6 ms·

I'm not sure that's at all the argument jws was making. From the customer's point of view, why should they be able to download 100 gigabytes (through Comcast's

I'm not sure that's at all the argument jws was making. From the customer's point of view, why should they be able to download 100 gigabytes (through Comcast's infrastructure) from an endpoint also within Comcast's network with no problem, but now they can't get any data at all from a level3 endpoint? They're taking up 100 gigs of bandwidth on Comcast's network regardless. Why does level3 have to pay extra to send that customer the bits they've requested?

seabee 16y ago
Why? Because Comcast can make them. Comcast invested in infrastructure which brought subscribers to Netflix. When these subscribers have no alternative (which is apparently the case in many parts of the US) Comcast gets to do all the usual monopoly tricks. "How much is this subscriber worth to you?" Enough to pay, clearly. For comparison, there was a little discussion recently in the UK re: net neutrality. It is unlikely to go anywhere because of the ease of switching ISPs, and the fact that the BBC - probably the biggest bandwidth sucker nationwide - is 'highly unlikely' to pay ISPs for access. If the biggest player won't pay, who will? Business is about extracting value, not recouping costs. Amoral, not benevolent.
- jordan0day 16y ago
  Well yes, of course a business is going to use any tricks, dirty or otherwise, to get as much money as possible. The fact that Comcast is charging their subscribers for access to "the internet" means they ought to be obligated to take bits from anyone who will provide them. If level3 is saying "A person on your network wants these bits, here they are!", Comcast has an obligation to their customer to deliver them.
omegazero 16y ago
Look at both ends of the transmission: If both endpoints are inside Comcast's network, Comcast receives payments from both the sender and receiver to cover the costs. If one end point is in Level3's network and Level3 refuses to pay, only one side is paying for the connection. Or consider just the part of the transmission that occurs within Comcast's network. Case 1: data is sent from Comcast-user-A to Comcast-user-B, both pay a share of the costs. Case 2: data is sent from Comcast-user-A to Level3-Border-Router, only Comcast-user-A pays.
- jordan0day 16y ago
  This is a silly argument. Comcast is charging its customers for access to a nebulous (but commonly-understood) entity called "The Internet". If their pricing model doesn't anticipate that users would want to access bits that exist outside of Comcast's own network (and therefore originate from someone who doesn't pay Comcast), well, it's a wonder they're still in business!

seabee 16y ago

Why? Because Comcast can make them. Comcast invested in infrastructure which brought subscribers to Netflix. When these subscribers have no alternative (which is apparently the case in many parts of the US) Comcast gets to do all the usual monopoly tricks. "How much is this subscriber worth to you?" Enough to pay, clearly. For comparison, there was a little discussion recently in the UK re: net neutrality. It is unlikely to go anywhere because of the ease of switching ISPs, and the fact that the BBC - probably the biggest bandwidth sucker nationwide - is 'highly unlikely' to pay ISPs for access. If the biggest player won't pay, who will? Business is about extracting value, not recouping costs. Amoral, not benevolent.

jordan0day 16y ago
Well yes, of course a business is going to use any tricks, dirty or otherwise, to get as much money as possible. The fact that Comcast is charging their subscribers for access to "the internet" means they ought to be obligated to take bits from anyone who will provide them. If level3 is saying "A person on your network wants these bits, here they are!", Comcast has an obligation to their customer to deliver them.

omegazero 16y ago

Look at both ends of the transmission: If both endpoints are inside Comcast's network, Comcast receives payments from both the sender and receiver to cover the costs. If one end point is in Level3's network and Level3 refuses to pay, only one side is paying for the connection. Or consider just the part of the transmission that occurs within Comcast's network. Case 1: data is sent from Comcast-user-A to Comcast-user-B, both pay a share of the costs. Case 2: data is sent from Comcast-user-A to Level3-Border-Router, only Comcast-user-A pays.

jordan0day 16y ago
This is a silly argument. Comcast is charging its customers for access to a nebulous (but commonly-understood) entity called "The Internet". If their pricing model doesn't anticipate that users would want to access bits that exist outside of Comcast's own network (and therefore originate from someone who doesn't pay Comcast), well, it's a wonder they're still in business!