5 ms·

The one thing missing from all the articles about OpenConnect is any way for Netflix subscribers to see which ISPs are participating. I'd like to know if my IS

by curun1r 12y ago

The one thing missing from all the articles about OpenConnect is any way for Netflix subscribers to see which ISPs are participating. I'd like to know if my ISP participates and, if not, be able to call in to suggest they do. If they still don't join in a reasonable time frame, then I'd at least have the option to switch providers to someone that participates. A program like this will be more successful if they allow for consumers to pressure ISPs to participate.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Alupis 12y ago
Unfortunately, as we've discovered from the whole net neutrality debate -- netflix has offered these boxes for free to all major ISP's... yet the Big5 ISP's have all turned them down.
- Thaxll 12y ago
  Yes because those box aren't sufficient for 1M+ sub. You're better off using peering rather than cache boxes in your network if you're a large ISP.
  - Alupis 12y ago
    Well, the boxes have multiple 10Gb ports on them -- so they can be as fast as the ISP will allow it to be on their network. And, Netflix will provide (free of charge) as many OpenConnect devices an ISP needs to serve all of their mutual customers. Also, Netflix offered to change their distribution model into a P2P model as well -- the Big5 ISP's said no to that too.
    - sp332 12y ago
      That doesn't mean the hard drives can serve multiple 10Gb at once. And why would ISPs give them space, power, and cooling for free when every other colo'd box (including CDNs like Akamai) pay for that?
      - wmf 12y ago
        If the bandwidth savings generated by the box exceed the cost of hosting it, then take it. Otherwise don't. But AFAIK Netflix isn't willing to pay ISPs to take boxes that save the ISP money.
        sp332 12y ago
        That's one part of a negotiation. There's nothing that says an ISP has to take any deal that's more than $0 net profit.
        wmf 12y ago
        Nobody (sane) is trying to force ISPs to accept the boxes. But if an ISP refuses the boxes and they refuse to peer and they refuse to have uncongested transit... people start talking about regulation. Also, a "negotiation" with a monopoly is often indistinguishable from extortion.
      - justincormack 12y ago
        The new model has SSD but both could serve a useful amount of multiple 10Gb I believe.
        Alupis 12y ago
        in addition to RAM caching. these boxes should be capable of pushing lots of bits.
  - wmf 12y ago
    Citation needed. My understanding is that Netflix offers as many boxes as the ISP needs. This makes sense since each box is supposed to save money for Netflix and for the ISP.
  - dsl 12y ago
    That is simply not true. A consumer broadband network often distributes out over a very large area and condenses into micro POPs. In the Bay Area think Pleasanton, Concord, Marin, etc. The ISP must then backhaul traffic from these micro POPs to a major POP where the whole internet interconnects (Santa Clara/San Jose). If Netflix were to install a million terabits a second of peering and a hundred thousand caching appliances in San Jose, it wouldn't alleviate the ISPs pain point at all, which is the backhaul to the micro POPs. Putting OpenConnect appliances into micro depolyments "out in the field" solves the problem, because it moves the content and caching out to the last mile. However the ISPs are reluctant to do this because then what used to be a half rack of telcom gear in a small shed somewhere has now become a defacto colocation facility. You have Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Vudu, YouTube, Microsoft, eBay, and two dozen others each with 4u of gear in hundreds of locations that you are paying for power and rolling out to service when they fail (because you can't let competitors have physical access to each others gear, and a node failure can saturate the uplinks from the micro POP).
    - Thaxll 12y ago
      So why then large ISPs would refuse it, if it's free?
      - dsl 12y ago
        The physical box is free, yes. Imagine if every website you visited wanted to put a 1u box in your living room, which you paid to keep turned on and connected to the internet. If a box failed you either needed to unrack it, haul it down to FedEx, and rerack a replacement - or let a stranger in while you aren't home. If you don't get a box fixed fast enough, or choose not to install the MSN or Baidu box, everyone in your house starts to complain about it. I'm not defending the ISPs here, just simply explaining their perspective. I am a huge proponent of net neutrality, and I'm currently in the process of deploying something similar to OpenConnect for another large network.
      - dtparr 12y ago
        Presumably because they can then increase revenue by charging for the peering. And as other have noted, the issues with defacto colocation.
  - eggnet 12y ago
    That's ridiculous. What do you think is driving the traffic when an ISP doesn't accept the hardware. It's the same hardware just running in Netflix's data center.
FireBeyond 12y ago
They at least used to have something on their SuperHD page that would tell you whether your ISP participated ("Sorry, you can't view SuperHD content because your ISP has not opted in to our OpenConnect program"), but I think since they opened that up, there's no obvious list.
filmgirlcw 12y ago
The only major ISP I know that definitively is part of OpenConnect is Optimum (Cablevision). That's why they have the fastest Netflix speeds (only after Google Fiber, and even then it is close) on the ISP Index Netflix publishes each month. As an Optimum subscriber, I can say there is a massive difference between the Netflix experience at my apartment in Brooklyn compared to Netflix at my office in Manhattan.
rev_bird 12y ago
The Security Now podcast had an indie ISP owner on the show back in June (10, I believe). Most of the show was Leo Laporte calling him as asshat, but one thing he said that was compelling was that his customers require Netflix -- if he doesn't give them Netflix, they don't sign up. The bandwidth was killing him, so he told Netflix he wanted the OpenConnect, and that he'd pay for installation and maintenance. They told him no.
- wmf 12y ago
  Brett Glass is a bit of a crank, though. His ISP is unviable but rather than just going out of business honestly he's looking for others to subsidize it. It was discussed extensively on NANOG: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2014-July/068290.html http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2014-July/068290.ht...

by curun1r 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Alupis 12y ago

Unfortunately, as we've discovered from the whole net neutrality debate -- netflix has offered these boxes for free to all major ISP's... yet the Big5 ISP's have all turned them down.

Thaxll 12y ago
Yes because those box aren't sufficient for 1M+ sub. You're better off using peering rather than cache boxes in your network if you're a large ISP.
- Alupis 12y ago
  Well, the boxes have multiple 10Gb ports on them -- so they can be as fast as the ISP will allow it to be on their network. And, Netflix will provide (free of charge) as many OpenConnect devices an ISP needs to serve all of their mutual customers. Also, Netflix offered to change their distribution model into a P2P model as well -- the Big5 ISP's said no to that too.
  - sp332 12y ago
    That doesn't mean the hard drives can serve multiple 10Gb at once. And why would ISPs give them space, power, and cooling for free when every other colo'd box (including CDNs like Akamai) pay for that?
    - wmf 12y ago
      If the bandwidth savings generated by the box exceed the cost of hosting it, then take it. Otherwise don't. But AFAIK Netflix isn't willing to pay ISPs to take boxes that save the ISP money.
      - sp332 12y ago
        That's one part of a negotiation. There's nothing that says an ISP has to take any deal that's more than $0 net profit.
        wmf 12y ago
        Nobody (sane) is trying to force ISPs to accept the boxes. But if an ISP refuses the boxes and they refuse to peer and they refuse to have uncongested transit... people start talking about regulation. Also, a "negotiation" with a monopoly is often indistinguishable from extortion.
    - justincormack 12y ago
      The new model has SSD but both could serve a useful amount of multiple 10Gb I believe.
      - Alupis 12y ago
        in addition to RAM caching. these boxes should be capable of pushing lots of bits.
- wmf 12y ago
  Citation needed. My understanding is that Netflix offers as many boxes as the ISP needs. This makes sense since each box is supposed to save money for Netflix and for the ISP.
- dsl 12y ago
  That is simply not true. A consumer broadband network often distributes out over a very large area and condenses into micro POPs. In the Bay Area think Pleasanton, Concord, Marin, etc. The ISP must then backhaul traffic from these micro POPs to a major POP where the whole internet interconnects (Santa Clara/San Jose). If Netflix were to install a million terabits a second of peering and a hundred thousand caching appliances in San Jose, it wouldn't alleviate the ISPs pain point at all, which is the backhaul to the micro POPs. Putting OpenConnect appliances into micro depolyments "out in the field" solves the problem, because it moves the content and caching out to the last mile. However the ISPs are reluctant to do this because then what used to be a half rack of telcom gear in a small shed somewhere has now become a defacto colocation facility. You have Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, Vudu, YouTube, Microsoft, eBay, and two dozen others each with 4u of gear in hundreds of locations that you are paying for power and rolling out to service when they fail (because you can't let competitors have physical access to each others gear, and a node failure can saturate the uplinks from the micro POP).
  - Thaxll 12y ago
    So why then large ISPs would refuse it, if it's free?
    - dsl 12y ago
      The physical box is free, yes. Imagine if every website you visited wanted to put a 1u box in your living room, which you paid to keep turned on and connected to the internet. If a box failed you either needed to unrack it, haul it down to FedEx, and rerack a replacement - or let a stranger in while you aren't home. If you don't get a box fixed fast enough, or choose not to install the MSN or Baidu box, everyone in your house starts to complain about it. I'm not defending the ISPs here, just simply explaining their perspective. I am a huge proponent of net neutrality, and I'm currently in the process of deploying something similar to OpenConnect for another large network.
    - dtparr 12y ago
      Presumably because they can then increase revenue by charging for the peering. And as other have noted, the issues with defacto colocation.
- eggnet 12y ago
  That's ridiculous. What do you think is driving the traffic when an ISP doesn't accept the hardware. It's the same hardware just running in Netflix's data center.

FireBeyond 12y ago

They at least used to have something on their SuperHD page that would tell you whether your ISP participated ("Sorry, you can't view SuperHD content because your ISP has not opted in to our OpenConnect program"), but I think since they opened that up, there's no obvious list.

filmgirlcw 12y ago

The only major ISP I know that definitively is part of OpenConnect is Optimum (Cablevision). That's why they have the fastest Netflix speeds (only after Google Fiber, and even then it is close) on the ISP Index Netflix publishes each month. As an Optimum subscriber, I can say there is a massive difference between the Netflix experience at my apartment in Brooklyn compared to Netflix at my office in Manhattan.

rev_bird 12y ago

The Security Now podcast had an indie ISP owner on the show back in June (10, I believe). Most of the show was Leo Laporte calling him as asshat, but one thing he said that was compelling was that his customers require Netflix -- if he doesn't give them Netflix, they don't sign up. The bandwidth was killing him, so he told Netflix he wanted the OpenConnect, and that he'd pay for installation and maintenance. They told him no.

wmf 12y ago
Brett Glass is a bit of a crank, though. His ISP is unviable but rather than just going out of business honestly he's looking for others to subsidize it. It was discussed extensively on NANOG: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2014-July/068290.html http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2014-July/068290.ht...