5 ms·

PUSH and PULL don't really describe how it works. Its the senders responsibility to deliver data to the local ISP of the recipient. It doesn't matter if the pe

PUSH and PULL don't really describe how it works. Its the senders responsibility to deliver data to the local ISP of the recipient. It doesn't matter if the person asked for the data, you still have to pay to get it there. The issue is that Verizon is both a national transit provider and a local ISP. If you just dump your data on the nearest Verizon peering port, you aren't fulfilling your end of the bargain. You are asking Verizon to do it for you, as a transit provider. However, if you are delivering it to the last mile, you have "paid for it" it already. The issue is where are these congestion issues occurring. At the last mile or at the edges of Verizon's transit network. Verizon absolutely has the right to bill for providing transit.

simcop2387 12y ago
The question then becomes does the contract Verizon have for peering with other transit providers allow them to charge the other transit customers for that? And if they do what's to stop every transit provider from charging every other transit provider's customers for the same thing? And then the all important question, SHOULD they be stopped from doing it? The current structure of the internet was built around this not happening that way, but is that the way it should be? I strongly believe that letting it happen would cause many other political and routing problems for the internet as a whole to the point where it'll end up being regulated against doing it that way anyway. It could also end up then as a zero sum game between all the transit providers ending "free" peering agreements.
malchow 12y ago
It's a fair distinction. Here, I believe, the movie is going AWS Seattle to L3 to the front door of Verizon's consumer network in LA, and Netflix is paying for it all the way to the front door. Is that accurate? Or no?
- msandford 12y ago
  Normally I pay for transit from my house to my ISPs peering points. And other service providers pay their ISPs for transit from their "houses" to the same peering points. In this case Netflix is being forced to pay for transit from their "house" all the way to mine. Not how the internet normally works.
- wmf 12y ago
  Netflix does not serve video out of AWS. If you're in LA, Netflix is probably serving from a server in LA.
  - misframer 12y ago
    I didn't know that. Can you link to a reference? I thought they used AWS for everything.
    - pwarner 12y ago
      basically they build their own hardware: https://www.netflix.com/openconnect https://www.netflix.com/openconnect you can't put your own hardware at AWS. they are the poster child for using AWS for what it is good for, general purpose compute (storing your play list, the list of all movies, controlling the CDN etc) but I imagine for streaming you need bare metal
      - caust1c 12y ago
        They're actually one of the most prominent companies with a large deployment of FreeBSD (the OS they use for their CDN). https://www.netflix.com/openconnect/software https://www.netflix.com/openconnect/software
  - lemming 12y ago
    Netflix very publicly went all AWS a couple of years ago: http://techblog.netflix.com/search/label/AWS http://techblog.netflix.com/search/label/AWS.
    - jauer 12y ago
      Netflix CDN is distinct from AWS. AWS may be the origin for content distributed via peering, appliances, and CDN partners but your videos aren't streaming from AWS: https://www.netflix.com/openconnect https://www.netflix.com/openconnect
kbutler 12y ago
So Netflix should pay Verizon $1/month/customer. And pass that cost on to the Verizon subscribers... How quickly would this change Verizon's policy? As a customer of an ISP, I pay for access to servers on the internet. My ISP charges me for a level of bandwidth. If they are the bottleneck slowing down my connection to the services I want to access, they should fix it, and give me what I'm paying them for.
- rhino369 12y ago
  You aren't paying Verizon to transit L3's traffic. Even if it's going to you.
  - vertex-four 12y ago
    My contract says I'm paying for access to the Internet. Access to the Internet involves transmitting data outwards, and receiving data inwards. So yes, I am paying them to transmit L3's traffic.
  - seanflyon 12y ago
    That's what I thought I was paying for when I agreed to give my service provider money.
    - rhino369 12y ago
      No it's not. You pay to send to them, and to receive data people send to you. You don't pay for your ISP to transit data from whoever is sending you data. For example, you want to download something off a Server in Germany. Your ISP is responsible for getting your initial message to the server. But it's not responsible for taking that information in Germany and carrying to back to the US for you. The Server's ISP has to carry it to the USA and then dump it off at your local ISP. Now your ISP and the Server ISP may have a peering point in Germany, but they might not. But either way, your ISP isn't under any obligation to pay for transit of data being sent to you. That's just not how it works. And that definitely isn't what is in your agreement with your ISP.
rahimnathwani 12y ago
"Verizon absolutely has the right to bill for providing transit." Even if we agree that Verizon has the right to bill Level 3 for transit within _Verizon's own network_, it seems odd that they are not taking advantage of Netflix's CDN boxes, which would drastically reduce the amount of transit required. If you just dump your data on the nearest Verizon peering port, you aren't fulfilling your end of the bargain. So, let's say I build a new skyscraper with 10,000 apartments, and I set myself up as the exclusive ISP to the tenants of that skyscraper. I wire up the building nicely, and have some big switches and routers in the basement. Does every content provider (e.g. Netflix) or company working on their behalf (e.g. Level 3) now have an obligation to build new circuits, and deliver the traffic all the way to my basement?
- 15thandwhatever 12y ago
  If this were telecom/PSTN, yes. I know this is not the PSTN, but bear with me for a second. For years, this is how Verizon/AT&T/SBC/BellSouth/etc had structured telephone networks. And this is probably the same structure they want to extend to shared data networks aka the Internet. If you were a competitive telco carrier who wanted to deliver a massive amount of phone calls to Verizon customers in a particular region, you couldn't just dump it off at the tandem (which you can think of like a telecom peering point), you had to extend your network to the end offices where the Verizon customers were aggregated. The thought there being there's finite capacity between the end office and the tandem. And if you're going to use most of it, you should either pay for it or build your own facilities to alleviate congestion. You're dealing with a traditional telecom company (Verizon) in its telecom mindset (build to me/mid-span meet, and keep a very tight watch on ratios/meet points via accounting, billing, and state regulation), vs. a traditional Internet company (Level 3) in its traditional peering mindset (build to the exchange, then build to me, and keep a loose observation on ratios/meet points with no regulation). I hope I haven't gone too far off track.
  - rahimnathwani 12y ago
    So, let's say I build a new skyscraper with 10,000 apartments, and I set myself up as the exclusive POTS/PSTN provider to the tenants of that skyscraper. I wire up the building nicely, and have some big switches and routers in the basement. Does every other phone company now have an obligation to build new circuits, and extend their network all the way to my basement?

simcop2387 12y ago

The question then becomes does the contract Verizon have for peering with other transit providers allow them to charge the other transit customers for that? And if they do what's to stop every transit provider from charging every other transit provider's customers for the same thing? And then the all important question, SHOULD they be stopped from doing it? The current structure of the internet was built around this not happening that way, but is that the way it should be? I strongly believe that letting it happen would cause many other political and routing problems for the internet as a whole to the point where it'll end up being regulated against doing it that way anyway. It could also end up then as a zero sum game between all the transit providers ending "free" peering agreements.

malchow 12y ago

It's a fair distinction. Here, I believe, the movie is going AWS Seattle to L3 to the front door of Verizon's consumer network in LA, and Netflix is paying for it all the way to the front door. Is that accurate? Or no?

msandford 12y ago
Normally I pay for transit from my house to my ISPs peering points. And other service providers pay their ISPs for transit from their "houses" to the same peering points. In this case Netflix is being forced to pay for transit from their "house" all the way to mine. Not how the internet normally works.
wmf 12y ago
Netflix does not serve video out of AWS. If you're in LA, Netflix is probably serving from a server in LA.
- misframer 12y ago
  I didn't know that. Can you link to a reference? I thought they used AWS for everything.
  - pwarner 12y ago
    basically they build their own hardware: https://www.netflix.com/openconnect https://www.netflix.com/openconnect you can't put your own hardware at AWS. they are the poster child for using AWS for what it is good for, general purpose compute (storing your play list, the list of all movies, controlling the CDN etc) but I imagine for streaming you need bare metal
    - caust1c 12y ago
      They're actually one of the most prominent companies with a large deployment of FreeBSD (the OS they use for their CDN). https://www.netflix.com/openconnect/software https://www.netflix.com/openconnect/software
- lemming 12y ago
  Netflix very publicly went all AWS a couple of years ago: http://techblog.netflix.com/search/label/AWS http://techblog.netflix.com/search/label/AWS.
  - jauer 12y ago
    Netflix CDN is distinct from AWS. AWS may be the origin for content distributed via peering, appliances, and CDN partners but your videos aren't streaming from AWS: https://www.netflix.com/openconnect https://www.netflix.com/openconnect

kbutler 12y ago

So Netflix should pay Verizon $1/month/customer. And pass that cost on to the Verizon subscribers... How quickly would this change Verizon's policy? As a customer of an ISP, I pay for access to servers on the internet. My ISP charges me for a level of bandwidth. If they are the bottleneck slowing down my connection to the services I want to access, they should fix it, and give me what I'm paying them for.

rhino369 12y ago
You aren't paying Verizon to transit L3's traffic. Even if it's going to you.
- vertex-four 12y ago
  My contract says I'm paying for access to the Internet. Access to the Internet involves transmitting data outwards, and receiving data inwards. So yes, I am paying them to transmit L3's traffic.
- seanflyon 12y ago
  That's what I thought I was paying for when I agreed to give my service provider money.
  - rhino369 12y ago
    No it's not. You pay to send to them, and to receive data people send to you. You don't pay for your ISP to transit data from whoever is sending you data. For example, you want to download something off a Server in Germany. Your ISP is responsible for getting your initial message to the server. But it's not responsible for taking that information in Germany and carrying to back to the US for you. The Server's ISP has to carry it to the USA and then dump it off at your local ISP. Now your ISP and the Server ISP may have a peering point in Germany, but they might not. But either way, your ISP isn't under any obligation to pay for transit of data being sent to you. That's just not how it works. And that definitely isn't what is in your agreement with your ISP.

rahimnathwani 12y ago

"Verizon absolutely has the right to bill for providing transit." Even if we agree that Verizon has the right to bill Level 3 for transit within _Verizon's own network_, it seems odd that they are not taking advantage of Netflix's CDN boxes, which would drastically reduce the amount of transit required. If you just dump your data on the nearest Verizon peering port, you aren't fulfilling your end of the bargain. So, let's say I build a new skyscraper with 10,000 apartments, and I set myself up as the exclusive ISP to the tenants of that skyscraper. I wire up the building nicely, and have some big switches and routers in the basement. Does every content provider (e.g. Netflix) or company working on their behalf (e.g. Level 3) now have an obligation to build new circuits, and deliver the traffic all the way to my basement?

15thandwhatever 12y ago
If this were telecom/PSTN, yes. I know this is not the PSTN, but bear with me for a second. For years, this is how Verizon/AT&T/SBC/BellSouth/etc had structured telephone networks. And this is probably the same structure they want to extend to shared data networks aka the Internet. If you were a competitive telco carrier who wanted to deliver a massive amount of phone calls to Verizon customers in a particular region, you couldn't just dump it off at the tandem (which you can think of like a telecom peering point), you had to extend your network to the end offices where the Verizon customers were aggregated. The thought there being there's finite capacity between the end office and the tandem. And if you're going to use most of it, you should either pay for it or build your own facilities to alleviate congestion. You're dealing with a traditional telecom company (Verizon) in its telecom mindset (build to me/mid-span meet, and keep a very tight watch on ratios/meet points via accounting, billing, and state regulation), vs. a traditional Internet company (Level 3) in its traditional peering mindset (build to the exchange, then build to me, and keep a loose observation on ratios/meet points with no regulation). I hope I haven't gone too far off track.
- rahimnathwani 12y ago
  So, let's say I build a new skyscraper with 10,000 apartments, and I set myself up as the exclusive POTS/PSTN provider to the tenants of that skyscraper. I wire up the building nicely, and have some big switches and routers in the basement. Does every other phone company now have an obligation to build new circuits, and extend their network all the way to my basement?