how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2005-12-01 10:35:55: According to the Washington Post, a BellSouth executive yesterday told reporters and analysts that the telco should be able to charge certain websites more if they wish to be accessed by customers more quickly. ..
| |
page: 1 · 2 · 3  |
 
mr stupid
@bellsouth.net | New World Order Dont you all know that all of the Bell companies are pure
evil, (Verizon is no exception). Humpty Dumpty is trying to come back together again with FCC approval. ATT and and any other RBOC is really just the Beast without the 666.. | |
| nonner9
join:2005-10-14
Charlotte, NC
| Bellsouth can do what they want I didn't see anyone posting this idea yet.
I think Bellsouth has every right to charge more
for websites that use a lot of bandwidth.
Let a business do as they wish. Stop gov't interference.
If I was a shareholder, I would be upset. The reason being is that Google isn't going to pay Bellsouth. Google would be smart to give them the finger, then "block" all Bellsouth customers from accessing www.google.com ... Bellsouth will start getting tons of calls from customers asking why Google doesn't work, and eventually Bellsouth will be faced with losing customers or not charging google. .... ahhh Free Market, it works so magically .... | |
| 
DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey | google says goodbye bs Couldnt google restrict access to bellsouth, and say well were not paying unless you pay us, customers would be a little upset.
--
Feed your Faith, not your doubts | |
| |
mike1324
@168.221.x.x | ping No wonder they doubled my ping without warning. Now they'll have a tier so i can get my original ping back, but it'll cost me $$$ | |
| | 
Doctor Olds
I Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.
Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
clubs:
| Re: ping said by mike1324 :
No wonder they doubled my ping without warning. Now they'll have a tier so i can get my original ping back, but it'll cost me $$$
Bellsouth's dirty secret they don't want the average person to know what they are doing right now behind the users' backs. Everyone was set to Fast Path (it's the default setting in the DSLAM) in Bellsouth land for the last 5 -6 Years since Bellsouth started offering ADSL for the public to consume. Fast Path is the standard on a line with no other issues and gives very good latency on the first hop. Interleaved is now being placed on people's lines without any valid technical reason as a way to reduce load on their network by slowing everyone down.
Here is a perfect example of Fast Path taken away from a Bellsouth customer for no reason.
»Why has my ping doubled?
No reason other than to degrade the line performance as the doubled ping from Interleaving starts on the first hop and stays with you the entire route. Then you are a less of a load on the line than you were getting before, but the price load on your wallet didn't drop.  Hidden profits, Best Effort or Half an Effort?? If you game, doubled latency can ruin a once good DSL line. If you use Video chat or VOIP, the doubled latency can kill those applications until they are choppy or unusable.
We all know it's about Latency. 
»db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=00729
»rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/r···ncy.html
Regards,
Doctor Olds
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time? | |
| clecrupt9
join:2002-01-22
GA
| Let Em Do It Google isn't exactly a small pushed around company. I suspect they don't much like this idea- doesn't it almost smack of good vs evil? You have an old, known top be crooked, once Government busted up company coming back from the dead to challenge a new, young, very rich company.
I say of you could get people and business off dialpads and telephones, we could finally kill this AT&T monster. The technology is here, now. But until that happens, we're going to live with them and their crooked business practices. | |
| 
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Stick with what you know.... I find this rather annoying in many ways. I have BellSouth service, and generally it's fine...but this as an overall business plan is complete bunk. Bad comparisons, poor judgement in my view.
It seems our precious bells have now decided they are either content providers when it suits them, or network providers when it suits them.
Unfortunately our FCC has done nothing to clarify this point. IMHO the root issue behind SBCs comments was purely because they want THEIR portal to get more hits than others. BellSouth is doing the same in some ways here.
However, Google and other sites like it aren't the issue. They need to get their collective heads out of their backsides on that one. You don't prioritize traffic to other portals and call yourself a network provider, AND get away with it from a anti-trust point of view. What happens to all of the smaller mom & pop shops? "Oh well you'll need to get your hosting through us and you'll have plenty of bandwidth!"
I don't think so.
The issue of VoIP traffic is another issue IMHO. Here, the bells will begin offering their own VoIP service and of course it will have scads of bandwidth at the ready...but potentially cripple that of other providers. This is where the agreements will come into play. Here, providers like Vonage will end up spending bunches of cash to get max throughput on all of the ISPs or at least the major ones. Thus they will end up in the toilet, purchased by someone else.
The same thing applies when we're talking the ILECs / CLECs or ISPs who end up buying lines from the Bells. Under this idea they could/would throttle down their bandwidth unless they pay up.
In short the Bells and others (Comcast etc) need to learn that they aren't in the content creation business, but rather at best delivery (esp cable or when the bells start doing tv), but really just connectivity.
K.
--
TheGlobalMind.com
Chaos, panic & disorder. My work here is done.
Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | |
| NerdMods
join:2004-07-20
Atlanta, GA
1 edit | Moderators please delete Moderators please delete | |
| flushls
join:2004-11-02
Joyce, WA | A monopolist without a real monopoly Let them it will help their competitors. | |
| dlewis23
join:2005-04-18
Boca Raton, FL
| WOW WOW..
so bellsouth your just going to slow down your already slow interet on purpose.
thats a really great way to get more customers to sign up for your service. And another great way to keep your current customers.
Maby you shoud do this, since there are companies charging $49.99 a month for 15mbps internet, you should do the same. because FIOS and Cable are kicking your ass right now. Its just a matter of time till DSL is dead, and then what are you going to do for internet. | |
| bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| This is really about killing 3rd party VoIP COs BellSouth CTO William L. Smith also told reporters BellSouth should be able to charge VoIP carriers for network traffic QOS (quality of service). As much as this article seems to be about Bellsouth wanting to charge Google, its really about Bellsouth wanting to purposely degrade 3rd party VoIP services and forcing them to pay to have reasonable performance...
As for leaving Bellsouth to go with another provider, its questionable as to whether that will actually solve anything... Any major provider, telco or MSO, who is going to provider VoIP is going to try to pull the same stunt.
I also have to wonder if this type of service degradation is going to affect business class services as well or if this is purposely aimed at residential class services in order to get people to "choose" their uncrippled VoIP service.
--
Support "W"
The one thing worse than idle hands is an idle mind. | |
| compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| Typical of Bells It seems that BellSouth wants to make money by charging their customers access to the web; then turn around and charge web content providers when those customers access the content. My guess, there is no more money to be made as an isp. Maybe after seeing the growth of Google, Yahoo, Amazon and Ebay they want piece of the dot com action. | |
| kingdomware
join:2000-09-23
Waldorf, MD | WOW I heard he ran it by his toilet and the response was FLUSH!
See, this what happens when you don't take the toilets advice. | |
| GLHS329
join:2002-02-27
Atqasuk, AK
| Here's a thought For every dollar BellSouth tries to charge Google, Google submits their own bill to BellSouth. After all, it's those BellSouth customers that are running up Google's costs! Shouldn't BellSouth be responsible for all the network/server usage incurred due to BellSouth's customers!!!
Hey, wait a minute! Google could charge $1.05 for every $1 BellSouth bills them. They could turn it into a profit center  | |
| Kiwi
Premium
join:2003-05-26
USA
 ·Comcast
 ·Aristotle Internet
| Never Ending Story Seems like the concept the RIAA started, is becoming a blooming prospect for a future business model; many kinds of 'Ransom' from out of court settlements, rootkits and now hijacking Google -What's left? out right terrorism on VoIP providers? Any USA based business models that are 'User Friendly' anymore?
Life is getting out of hand....
--
2.66g/533fsb Intel CPU @ 3.48g512meg Twinmos PC3700~466 DDR @ 2.8v -PCpower&Cooling 512. May, 2003*ATI 9500 Pro @ 9700 Pro @1.6v
AMD ASUS A7N8X-E ~2500+ @3200 ATI 9500 Pro, Corsair 512LL. | |
| 
OreoleO
Wanna Settle This Outside??
join:2004-05-22
Feasterville Trevose, PA
| bs That's the most bs i ever heard, i'm 100% positive that google won't pay them a dime, i mean how much is a googly page, around 50 kb/s.
If bs decides to somehow lag google out, or in some evil way, I hope Google puts a big banner that says, is you google slow? then, DITCH BELLSOUTH!!
lol | |
| waiting4fios
join:2005-04-08
Howell, NJ
 ·Verizon FIOS
| seems like nobody gets it 1)Where did BellSouth mention Google? It seems like Broadbandreports are the ones that specifically mentioned Google.
2)Where did BellSouth say that they would slow down your connection to certain websites/applications?
Let's assume I have a VOIP and my call travels through the Internet like any other data packet and arrives at its destination with the same delay as any other internet packet, is this the way VOIP works? YES. Now let's say that Vonage can set up an agreement with BellSouth where Vonage pays BellSouth a fee, and BellSouth marks Vonage data packets so that they are sent across the network at a faster rate than regular internet data packets, is there anything wrong with that? NO. In fact this would be beneficial to both Vonage and BellSouth.
1)BellSouth makes more money
2)Vonage calls have better call quality and reliability, so Vonage customers are happier with the service.
Does Vonage HAVE to pay BellSouth? NO. Vonage is not being forced to pay more, and BellSouth will continue to pass Vonage packets like they do today with no QOS. The advantage to Vonage is a better product with reliability closer to that of regular POTS service.
As it stands right now, all VOIP service is provided on a best effort basis. This is like the Postal Service. I put a 37 cent stamp on my letter, put it in the mail and the Postal Service will make its best effort to deliver my letter to its destination. Am I guaranteed that my letter will arrive? No. Am I guaranteed how quickly my letter will arrive? No. However, I can pay a few extra dollars and the postal service will 1)Guarantee my delivery, and 2)Guarantee my delivery time. This is no different than what BellSouth is talking about. All they are saying is that your VOIP call can sound much clearer if they give it priority. Should they charge to give it priority? Yes. If I am an ISP why should I send certain packets faster than others unless I am being paid to do so, just like the postal service doesn't send that letter next day air if it is not paid to do so. BellSouth never mentioned degrading current service levels, nor did they specifically mention Google like so many of you went to rant on about. Right now if you sign on to yahoo.com or google.com or whatever you receive no guarantee as to how fast the page will load, whether its 1 second or 1 minute, its all subject to best effort delivery. Now if Bellsouth says to yahoo, "I can guarantee your pages will load in 1 second to all my subscribers by prioritizing the delivery of your packets if you are willing to pay $$$" Then let them. If yahoo says, "No its ok, let the pages load at the current best effort model currently in place" Then that's their right as well. No one is having service degraded, simply one company is choosing to pay BellSouth a "first-class" ticket and another company can choose to fly coach.
For those who say the slower DSL is coach and the faster tier is first class, you are wrong! The slower DSL just means you chose to drive a car, The faster tier means you chose to ride a train, and the fastest tier means you chose to fly a plane. If I choose to drive a car, I can drive a Hyundai or I can drive a Corvette. Hyundai=coach, Corvette=First Class; albeit on the slowest DSL. If I'm subscribed to 6M DSL, I can still have first class on a train, or I can still ride coach, and if I have a 15/2 Fiber connection then I'm flying on a plane, but I can still have first class and still have coach. The connection speed that you pay for has nothing to do with the quality of service that is offered, and that is the point that most of you miss. Why? Because all of you want everything you can get paying as little as possible. Do I wish I could pay coach for a first class ticket? Yes. Do I expect to? No.
Bottomline - Nothing wrong with BellSouth's comments, they were twisted by Broadbandreports, most of you fell for it, few understand the logic, it makes perfect sense, and you have the right to disagree. | |
|
rr73
@bellsouth.ne | Traffic Prioritization If they prioritize traffic to websites for a feee or at all, they will ose ALL my business... Seems like if they could charge for the air you breath, they would, and if they could take it further, you'd pay extra for clean air.... | |
| mmoon
join:2005-12-03
Marietta, GA | Anyone heard of this yet? When will someone be filing lawsuits against any ISP for interfering with the execution of a contract. For VoIP providers it seems that option is available or at least class action for their customers when it happens. Am I way off there? | |
| francishsu
join:2000-06-27
Wyoming, MI | already happening? Aren't there already some cases where ISPs are either prioritizing their own VOIP and/or blocking competing VOIP services? | |
| | | |
|
·