Comcast, Time Warner Agree to Merge

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Comcast, Time Warner Agree to Merge

Alereon: Feb 6, 2004; Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed; College Slice

dpbjinc posted:

I don't think it's as bad as the media is making it. It used to be that ISPs would give more capacity than promised to the networks they're linked with in expectation that they'd do the same. Netflix's traffic is mostly one way, so they didn't have any extra capacity to give, so Comcast isn't giving them any extra either unless they pay for it.

Netflix isn't really a network in the way you're thinking of, this is more analogous to an ISP charging each website to be reachable by their subscribers. This was never something that was considered because being able to reach websites was considered to be the service your subscribers were paying for, and if some websites weren't available on one ISP they would just switch ISPs. The change now is that legislated monopolies are more common, but primarily I think that the ISPs have enough lobbying clout that they don't have to worry about punitive legislation in response to anti-competitive behavior.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2014 17:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 15, 2024 10:14

Alereon: Feb 6, 2004; Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed; College Slice

Crotch Fruit posted:

I am assuming Netflix is paying Cogent a boatload of money for a ton of bandwidth, and was previously not paying Comcast or other ISPs any extra for the additional load. In that regard, I cant get mad at Netflix for paying Comcast because Netflix has caused a big increase in bandwidth usage. However, I can get upset at Cogent demanding Verizon pay to upgrade their links because Cogent is being paid a ton of money from Netflix and Verizon is not being paid by Netflix.

Maybe I've got this all wrong, but that is how I see it. I can understand websitea.com and websiteb.com not paying extra to the ISP but that is some random website not making up 30% of all internet traffic. The big thing that I am assuming here (and please correct me if I am wrong) is that Comcast probably has to spend a lot of money to ensure that Netflix has enough bandwidth to operate while Netflix was only paying Cogent for service.

The ISP is already being paid by their subscribers for that traffic, why should they be allowed to double-dip? If you look at it like a phone call, you're suggesting telcos get paid three times: each end should pay their telco for the minutes they use, and then the calling party should also additionally pay the receiving telco a second time for the minutes the recipient used.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2014 18:23

Alereon: Feb 6, 2004; Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed; College Slice

Netflix didn't choose to pay Comcast for direct connectivity because it would save them money, Comcast used an array of tactics to degrade the experience for Netflix subscribers until Netflix agreed to pay them to stop. Netflix's traffic volumes are not relevant since Comcast subscribers already pay for that traffic. If Comcast is having trouble making their usage-based pricing model work out they should probably fix that, though I think their financials indicate they are not in fact having any problems with this. My heart is also warmed by your faith in the inherent goodness and generosity of Comcast that they will not exploit this one-sided relationship with Netflix, who is their best-bud partner and definitely not a competitor.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2014 03:16

Alereon: Feb 6, 2004; Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed; College Slice

Install Windows posted:

Netflix's current peering partners' own agreements with Comcast did not include enough to handle the Netflix traffic, it's as simple as that. In particular, Level 3 and Comcast have had ongoing issues with each other that heavily involved Netflix's traffic: http://www.telecompetitor.com/behind-the-level-3-comcast-peering-settlement/

Yes, threatening to depeer networks that carry Netflix traffic is one of the ways that Comcast has interfered with Netflix's ability to deliver competing content to Comcast customers.

quote:

Comcast subscribers do not, in fact, pay for that traffic, otherwise there wouldn't be the peering issue!

It is an interesting idea that Comcast should get paid a second time for the traffic their subscribers are already paying for because they want to be, but I don't think I can agree with that.

Install Windows posted:

This is what happens when a service takes over 30% of internet traffic in the country, poorly manages its peering agreements, and then gets pushed back by just about every ISP in the country.

It's funny how the first link you posted points out that mainly Comcast and Verizon are causing significant issues, and those are the two companies that give net neutrality legislation a reason to exist.

Alereon fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Feb 25, 2014

# ¿ Feb 25, 2014 03:36

Alereon: Feb 6, 2004; Dehumanize yourself and face to Trumpshed; College Slice

Install Windows posted:

Threatening to depeer networks that are not honoring the peering contracts is actually exactly how peering arrangements are meant to work.

You depeer networks that demonstrate limited value or violate peering contracts through abusive routing, both of which are visible as a traffic imbalance. Asymmetric traffic patterns because you're connecting an ISP full of clients (with highly asymmetric throughput) to a backbone provider connected to a shitton of servers is, you know, obviously not a reason to depeer a network. Why is it valid for Comcast to say "whoa whoa whoa you gotta pay us for all this data our customers are downloading!!" versus Netflix saying "whoa whoa whoa you gotta pay us for all this data your customers are downloading!!"? The answer is that Comcast doesn't want their subscribers to get Netflix's service because it impacts their TV revenue.

Install Windows posted:

Please explain where Comcast is asking to "be paid a second time".

You know that when I download a big file on my cellphone and pay T-Mobile a bunch of money for the privilege they do not also get to charge the site I downloaded it from, right? I mean obviously you do, and this situation is no different, so I'm not sure what we disagree on.

In any other context Comcast would be excited about a company contributing to a massive growth in customer usage and justification for customers paying for speed upgrades, especially when they're as willing as Netflix to cooperate by colocating cache boxes and such to reduce network impacts and costs. Comcast suddenly cares because Netflix is FINALLY a real competitor to Comcast's TV business. That's the only reason this is an exceptional case.

Alereon fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Feb 25, 2014

# ¿ Feb 25, 2014 03:52

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Comcast, Time Warner Agree to Merge