Skip to main content

View Diary: FCC overwhelmed with net neutrality activism, Democratic senators demand reclassification (105 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It has nothing to do with capacity (0+ / 0-)

    that's an argument that shows you don't understand the issue at  hand. You can call bullshit all you want it doesn't change reality or the facts.

    Der Weg ist das Ziel

    by duhban on Tue Jul 15, 2014 at 07:37:21 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  and I am tired of repeating myself about the ISPs (0+ / 0-)

      you want to be myopically tribal? That's up to you but it's not useful.

      Der Weg ist das Ziel

      by duhban on Tue Jul 15, 2014 at 07:38:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  oh do tell (2+ / 0-)

      Explain like you would to someone who's been in the business for 20 years, darling. I'm all ears.

      •  if you've been in the business for 20 years (0+ / 0-)

        then I am at loss for why you are confusing peering agreements with capacity.

        Perhaps you could explain that?

        I'm past sick of the myopic tribalism about this issue. The ISPs are a bunch of virtual monopolies (or perhaps 'just' virtual monopolies)  that both deserve and need more regulation and competition. However no matter how many times I say that it seems to always get ignored when I also point out that the difficulties and issues with netflix will not go away without addressing them too.

        You are aware that most issues in life are not 'good' and 'bad'?

        Der Weg ist das Ziel

        by duhban on Tue Jul 15, 2014 at 07:42:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Peering agreements ARE the internet (3+ / 0-)

          No major backbone provider is complaining about it...only, coincidentally, the last-mile providers. Why? Because peering agreements pretty much force backbone provider to keep their shit updated and optimized with the latest equipment and software at no cost to the consumer or anyone else. If you're a backbone provider you need peering agreements: you need to give and you need to get them. Without the latest and greatest equipment no one will want to make these (courtesy...or very, very low cost) agreements with you because your network is shit. Obviously, Comcast and the like (who are last mile providers and need peering agreements more than anyone) don't like any kind of agreement that doesn't provide them a profit in some way. If they can FORCE these agreements without having to update their equipment then that's what they'll do. Preferably they'd like to control Netflix in the process. If they can't get that then reclassifying the internet will certainly help them get peering agreements at a low cost without having to upgrade their equipment.

          In markets where Google has injected high speed internet these very same last mile providers have somehow managed to provide speedier service at lower prices. Imagine that!

          So tell me again what I don't fucking understand, okay?

          •  that's not going to solve the issue with netflix (0+ / 0-)

            when netflix is throwing twice as much traffic as is coming back (which admittedly may or may not be strictly accurate I can't recall the exact ratio) that is a problem and has nothing to do with capacity. Peering agreements only work because the traffic was roughly equal. When youtube first began to disturb that balance you know what Google did? Paid for the difference. What the hell is so special about netflix that they can double youtube in downstream percentage but still not have to do the same? Please tell me oh all knowing expert I'm incredibly curious to see your justification on that.

            Because we both know that there is no justification. Netflix was and is just too bloody successful for the current model and it's going to have to suck it up and deal with it like Google did.

            And yes if you don't understand that that's on you.

            Der Weg ist das Ziel

            by duhban on Tue Jul 15, 2014 at 08:11:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You made my points for me (3+ / 0-)

              Peering agreements were mostly gentlemen s' agreements, the caveat being that if things became uneven somehow that the other party helped make up the difference. That is why Netflix (and others) have made offers to providers that  ameliorate and help the peering partner's capacity issues. Netflix has helped backbone providers...and helped themselves...all in the same spirit that peering agreements were made. They offer to provide free servers and other equipment to any peer that needs them, meaning their content has a shorter road to travel to consumers and will be faster. Maybe they even get dedicated pipes. (Interesting sidenote: Pornographers in the 90s did the same damn thing and many of us credit them with being the fuel that backbone providers used to make the internet what it is today.)

              Of course Comcast doesn't fucking like that...a faster Netflix is a cable providers worst nightmare. They think it's unfair that Netflix is helping the backbone providers provide good throughput of their content without affecting non-Netflix traffic? Netflix made the same offers to these guys and got turned down...even when offering cash on top of it all. I'm using Netflix as the example but they were not alone in making offers like this.

              Let's take this a step further by using an analogy to roads and bridges. When a developer wants to build a new office park in the middle of no where the local city/county usually makes them build many of the roads and/or bridges that lead to and out of the new park. These roads are public roads that would otherwise never get built. A city isn't going to build a road just because a developer wants one...they have to help the city build those, too. This is what Netflix has been doing. It's what pornographers did early on in the 90s. We don't need any new regulations except ONE...make NN permanent and inviolable.

              Netflix helping to build the internet they NEEDED was a feature NOT a bug of how the internet's backbone works. And exactly how it has ALWAYS worked. The backbone providers get through it and come out the other end with better capacity and throughput than they would have otherwise. That's good for everyone except Comcast and other cable providers who have been providing miserable last-mile speeds ON PURPOSE because Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and YouTube are threat to their business model. It's that simple. Other countries have last mile providers with higher speeds and none of these issues. How can ESTONIA do it but we can't? Really?

              •  Thanks for the clear explanation and apt analogy. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                eltee, charlatan, stevemb

                Unfortunately, you are dealing with our resident troll, and none of what you just told him will make an iota of difference to him.

                Thank you for trying though.

                The hundreds of others who have tried previously.

                As private parts to the gods are we, they play with us for their sport. - Black Adder "Chains"

                by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Tue Jul 15, 2014 at 09:30:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  netflix has never made such an offer (0+ / 0-)

                in point of fact it was netflix's intransigence on that issue that is part of the problem.

                Der Weg ist das Ziel

                by duhban on Tue Jul 15, 2014 at 10:35:52 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  That's *exactly* what Netflix is already doing (2+ / 0-)

                  with Cablevision. It's standard for large content providers to work with ISPs. Please back up your 'intransigence' claim with a cite or withdraw it.

                  •  Don't Hold Your Breath (2+ / 0-)

                    There are approximately eleventy zillion requests for cities from him already in the queue ahead of you, and that's just on the NSA threads.

                    On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

                    by stevemb on Wed Jul 16, 2014 at 06:07:49 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  yeah because I should treat your demands seriously (0+ / 0-)

                      while you insult, belittle and bully right?

                      Let me spell it out for you for the upteen time Steve, I don't waste my time with people attacking me or 'arguing' in bad faith. I'll debate till the cows come home as demonstrated by my comments with people I think are doing more than trying to waste my time. That includes providing links.

                      So if I refuse to take you seriously well I think even you can figure it out from there.

                      Der Weg ist das Ziel

                      by duhban on Wed Jul 16, 2014 at 08:10:59 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  Cablevision is much much more complicated than tha (0+ / 0-)

                    After being embarrassed in 2011 it wanted to get it's speeds up and allowing netflix to use Open Connect did that. More over we probably will never know the finical details which is really what this is all about. Open Connect basically places the costs on the provider where as the providers want netflix to pay for it.

                    Personally I declare a pox on both houses.

                    As to the intransigence let's be clear here Netflix has refused to do what youtube has done for years and only did so with commcast because of the decision in Verizon.

                    Der Weg ist das Ziel

                    by duhban on Wed Jul 16, 2014 at 08:07:17 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  It's not complicated (1+ / 0-)

                      The Cablevision deal is a simple colocation agreement. CDN's do it all the time. You can even rent a cage at a data center and do it yourself.

                      As to the intransigence let's be clear here Netflix has refused to do what youtube has done for years and only did so with commcast because of the decision in Verizon.
                      Again a big claim without a cite. In fact Google is presently fighting the same fight Netflix did. The intransigence here is on the part of ISPs who are screwing their customers out of their rated bandwidth.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site