I'm pretty sure my network would not qualify for that, and while it would
certainly help, it would not eliminate the cost entirely.

On Saturday, December 16, 2017, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have had a netflix caching server for several years.  It was free.  Does
> not add to my backbone cost as it fills itself during the off hours.
>
> *From:* Jason McKemie
> *Sent:* Saturday, December 16, 2017 9:29 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>
> IMO, the true cost of a service like Netflix is more than the monthly rate
> that they bill their customers. As ISPs, we just have to absorb that cost
> or raise prices to compensate, doesn't help with the big bad ISP perception.
>
> On Saturday, December 16, 2017, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> It would mirror access charges in the telecom world.  There are some
>> logical reasons why such a scheme would be fair, but it would really drive
>> up the cost of everything.
>>
>> *From:* Mike Hammett
>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 16, 2017 8:18 AM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>>
>> A lot of people wanted to do that back in the day. I had no idea why.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
>>
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From: *"Ron M." <[email protected]>
>> *To: *[email protected]
>> *Sent: *Saturday, December 16, 2017 8:00:10 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>>
>> What I'm thinking here... don't charge the end users. Get good IP traffic
>> accounting and charge the upstream content providers for carrying THEIR
>> sourced traffic. Don't penalize the end users. ;-)
>>
>> (My $0.02, can I have my change back now?)
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> One of our tech support guys asked me yesterday if we're going to start
>>> charging for access to Facebook, Netflix, etc. I was just like, dude,
>>> seriously? Yeah, cuz that will surely get us customers. He said, but now we
>>> can, so why wouldn't we? I said, but did we before NN? And then I realized
>>> he was just trying to annoy me. Same shit the media is doing. FUD dbag
>>> tactics. IT'S A TRAP!
>>>
>>> On 12/15/2017 2:59 PM, Adam Moffett wrote:
>>>
>>> Exactly.  I literally see people suggesting that ISP's will charge for
>>> access to Facebook or charge for access to Netflix.  Not. Going. To. Happen.
>>>
>>>
>>> ------ Original Message ------
>>> From: "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]>
>>> To: "af" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: 12/15/2017 3:57:00 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, true, there were ways to legally do it before if you really wanted
>>> to. Bbut more to the point, nobody is going to do something like that
>>> anyway, because there's no way that it would be worth the customer backlash
>>> they'd have to deal with.
>>>
>>> Nah, nobody is going to have the sense to feel silly about it... they'll
>>> just keep whining for awhile, and then forget about it. Or else, they'll
>>> find something that's completely unrelated that they don't like and blame
>>> it on the lack of NN.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You would have to justify that as "reasonable network management".
>>>> They defined reasonable network management as being driven by technical
>>>> reasons rather than business reasons (paraphrased).  Not disagreeing with
>>>> you, just clarifying.
>>>>
>>>> The bigger loophole I saw was that transit providers were excluded from
>>>> all the rules.
>>>> Put an AS in between you and your upstream who just does filtering for
>>>> you.  They're a transit provider so they have no NN rules.
>>>>
>>>> It was very frustrating to witness all the crazy theories about what
>>>> would happen.  I wonder if anyone will have the sense to feel silly about
>>>> pontificating on Facebook when absolutely nothing changes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------ Original Message ------
>>>> From: "Dennis Burgess" <[email protected]>
>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: 12/15/2017 3:43:06 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NN did not disallow you to block facebook, just have to disclose it.  J
>>>> So it really did’ent do anything.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Dennis Burgess** –** Network Solution Engineer – Consultant *
>>>>
>>>> MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant
>>>> <http://www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5> –
>>>> MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net
>>>>
>>>> Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com
>>>>
>>>> Office: 314-735-0270 <%28314%29%20735-0270>
>>>>
>>>> E-Mail: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2017 3:24 PM
>>>> *To:* af <[email protected]>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Awesome! I think I'll go block Facebook, and see how that goes...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Steve Jones <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/12/15/net_neutr
>>>> ality_s_end_was_mostly_celebrated_by_the_far_right.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apparently now we ISPs can lawfully block individual sites and will do
>>>> so with impunity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These people with these petty ideas I dont think understand how poorly
>>>> granularity scales.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Josh Baird <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I like this as well.  I was thinking it would be a good idea to put out
>>>> a statement..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Paul McCall <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yep, that is concise and effective
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Gino A.
>>>> Villarini
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2017 7:57 AM
>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Our NN statment
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you guys think? Lots of customers calling!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Aeronet Statement on Net Neutrality
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> AeroNet, a ISP that provides advanced Internet services to Business and
>>>> individuals in PR, USVI and Miami, applauds any action taken  that
>>>> promotes  innovation and advancement of connectivity for all consumers. In
>>>> Aeronet’s  17 years of history, our pricing structure has always been
>>>> simple, unlimited and without any toll gates.  The placement and removal of
>>>> Net Neutrality rules have not and will not modify our pricing policy.  We
>>>> maintain our commitment to provide the fastest and most reliable service to
>>>> our customers, with innovative solutions that fulfill our customers needs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Gino A. Villarini*
>>>>
>>>> President
>>>>
>>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to