On Tue, 22 Jul 2014, Will Dennis wrote:
I think all of this PR battle (which now parts of the LOPSA membership is
getting sucked into ;) is over Netflix trying not to have to pay VZ to reach
their customers like they did Comcast --
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/business/media/comcast-and-netflix-reach-a-streaming-agreement.html
I agree that this is what Verizon is trying to do. I think the comcast agreement
was a bad thing for the Internet (for all the reasons mentioned here)
VZ has a right to run their network any way it sees fit. If they can make more
profit from Netflix with a pay-to-play agreement, that's good for the owners
of VZ, and is incumbent on management trying to maximize profit for the owners
(which is every businesses' job #1.) However, somewhere, it crosses the line
of "reasonable" profit and is construed to hurt consumers, and the Fed steps
in to limit profiteering via regulation. Seeing as how the FCC already
regulates VZ, VZ is making the calculated risk that Netflix will blink before
the FCC will act... "It's just business."
remember, that maximizing profit includes the long-term "we need to stay in
business by keeping our customers happy" requirement. It's really easy to miss
that when looking at a balance sheet.
David Lang
Disclaimer: I'm a Comcast customer for home Internet services (we do have VZ
FiOS run to our home, but no compelling reason to switch) and I'm not a Netflix
customer.
W.
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-boun...@lists.lopsa.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.lopsa.org]
On Behalf Of Derek Balling
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 5:04 PM
To: David Lang
Cc: discuss@lists.lopsa.org
Subject: Re: [lopsa-discuss] Https - the solution to net neutrality and ISP
monopolies
On Jul 22, 2014, at 4:57 PM, David Lang <da...@lang.hm> wrote:
They aren't slowing down Netflix to allow other traffic through, they are
letting an congestion point exist, which hurts all traffic through that
connection, not just Netflix traffic.
Do we have documented evidence of the other impacted traffic, or is that just
your assertion?
Assuming for the moment you're right (and I don't know, it could be, it's not how I'd play the game
sitting in their chair), that's motivating other L3 customers (who have negative impact) to put
pressure on their uplink to "solve the problem" (which would be accomplished by paying
VZN), or to switch to other carriers. (In other words, playing a variation on the PR game Netflix
is playing on VZN, against L3), which point it in the "goose and gander" category.
D
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
