Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-03-19 10:34:57: You might recall that Level 3 had plenty to say a few years ago when they were engaged in a traffic interconnection feud with Comcast. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


ieolus
Support The Clecs

join:2001-06-19
Danbury, CT

1 recommendation

Level 3 is correct

What do customers pay ISPs for if not to maintain and upgrade their damn network???
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp


norm

join:2012-10-18
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

2 recommendations

said by ieolus:

What do customers pay ISPs for if not to maintain and upgrade their damn network???

Access to their walled garden, obviously. I know I personally pay for access to Verizon's network so I can have access to Verizon's own network - assuming I don't have to touch an ALTER.NET hop. Anything else is additional and I should be thankful. /s

I work from home. My work VPN connects to a server in the DFW area that also uses Verizon. It's not uncommon to have packet loss and high latency from PA to TX. Because the issues START at the ALTER.NET hops, which is still Verizon, mind you, they refuse to ever acknowledge the issue.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

2 recommendations

reply to ieolus
Comcast is also a transit company and can seek Netflix as a client if they wish. Liquid Web peers directly with Comcast so why can't NetFlix? L3 is just worrying they're going to lose more customers over them going directly to the ISPs. Google also peers directly with ISPs.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26
reply to ieolus
said by ieolus:

What do customers pay ISPs for if not to maintain and upgrade their damn network???

All I can say is, I give up, what do we pay them for?

I think it's for a way for them to figure out how to raise rates, isn't it?
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects ··· amonkey/


Mr Fel
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

1 edit

I agree with Level 3 but...

The timing of the post is highly convenient for Level 3 during a time of higher scrutiny for Comcast while it's working on getting the merger with TWC approved. I wonder what type of response Level 3 is hoping to receive, if there ever is one, from Comcast while it's trying to avoid any negative press much like this. I'm surprised the only ISP they named was just AT&T.
--
Change the scheme, alter the mood! Electrify the boys and girls if you'd be so kind.


level3fail

@qwest.net
reply to ieolus

Re: Level 3 is correct

Level3 has been horrible for our company in the last few months. We used(last 5 years) to never have problems with our upstream peers, being L3, XO, TW, etc - our data center is actually a pop for L3, and is maybe 150ft from it to our equipment. We have had to let our data center network team know that we are seeing large amounts of packet loss at times, sometimes lasting minutes, sometimes hours. They finally were able to lower the priority of L3 to us, and we are now running as were before, with no major problems(terminating thousands of VPN connections kinda require a good pipe).


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 recommendation

Change of position?

seem opposite of the position Level3 took when negoeating a dispute with Cogent
»www.prnewswire.com/news- ··· 437.html
.
remember before Cogent, Level3 was Netflix's "discount" CDN and was caught trying to slip CDN traffic in with transit.
Maybe it just depends which end of the stick you are grabbing.

axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

The internet still works

I haven't had any sites blocked due to ISP shenanigans. In the case of streaming video, you wait for it to buffer and the packets come through. They probably aren't even violating network neutrality, if the connection is dropping packets randomly instead of based on rules targeting certain endpoints.

The real problem is how much negotiating power Comcast has to make these one-sided deals. Comcast/Time Warner merger decreases competition in the ISP / transit company market, which would be good grounds to block it.

Here's how things would work in an ideal world: Level 3 / Netflix / Whoever wouldn't enter any unfair agreements with Comcast. If Comcast balks, their customers have slow connections with dropped packets to some content. Then those customers switch to the competing local ISP.

The problem arises when there is not good alternative for the customer than Comcast, so they stay there and cancel their Netflix because it's not usable, and switch to someone else who did pay Comcast.

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to TBBroadband

Re: Level 3 is correct

You should read up on all the transit battles in the UK and Germany and how the last-mile providers were doing the exact same thing Comcast, Verizon, et al are doing here.

Here's what is happening:

You can drive on the thruway no problem, you just have to wait at the toll booth and pay with cash (Level 3), OR you can get an EZPASS and drive through the "special" toll booth at 60 MPH and pay less with no toll congestion (that doesn't mean the road isn't congested).

I'm not sure they really pay less (they probably do), but driving through the jump point at 60 MPH really makes a difference, doesn't it...

It can also be handled by an inter-web CDN, but I think Netflix should pay for that not offer it for "free", IMHO.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to Mr Fel

Re: I agree with Level 3 but...

If L3 even cared about this they would have complained before when Comcast was selling transit across their network for peering. They just want to bring an uproar in the IT industry over this. Nothing going on here with them.


nothing00

join:2001-06-10
Centereach, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

3 recommendations

reply to norm

Re: Level 3 is correct

Ah, I see what's happening. If this continues this is what the cable/telcos are after:

Sign up for the Comcast Network today! Includes great services such as:
- Netflix
- Amazon
- Facebook
- NBC
- Comcastic Email
And enjoy unlimited Internet access with 50GB of data a month!

Sign up for the Verizon Network today! Includes great services such as:
- Redbox Instant
- Amazon
- Google
- Twitter
- Verizon Email
And enjoy unlimited Internet access with 75GB of data a month! All at incomparable FiOS speeds up to 500mbps!

Yeah, it's going to hell.


Probitas

@teksavvy.com

similar to rent

I've heard some landlords charge premiums on top of rental space in some malls. Your business pays X, and then you pay some percent of $ over that based on how successful (profit) you are. Sounds like gouging to me, as they already pay rent. Seems highly unfair to attempt to tell some business that happens to use your network because their customers (let's remember the ISP customers are trying to use their paid service to access a third party site) want to use the service it's going to cost them MORE to let their own customers have access to another site. Sounds like the mob to me. Quite a racket.


PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD
reply to elefante72

Re: Level 3 is correct

Pass through the EZPASS toll booth and still hit the same congested traffic as everyone else. That might actually be the best example of the ludicrous nature of this.

shmerl

join:2013-10-21
reply to nothing00
Is FiOS really limited to 75 GB a month?

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

1 recommendation

reply to tshirt

Re: Change of position?

I bet the prospect of losing major customers like Netflix to direct peering agreements would be scary for any CDN and transit provider: they built tens if not hundreds of Gbps across their network and CDN nodes at a cost of several million dollars to support streaming media and now large chunks of that revenue stream are going away.


norm

join:2012-10-18
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to shmerl

Re: Level 3 is correct

said by shmerl:

Is FiOS really limited to 75 GB a month?

No, nor is Comcast limited to 50GB a month. They were just future theoretical situations proposed by nothing00.

In some markets, Comcast has a 300GB cap. FiOS doesn't have a hard cap but will disconnect heavy users.


David
I start new work on
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:101
Reviews:
·DIRECTV
·AT&T Midwest
·magicjack.com
·Google Voice

3 edits

1 recommendation

I guess it sucks for level 3.

After all if I can avoid paying the middleman and his prices and can contact the ISP's directly, exactly what do I need level 3/middleman for?

I wonder if they will become the floppy disks of the industry as USB drives (direct connection) takes hold.

why pay the middle man's cut when I can just pay the provider directly? Doesn't sams club /wal-mart kind of do that already?

--
02/24/14- My hours recently changed. I work 11:30 A.M. to 10 P.M. central time. I am not in the office on friday, saturday, or sunday. Thanks-David

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

2 recommendations

reply to elefante72

Re: Level 3 is correct

Comcast is just NOT an ISP. They are peering/transit provider as well. They've been selling peering and transit to other companies for YEARS. This is just a way for L3 to cry about something as they often do when they lose customers.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
reply to Probitas

Re: similar to rent

That's how big malls have always worked rent + tenant improvements + x%.
most franchise s for stores and other business are similar.


guppy_fish
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

2 recommendations

Caught with hand in cookie jar

Cognet, L3, XO and a dozen others thought they had it rigged, get Teir one Status, the sign up Netflix, underbid to get the $$ and flood the peering points

Gig is up dudes, and the need for these networks will go back to doing what they did before, which is they get paid for the tiny part of the network they actually are

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

1 recommendation

reply to TBBroadband

Re: I agree with Level 3 but...

A merger of TWC and Comcast would make Comcast an even bigger transit provider. A bigger potential threat to Level3. I can't imagine they want this merger to go through.

InvalidError

join:2008-02-03
kudos:5

3 recommendations

reply to David

Re: I guess level 3 does have a point...

Not every company and over-the-top service provider is large enough to afford the infrastructure necessary to peer directly with ISPs and there are also limits to how small one of those can be before putting them on-net is worth the trouble for ISPs. For all those not-large-enough cases, some sort of middleman to aggregate traffic is necessary.

There will always be a need for middleman networks. What changes is that now traditional transit providers have to get used to the idea that some of their larger clients may end up bypassing them when they become large enough for ISPs to be interested in direct peering with.

In other words, L3 wants to protect their traditional business model against new trends that may significantly alter the balance of power and the way they have to do business. Sounds awfully similar to what the RIAA/MPAA and related entities have been doing for the past 10-15 years. L3 is losing their ability to impose peering terms and they do not like it, just like the *AAs do not like their slipping grips on copyright enforcement, retail markups and independent artists/producers who refuse to become members.


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

1 recommendation

This is about Level3 protecting their revenue stream.

They are pissed that Netflix just cut big chunk of their revenue by bypassing them and going directly to Comcast.

Let's say Netflix is paying Level3 for 100Gb of traffic to the internet and 50Gb of that traffic was headed to Comcast's network. IF they were paying $1000/GB (just an exampe) and 40Gb of that traffic was headed to Comcast then the Comcast/Netflix peering arrangement just took $40k/mo out of Level3's pocket.

This is what they are whining about.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.

XeenFalcon

join:2006-09-13
Salt Lake City, UT

3 recommendations

The Internet in the US is becoming a closed network

When I ran my dial-up ISP back in the late 90's the business model was to pay for a backbone connection or multiple back bone connections with multiple providers like Level 3. The priority was to provide the possible routing to the customers. Today the large ISP's like Comcast and Verizon are essentially back bone providers themselves. Now priorities have changed from giving the customers the best routing possible to the internet to charging the content providers for the best routing possible to the customer. So what if the peering between Comcast/VZ and Level 3/Cogent/XO became lop sided in one direction it’s because we the paying subscriber wanted that data (aka Netflix) provided by them. If a peering point becomes saturated in one direction because the ISP's paying customers are wanting that data the ISP should be obligated to free up that congestion not charge the backbone provider more for access to their customers. It’s a matter of customer service to apply the best routing possible for your customers. It turns that some users were getting better throughput to netflix by using a VPN that put them straight on to cogent or level 3 bypassing the choke point that says it all. If a customer has to use a VPN to essentially change their own routing to get to the content they desire, this blows me away. As this keeps happening backbone providers like Level 3, XO and Cogent will fade away and all will be left with is Comcast and VZ backbone controlling everything and we will be left with is a closed network.
Expand your moderator at work


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to XeenFalcon

Re: The Internet in the US is becoming a closed network

said by XeenFalcon:

As this keeps happening backbone providers like Level 3, XO and Cogent will fade away

That isn't going to happen.
Traffic is multiplying at an increasingly rapid pace, and there is plenty for everyone.
In fact Level3 and Cogent still carry Netflix to the caches just outside Comcast network entry points in the new agreements.

54761437

join:2013-01-18
Durham, NC

1 recommendation

None of it makes any difference

Until ISPs are compelled (forced) to prove that they're NOT intentionally letting their peering points become oversaturated, speculation that Level3 is the bad guy here and Comcast is the good guy is stupid. Give me proof, show me some numbers to back up these ridiculous claims. When people on this site go to bat for Comcast with NO SOLID EVIDENCE of anything they've done (back room deals and vague PR statements about how "robust" their network is don't count), it makes me wonder how many Comcast employees and shareholders we really have here.


brockalee1

@myvzw.com
reply to norm

Re: Level 3 is correct

They will probably place caps on sites not in your "package" .

sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1
reply to Anon

Re: I guess level 3 does have a point...

You actually *believe* him? How do you manage to miss every single conversation on this issue only to become "clear" based on the rantings of an irritating corporatist?

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to InvalidError

Re: Change of position?

Perhaps the CDNs providing transit to end users should've been a little more competitive and they would have less to fear. Both Comcast and Netflix are on the record stating the issue wasn't "Comcast allowing the connection to saturate". So, who's left at fault? I'd wager on the CDNs/ISPs that Netflix chose to do business with. Netflix learned this the hard way and decided to fix it by arranging an interconnection agreement with Comcast; and soon several other major ISPs