| reply to jbrunette
Re: Hmm... Well I took it two ways. One, the way everyone here took it. The other being that if content providers want faster wider access then they should pay for the upgrades. |
|
|
|
| said by bogey780:Well I took it two ways. One, the way everyone here took it. The other being that if content providers want faster wider access then they should pay for the upgrades. Why should content providers pay for faster access? I already pay my isp for those faster access. If I am paying my isp for 7000 kbps down load speed content providers should not have to pay for sending data, that I request, at 7000 kbps speed. Also, content providers only respond to requests from isp customers and shouldn't have to pay to access those customers; since, they didn't. |
|
| To get from one spot on the internet to another you have to take hops. Some hops get congested because of certain providers. Some people want a better ping. It could be from this that Bellsouth will offer to lower the amount of hops or redirect traffic around congestion for a fee.
But yea, either way it presents a problem since the possibility of impropriety is great. Though I'd pay a little more if they could get my ping lower to some servers. |
|
 rr73
@mia.bellsouth.ne | Don't forget that the ping times point you are making refers to routing, and those conjested points typically affect "areas" of the Internet, not specific sites, rerouting for the benefit of one customer may makes things worse somewhere else. |
|
