3 ms·
To your edit: No, my theory was that, when the businesses aren't servicing each other, as in a mutual transit scenario, then one getting a benefit at the expens
by mikecb 12y ago
To your edit: No, my theory was that, when the businesses aren't servicing each other, as in a mutual transit scenario, then one getting a benefit at the expense of the other is unfair.
Honestly, it's a case of externalities, so we're not going to see much improvement until government either takes over peering or last mile.
- msandford 12y agoI don't think that either is benefitting at the expense of the other. Netflix pays for huge amounts of bandwidth to all the residential ISPs where their customers are located. Verizon customers pay for huge amounts of aggregate bandwidth to Netflix and everywhere else on the internet. If there is more download traffic on Verizon's network than there is upload traffic it's only because that's all Verizon allows their customers to do. Contractually. They sell asymmetric plans. The results are not surprising.
- mikecb 12y agoI think Verizon has an internal struggle. They are both a transit provider and an end-user isp. I think their transit role, which made this deal with Level3 for settlement-free peering, and its ISP role, which made deals with end users for high bandwidth, are fighting each other. We'll see if that plays out.
- yxhuvud 12y agoBut the only player providing transit here is L3. Verizon is not - it is simply delivering to its customers what their customers has bought.