5 ms·

Seems you are the one who doesn't have any idea about how much "bandwidth" really costs, which is $0. When peering happens, do you think they put quota on how m

Seems you are the one who doesn't have any idea about how much "bandwidth" really costs, which is $0. When peering happens, do you think they put quota on how much bandwidth you can send through? No, you have a throughput limit but then after that its unmetered. No way Vimeo is paying per TB served if they hope to one day make profits (unless they already do so). You can easily setup your own personal video hosting site serving TB of traffic per month (over a 1gbps port) for less than $100/month, as long as you stay away from anything "cloud" that is just trying to extract as much money from you as possible. I'm surprised that you somehow think someone else is less experienced than yourself when you don't know even know these basic facts on how the internet is priced.

vlovich123 5y ago
You’re generally correct although it’s slightly more nuanced. There are places in the world where peering isn’t free (eg Australia) and even mandated by law not to be (Eg SK).
- chockchocschoir 5y ago
  I'm not saying the peering itself is free (it depends wildly, peering conditions/agreements are setup on a case-by-case basis often), but the amount of TB/month you include in the peering is not something I've seen before. Could you share what law mandates that traffic has to be priced by amount send in a time interval in peering agreements? Or is this just a misunderstanding?
  - vlovich123 5y ago
    http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=89261 http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=8... https://blog.cloudflare.com/bandwidth-costs-around-the-world/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/bandwidth-costs-around-the-world... Both links talk about SK regulations, the latter more directly: > This may be driven by new regulations from the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning, which mandate the commercial terms of domestic interconnection, based on predetermined “Tiers” of participating networks It could be a miscommunication but you’re being a little unclear with your language. If you’re saying that the $/TB is $0 then you’re not strictly true everywhere. Additionally, even if peering is 0-rated between large cloud providers, it isn’t necessarily true for Vimeo if they’re a customer. It depends on the agreements they’re able to strike with their providers, or the terms they’re able to get for their own peering agreements (even if large cloud providers 0-rate each other’s traffic, they may not do so for smaller customers). If you’re saying that costs are variable based on how many TB you transfer I can’t say, but practically I doubt it would matter. But the contract can state that peering is charged $x/TB above the Y TB included in your annual minimum spend of Z hundreds of dollars. Of course amortized over Vimeo’s volume this (wildly speculating on my part) probably amounts to several dollars per month or even per year and most of their customers are unlikely to be in SK or Australia where this issue is most prevalent. So in practice most businesses do often see 0-rated transit costs. Disclaimer: this all my secondary hand information and I’m not particularly knowledgeable in this space. I would defer to anyone who actually strikes these peering deals regularly.
technobabbler 5y ago
Where can you get a gigabit host that serves many TB a month for $100? Not being sarcastic, genuinely interested in such a service.
- chockchocschoir 5y ago
  Easy, search for "unmetered dedicated server", bunch of offers all over the place. Many hosters also have "server auctions" where you can rent second-hand servers that are already setup but the one who initially ordered it stopped using it, those are also cheap.
  - technobabbler 5y ago
    That's awesome, thank you. I did not realize hosting prices were so cheap now... good to know for the future.
    - chockchocschoir 5y ago
      You're not alone! So many people are being "brought up" in the web/server world only knowing cloud hosting which is super expensive, and not many know about the "old world" of dedicated instances. Prices haven't changed a lot for a long time, for as long as I know, just that people are being steered to use cloud more and more.
      - ozim 5y ago
        How reliable are those "unmetered old world hostings", because "old world" hostings for me mean they can go down any time and I can call them as much as I want and no one will pick up. If AWS is down I don't have to call anyone, half of the internet is already twitting/posting it and they will be up quite soon.
        chockchocschoir 5y ago
        > How reliable are those "unmetered old world hostings", because "old world" hostings for me mean they can go down any time and I can call them as much as I want and no one will pick up. Yeah, that's not what that means at all. When you're on a dedicated instance, your greatest enemy is no longer the data center or the company you rent from, but it is yourself, and you'll probably be the biggest cause for any downtime as the hoster will leave your instance alone for as long as they possibly can. If someone goes wrong, you usually have access to support that can physically reset it for you and they'll do it quickly. Dedicated instance also doesn't mean with redundancy, so you'll survive with one or more instances down for some period of time. But you don't have to trust me for it. Check what kind of uptime famous companies like Hurricane Electric Vultr or Hetzner typically have so you could update your outdated view on dedicated hosting.
bryans 5y ago
Your insistence that access, peering and infrastructure costs equal $0 couldn't be further from the truth, and unmetered doesn't mean infinite, so your entire premise is false to begin with. Vimeo is not running on a $100/mo server, and that you believe you understand their costs better than they do is ridiculous and shameful.
- chockchocschoir 5y ago
  That is not at all what I am saying. I'm saying that the $/month "bandwidth" charge cloud entities charges is $0, which is true, they don't pay per volume, they pay for other things in their agreements for peering and so on. > Vimeo is not running on a $100/mo server, and that you believe you understand their costs better than they do is ridiculous and shameful. Who have said such a thing? Not me, so it's a bit ridiculous and shameful you're writing this in a reply to me.
  - bryans 5y ago
    > That is not at all what I am saying. I'm saying that the $/month "bandwidth" charge cloud entities charges is $0, which is true, they don't pay per volume, they pay for other things in their agreements for peering and so on. I used the colloquial phrase "bandwidth and server costs" to describe all of the things that go into delivering packets, without needing to discuss individual expenses, because those weren't relevant and don't mean anything to anyone not in a tech role. You decided to redefine that to mean "exclusively per-TB transfer charges" -- you even nitpicked the word "bandwidth" and ignored the word "server" because you needed to change the truth to fit your narrative. Your trolling is outrageous.
Ekaros 5y ago
The bandwidth itself maybe essentially 0$, but I don't think same can be said of hardware, physical space or power. Or even the contracts involved with these. So clearly price must be more than 0.

vlovich123 5y ago

You’re generally correct although it’s slightly more nuanced. There are places in the world where peering isn’t free (eg Australia) and even mandated by law not to be (Eg SK).

chockchocschoir 5y ago
I'm not saying the peering itself is free (it depends wildly, peering conditions/agreements are setup on a case-by-case basis often), but the amount of TB/month you include in the peering is not something I've seen before. Could you share what law mandates that traffic has to be priced by amount send in a time interval in peering agreements? Or is this just a misunderstanding?
- vlovich123 5y ago
  http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=89261 http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=8... https://blog.cloudflare.com/bandwidth-costs-around-the-world/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/bandwidth-costs-around-the-world... Both links talk about SK regulations, the latter more directly: > This may be driven by new regulations from the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning, which mandate the commercial terms of domestic interconnection, based on predetermined “Tiers” of participating networks It could be a miscommunication but you’re being a little unclear with your language. If you’re saying that the $/TB is $0 then you’re not strictly true everywhere. Additionally, even if peering is 0-rated between large cloud providers, it isn’t necessarily true for Vimeo if they’re a customer. It depends on the agreements they’re able to strike with their providers, or the terms they’re able to get for their own peering agreements (even if large cloud providers 0-rate each other’s traffic, they may not do so for smaller customers). If you’re saying that costs are variable based on how many TB you transfer I can’t say, but practically I doubt it would matter. But the contract can state that peering is charged $x/TB above the Y TB included in your annual minimum spend of Z hundreds of dollars. Of course amortized over Vimeo’s volume this (wildly speculating on my part) probably amounts to several dollars per month or even per year and most of their customers are unlikely to be in SK or Australia where this issue is most prevalent. So in practice most businesses do often see 0-rated transit costs. Disclaimer: this all my secondary hand information and I’m not particularly knowledgeable in this space. I would defer to anyone who actually strikes these peering deals regularly.

technobabbler 5y ago

Where can you get a gigabit host that serves many TB a month for $100? Not being sarcastic, genuinely interested in such a service.

chockchocschoir 5y ago
Easy, search for "unmetered dedicated server", bunch of offers all over the place. Many hosters also have "server auctions" where you can rent second-hand servers that are already setup but the one who initially ordered it stopped using it, those are also cheap.
- technobabbler 5y ago
  That's awesome, thank you. I did not realize hosting prices were so cheap now... good to know for the future.
  - chockchocschoir 5y ago
    You're not alone! So many people are being "brought up" in the web/server world only knowing cloud hosting which is super expensive, and not many know about the "old world" of dedicated instances. Prices haven't changed a lot for a long time, for as long as I know, just that people are being steered to use cloud more and more.
    - ozim 5y ago
      How reliable are those "unmetered old world hostings", because "old world" hostings for me mean they can go down any time and I can call them as much as I want and no one will pick up. If AWS is down I don't have to call anyone, half of the internet is already twitting/posting it and they will be up quite soon.
      - chockchocschoir 5y ago
        > How reliable are those "unmetered old world hostings", because "old world" hostings for me mean they can go down any time and I can call them as much as I want and no one will pick up. Yeah, that's not what that means at all. When you're on a dedicated instance, your greatest enemy is no longer the data center or the company you rent from, but it is yourself, and you'll probably be the biggest cause for any downtime as the hoster will leave your instance alone for as long as they possibly can. If someone goes wrong, you usually have access to support that can physically reset it for you and they'll do it quickly. Dedicated instance also doesn't mean with redundancy, so you'll survive with one or more instances down for some period of time. But you don't have to trust me for it. Check what kind of uptime famous companies like Hurricane Electric Vultr or Hetzner typically have so you could update your outdated view on dedicated hosting.

bryans 5y ago

Your insistence that access, peering and infrastructure costs equal $0 couldn't be further from the truth, and unmetered doesn't mean infinite, so your entire premise is false to begin with. Vimeo is not running on a $100/mo server, and that you believe you understand their costs better than they do is ridiculous and shameful.

chockchocschoir 5y ago
That is not at all what I am saying. I'm saying that the $/month "bandwidth" charge cloud entities charges is $0, which is true, they don't pay per volume, they pay for other things in their agreements for peering and so on. > Vimeo is not running on a $100/mo server, and that you believe you understand their costs better than they do is ridiculous and shameful. Who have said such a thing? Not me, so it's a bit ridiculous and shameful you're writing this in a reply to me.
- bryans 5y ago
  > That is not at all what I am saying. I'm saying that the $/month "bandwidth" charge cloud entities charges is $0, which is true, they don't pay per volume, they pay for other things in their agreements for peering and so on. I used the colloquial phrase "bandwidth and server costs" to describe all of the things that go into delivering packets, without needing to discuss individual expenses, because those weren't relevant and don't mean anything to anyone not in a tech role. You decided to redefine that to mean "exclusively per-TB transfer charges" -- you even nitpicked the word "bandwidth" and ignored the word "server" because you needed to change the truth to fit your narrative. Your trolling is outrageous.

Ekaros 5y ago

The bandwidth itself maybe essentially 0$, but I don't think same can be said of hardware, physical space or power. Or even the contracts involved with these. So clearly price must be more than 0.