and now Netflix has turned the tables and become the 800 pound gorilla telling little people to eff off.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 7:10:33 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Wanna throw up in your mouth? A few years ago Netflix colo'd their CDN servers in a Comcast data center to resolve an overloaded peering issue. Performance improved for Netflix users served by that Comcast data center, usage on the peering connection went back to normal. Netflix pays a monthly fee for Colo just as anybody else would. Most observers in the media noted that performance improved after Netflix started paying Comcast and called it blackmail or extortion. Bad ISP! Stop charging Netflix for Colo! We need Neutrality! So yeah, I agree with you. ------ Original Message ------ From: "George Skorup" < [email protected] > To: [email protected] Sent: 9/28/2017 1:25:29 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Wanna throw up in your mouth? I thought half or most of the issue was the "edge providers"? Consumer wants edge providers' content. Edge provider makes money from the consumer. Advertising. The content itself. Etc. Edge provider doesn't want to pay carrier for transit. Both sides bitch. Peering is overloaded. Gov't steps in to "fix" it. Data caps and speed tiers weren't dissolved with NN. So what does it do for the consumer? Or for that matter, the carrier? Who does it "protect" other than the edge provider? Seems it's only protecting their profits. On 9/27/2017 11:40 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: <blockquote> That's pretty much how I've always seen it... NN always seemed to me more of a solution to a problem that people were afraid might be there someday, which the market would more than likely take care of by itself if it actually does happen, than a solution to an actual real problem. On Sep 27, 2017 11:26 PM, "Jason McKemie" < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> I'd think the big guys getting greedy (and being allowed to do as they wish with their networks) would only help the smaller providers. It's certainly possible that I'm missing something though. On Wednesday, September 27, 2017, George Skorup < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> I think Steve is saying, what was broken 4 years ago that needed NN to come fix it? On 9/27/2017 10:08 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: <blockquote> How so? It depends on which session. Sometimes we at least had lube, or there was the threat of getting fucked, but we just hadn't been moved into the same cell block of our admirer yet. Sometimes we just got "raw dogged". On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Steve Jones < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> Were we fucked 4 years ago? On Sep 27, 2017 9:30 PM, "Josh Reynolds" < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> There's some points that are obviously wrong, and some that are not. Also, as consumers, if net neutrality is repealed we are fucked. On Sep 27, 2017 8:27 PM, "Steve Jones" < [email protected] > wrote: <blockquote> https://www.theverge.com/2017/9/27/16374136/ajit-pai-fcc-net-neutrality-isp I pretty much had to quit reading when this idiot sated what the FCCs job is </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote>
