3 ms·

But grandma pays to use her phone. My phone company shouldn't pay for her phone, but that's why she pays her own company.

by jonlucc 12y ago

NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
If the two are to be connected, someone must pay. Consumers are screaming "they're violating network neutrality!" any time someone suggests they (the consumers) pay, so who is left? Grandma just wasn't (until very recently) paying anything at all. This is why we shouldn't conflate peering disputes with network neutrality issues. We're reading and hearing quite a bit that is abysmally stupid. Comcast has no obligation to spend it's own money letting Netflix connect for free. The peering arrangement they had with Level3 was more than adequate to handle everything but the Netflix traffic, and now Netflix/Level3 is expecting Comcast to pay for the upgrades? Why? How is that fair? I get sick of defending Comcast here. They are an abominable company that I hope goes bankrupt and out of business. But I keep reading really stupid things from people who aren't thinking through the implications of what they're saying.
- jpollock 12y ago
  The US operates a bill-and-keep [1] model for phone calls, which is why people pay to receive calls on their mobile phones, and why spam texts are more prevalent. If a call is made from Verizon to AT&T, no money changes hands between them. ISPs have typically operated a B&K model where the traffic is largely symmetrical between carriers. The argument arrives when the flows aren't symmetrical (such as streaming video). As for Comcast paying to upgrade their network, there is precedent in the Cable TV model where they both pay for the content and pay to upgrade their network to receive, carry and bill it. Networks derive value from the connections. If there was proper local competition then this would fix itself over the course of a contract cycle since a competitor would enter offering a network with a better value. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_keep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_keep

But grandma pays to use her phone. My phone company shouldn't pay for her phone, but that's why she pays her own company.

by jonlucc 12y ago

But grandma pays to use her phone. My phone company shouldn't pay for her phone, but that's why she pays her own company.

NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago

If the two are to be connected, someone must pay. Consumers are screaming "they're violating network neutrality!" any time someone suggests they (the consumers) pay, so who is left? Grandma just wasn't (until very recently) paying anything at all. This is why we shouldn't conflate peering disputes with network neutrality issues. We're reading and hearing quite a bit that is abysmally stupid. Comcast has no obligation to spend it's own money letting Netflix connect for free. The peering arrangement they had with Level3 was more than adequate to handle everything but the Netflix traffic, and now Netflix/Level3 is expecting Comcast to pay for the upgrades? Why? How is that fair? I get sick of defending Comcast here. They are an abominable company that I hope goes bankrupt and out of business. But I keep reading really stupid things from people who aren't thinking through the implications of what they're saying.

jpollock 12y ago
The US operates a bill-and-keep [1] model for phone calls, which is why people pay to receive calls on their mobile phones, and why spam texts are more prevalent. If a call is made from Verizon to AT&T, no money changes hands between them. ISPs have typically operated a B&K model where the traffic is largely symmetrical between carriers. The argument arrives when the flows aren't symmetrical (such as streaming video). As for Comcast paying to upgrade their network, there is precedent in the Cable TV model where they both pay for the content and pay to upgrade their network to receive, carry and bill it. Networks derive value from the connections. If there was proper local competition then this would fix itself over the course of a contract cycle since a competitor would enter offering a network with a better value. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_keep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_and_keep