12 ms·

If my neighbor streams a movie from Netflix and I download a Linux ISO at the same time, there's no reason why the ISP should be allowed to charge extra from my

by 2000UltraDeluxe 5y ago

If my neighbor streams a movie from Netflix and I download a Linux ISO at the same time, there's no reason why the ISP should be allowed to charge extra from my neighbor or from Netflix, but not charge me or the guy hosting the Debian mirror. Netflix, the Debian mirror, my neighbor and I are all paying for our connections. If we saturate the agreed-upon bandwidth then the ISP's could offer to sell more bandwidth. If we don't, then it's up to the ISP's to fulfill their part of the bargain. Imagine if Office 365 started charging email senders for storage, not recipients people were using all the storage they pay for, but because Microsoft oversold their product and didn't want to invest in new storage servers.

jollybean 5y ago
You're confusing things a bit. Item 1) 'nor reason to charge extra for Netflix'. Of course there is a reason: QoS. You neighbour might want a low-latency, high bandwidth service that doesn't worry about packet loss. You might want a service which is better for downloads: no worries about latency, medium speed, no packet loss. Different prices for different services. Also - Netflix may choose to subsidize their service i.e. you don't even need an ISP bill with Netflix - it comes with the package. 2) Netflix, Debian, you and your neighbour are all paying different kinds of bills for different kinds of things. If Netflix's deal is that they get massive fast service until a certain threshold, after which their service is degraded ... when then users will see that degradation at their end. What cannot happen is ISPs arbitrarily charging Netflix more for no reason, or charging for different kinds of content. Everyone pays for a 'pipe' with different characteristics, ideally without price discrimination (i.e. if you want the same pipe as Netflix then you pay the same prices ass them), and that's that.
- 2000UltraDeluxe 5y ago
  Frankly, I don't see why both me and my neighbor can't have low-latency, high-speed connectiosn without packet loss. We manage to have such things outside the US so I assume you lot should manage on the other side pf the pond too.

jollybean 5y ago

You're confusing things a bit. Item 1) 'nor reason to charge extra for Netflix'. Of course there is a reason: QoS. You neighbour might want a low-latency, high bandwidth service that doesn't worry about packet loss. You might want a service which is better for downloads: no worries about latency, medium speed, no packet loss. Different prices for different services. Also - Netflix may choose to subsidize their service i.e. you don't even need an ISP bill with Netflix - it comes with the package. 2) Netflix, Debian, you and your neighbour are all paying different kinds of bills for different kinds of things. If Netflix's deal is that they get massive fast service until a certain threshold, after which their service is degraded ... when then users will see that degradation at their end. What cannot happen is ISPs arbitrarily charging Netflix more for no reason, or charging for different kinds of content. Everyone pays for a 'pipe' with different characteristics, ideally without price discrimination (i.e. if you want the same pipe as Netflix then you pay the same prices ass them), and that's that.

2000UltraDeluxe 5y ago
Frankly, I don't see why both me and my neighbor can't have low-latency, high-speed connectiosn without packet loss. We manage to have such things outside the US so I assume you lot should manage on the other side pf the pond too.