When I said bandwidth, I was referring more to internet egress. Then there is more support time associated with streaming usage, inflation, etc etc.
It's not something I believe in applying on my network, but I can completely understand why an ISP would think that it is reasonable to somehow meter and charge upstream providers. This would also allow the ISP to charge less to the consumer while recouping that money behind the scenes from the likes of Netflix - basically the reverse of what they currently do. Just playing the part of devil's advocate I suppose. On Saturday, December 16, 2017, <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure, but that was the argument you used. If it's not bandwidth usage and > associated costs, why should people not expect their bill to be the same? > > Jared > > > > Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 > From: "Jason McKemie" <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment > There are other costs besides bandwidth. > > On Saturday, December 16, 2017, <[email protected][mailto: > [email protected]]> wrote:Why shouldn't people expect the bill to be the > same? The cost of bandwidth has gone down about 10-15x since Netflix > streaming launched. > > Jared > > > > Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 > From: "Jason McKemie" <[email protected][mailto: > [email protected]]> > To: "[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]"; <[email protected][mailto:[email protected] > ]> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment > I'm not saying that isn't the way it is, but I was selling internet > service before Netflix was a thing - people use about 10-15x the bandwidth > now, but expect their internet bill to be the same. > > On Saturday, December 16, 2017, Carl Peterson <[email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]][mailto:[email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]]]> wrote: > > I don't get it. That is what your customers are paying you to deliver to > them. Why should you be able to charge Netflix as well. What if they say > no. What if they say screw you your IPs can't get Netflix and block you > entirely. > > On Dec 16, 2017, at 11:34 AM, Jason McKemie < > [email protected][mailto:[email protected] > ][mailto:[email protected][mailto: > [email protected]]]> wrote: > > 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][mailto: > [email protected]][mailto:[email protected][mailto:[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][mailto:[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][mailto: > [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][mailto:[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/[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[https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL][https:// > plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsD > eKalb][https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent- > computing-solutions][https://twitter.com/ICSIL]] > Midwest Internet Exchange[http://www.midwest- > ix.com/[http://www.midwest-ix.com/]] > [https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix][https://www. > linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange][https:// > twitter.com/mdwestix[https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix][ > https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet- > exchange][https://twitter.com/mdwestix]] > The Brothers WISP[http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/[http:// > www.thebrotherswisp.com/]] > [https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp][https://www. > youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg[https://www.facebook.com/ > thebrotherswisp][https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg] > ] > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > From: "Ron M." <[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]> > To: [email protected][mailto:[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] > [mailto:[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][mailto:[email protected]]> > To: "af" <[email protected][mailto:[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][mailto: > [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][mailto: > [email protected]]> > To: "[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]"; <[email protected][mailto:[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[http: > //www.linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5]] – MTCNA, > MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE > > For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net[http://www. > linktechs.net][http://www.linktechs.net/[http://www.linktechs.net/]] > Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com[http:// > www.towercoverage.com][http://www.towercoverage.com/[http:// > www.towercoverage.com/]] > Office: 314-735-0270[tel:314-735-0270] > E-Mail: [email protected][mailto:[email protected]] > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]] On > Behalf Of Mathew Howard > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 3:24 PM > To: af <[email protected][mailto:[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] > [mailto:[email protected]]> wrote: > > http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/12/15/net_ > neutrality_s_end_was_mostly_celebrated_by_the_far_right. > html[http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/12/15/ > net_neutrality_s_end_was_mostly_celebrated_by_the_far_ > right.html][http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/ > 12/15/net_neutrality_s_end_was_mostly_celebrated_by_the_ > far_right.html[http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/ > 2017/12/15/net_neutrality_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][mailto: > [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][mailto: > [email protected]]> wrote: > > Yep, that is concise and effective > > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected][mailto:[email protected]]] On > Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 7:57 AM > To: [email protected][mailto:[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 > > > > > > > >
