed through the peers. Thus Verizon and all ISPs can adhere to the letter of the law. While probably ignoring the spirit of it.
[1] http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/03/level-3-and-cogent-a...
[2] http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/why-is-netflix-bu...