On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Saku Ytti <[email protected]> wrote:
> On (2014-05-25 10:05 -0500), Blake Dunlap wrote: > > > The reason is because as an ISP, you generally have to build out for > > peak, not average use, unless you're [maligned eyeball provider] and > > just don't care. > > There are fairly regularly congestion in most ISPs, during single fault or > during extraordinary events where demand is much more than normal demands. > > I'm not talking about dropping now and then, some content/eyeball links are > congested every day until content agrees to pay to eyeball. > I'd be curious to know, if this content/eyeball strategic congestion occurs > for eyeballs who charge consumers by the byte. > > Why should the content network pay the eyeball network? First and foremost, the eyeballs which are the customers are paying the ISP to give them access to the content. It's the ISP that should pay to increase the bandwidth available between them and the content provider or host some sort of CDN like for the video streaming from the content provider, not the other way around. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
