4 ms·

No, because putting someone on a 100mbps pipe is not throttling them. Limiting that pipe to 50mbps is, however, throttling, according to the definition given b

by dimino 10y ago

No, because putting someone on a 100mbps pipe is not throttling them. Limiting that pipe to 50mbps is, however, throttling, according to the definition given by Wikipedia, and the definitions given by the FCC and upheld in court today.

AnthonyMouse 10y ago
Comcast has a pipe that goes to the last mile which is capable of 10Gbps+. Netflix or Level 3 have a pipe coming into Comcast which is capable of 10Gbps+. Comcast puts a thing in in between which is not a pipe, it's a device, and it transfers data at some lower speed. Or zero. That's what throttling is. A device between two fast pipes that lowers the speed they can exchange data.
- dimino 10y ago
  That's what throttling is, yes, but that's not what Comcast did, so it's not really relevant to this conversation. That's also not at all what peering agreements are.
  - AnthonyMouse 10y ago
    > that's not what Comcast did Which part of it did they not do? > That's also not at all what peering agreements are. Peering agreements mean plugging the pipes into the device. Not having peering agreements means unplugging some of the capacity, which has the effect of throttling. I'm not really sure why you're so insistent on this sophistry. There are pipes with enough capacity from Netflix to Comcast. There are pipes with enough capacity from Comcast to its customers. Anything they do in that Comcast building which prevents the traffic from flowing at full speed is going to be equivalent to throttling.
    - dimino 10y ago
      This has all been in an effort to answer the question, "Will Comcast be forced to peer with Netflix without having Netflix pay as a result of this ruling?" and the answer is no. Comcast will continue to be able to charge Netflix for their peering agreement. You claimed this wasn't true, and you are wrong. I don't want anyone to get the incorrect idea that what you're saying is correct, because it is in no way true. No one (not Netflix, Comcast, the US government, or Wikipedia) but you considers peering agreements (or not having them) to be "literally the same" as throttling.
      - AnthonyMouse 10y ago
        So now you seem to have given up on the idea that having a NOC where two fast pipes come in and you arrange to prevent them from passing traffic at high speed is not throttling, and are now making some different (and also wrong) claim. This ruling was about whether the FCC has the authority to regulate ISPs as telecommunications carriers. It seems that they do. Which presumably means that the FCC could require last mile providers to do free peering. And they should, even though they haven't yet.
        dimino 10y ago
        Again, no. You continue to conflate your ideology with what this ruling actually did. This ruling was specific, and its specific nature did not preclude Comcast from continuing to enter into paid-for peering agreements with Netflix. You are wrong to say or imply that Netflix will now, as a result of this ruling, be able to peer with Comcast for free. Objectively wrong.
        AnthonyMouse 10y ago
        Here's me from before: > No, I'm being specific about what Comcast should be obliged to do. What I don't see is anything from me that says "Netflix will now, as a result of this ruling, be able to peer with Comcast for free." The closest you can come to that is this: > Comcast just can't charge them for access to the last mile, and neither can it charge anybody else (like the transit providers who provide service to the little guy). But that was in response to a post hypothesizing that Netflix getting free peering would be problematic, i.e. argued under the hypothetical that that policy was in effect. You're arguing with a straw man.
        dimino 10y ago
        Throttling and peering (or not peering) are not the same thing. You said they were. You were/are wrong. This ruling upholds the FCC's prohibition on throttling content. If throttling and (not) peering are the same thing, then Comcast would be forced to peer with Netflix for free. They couldn't not do it. Therefore, you are arguing that Netflix will be able to peer with Comcast for free, even if you aren't actually saying those words. This is untrue. Netflix is not going to be able to peer with Comcast for free. You were and are wrong. No strawman, just you trying very hard not to be wrong.

by dimino 10y ago

AnthonyMouse 10y ago

Comcast has a pipe that goes to the last mile which is capable of 10Gbps+. Netflix or Level 3 have a pipe coming into Comcast which is capable of 10Gbps+. Comcast puts a thing in in between which is not a pipe, it's a device, and it transfers data at some lower speed. Or zero. That's what throttling is. A device between two fast pipes that lowers the speed they can exchange data.

dimino 10y ago
That's what throttling is, yes, but that's not what Comcast did, so it's not really relevant to this conversation. That's also not at all what peering agreements are.
- AnthonyMouse 10y ago
  > that's not what Comcast did Which part of it did they not do? > That's also not at all what peering agreements are. Peering agreements mean plugging the pipes into the device. Not having peering agreements means unplugging some of the capacity, which has the effect of throttling. I'm not really sure why you're so insistent on this sophistry. There are pipes with enough capacity from Netflix to Comcast. There are pipes with enough capacity from Comcast to its customers. Anything they do in that Comcast building which prevents the traffic from flowing at full speed is going to be equivalent to throttling.
  - dimino 10y ago
    This has all been in an effort to answer the question, "Will Comcast be forced to peer with Netflix without having Netflix pay as a result of this ruling?" and the answer is no. Comcast will continue to be able to charge Netflix for their peering agreement. You claimed this wasn't true, and you are wrong. I don't want anyone to get the incorrect idea that what you're saying is correct, because it is in no way true. No one (not Netflix, Comcast, the US government, or Wikipedia) but you considers peering agreements (or not having them) to be "literally the same" as throttling.
    - AnthonyMouse 10y ago
      So now you seem to have given up on the idea that having a NOC where two fast pipes come in and you arrange to prevent them from passing traffic at high speed is not throttling, and are now making some different (and also wrong) claim. This ruling was about whether the FCC has the authority to regulate ISPs as telecommunications carriers. It seems that they do. Which presumably means that the FCC could require last mile providers to do free peering. And they should, even though they haven't yet.
      - dimino 10y ago
        Again, no. You continue to conflate your ideology with what this ruling actually did. This ruling was specific, and its specific nature did not preclude Comcast from continuing to enter into paid-for peering agreements with Netflix. You are wrong to say or imply that Netflix will now, as a result of this ruling, be able to peer with Comcast for free. Objectively wrong.
        AnthonyMouse 10y ago
        Here's me from before: > No, I'm being specific about what Comcast should be obliged to do. What I don't see is anything from me that says "Netflix will now, as a result of this ruling, be able to peer with Comcast for free." The closest you can come to that is this: > Comcast just can't charge them for access to the last mile, and neither can it charge anybody else (like the transit providers who provide service to the little guy). But that was in response to a post hypothesizing that Netflix getting free peering would be problematic, i.e. argued under the hypothetical that that policy was in effect. You're arguing with a straw man.
        dimino 10y ago
        Throttling and peering (or not peering) are not the same thing. You said they were. You were/are wrong. This ruling upholds the FCC's prohibition on throttling content. If throttling and (not) peering are the same thing, then Comcast would be forced to peer with Netflix for free. They couldn't not do it. Therefore, you are arguing that Netflix will be able to peer with Comcast for free, even if you aren't actually saying those words. This is untrue. Netflix is not going to be able to peer with Comcast for free. You were and are wrong. No strawman, just you trying very hard not to be wrong.