dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
11
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

2 recommendations

InvalidError to pandora

Member

to pandora

Re: Isn't 100% congestion at the Verizon exchange their problem?

In grossly imbalanced settlement-free peering arrangements, the network receiving excess traffic usually has a clause entitling it to compensation for taking excess traffic.

In that case, Verizon would have every right to tell the other network to go screw itself if it wants to push even more settlement-free traffic through that peering point without offering some form of compensation.

Internet transit and peering has always worked this way but this has never been an issue before because before Netflix, there had never been a single entity responsible for such such a huge chunk of all prime-time internet traffic.

With P2P traffic, every network is both a source and sink so P2P traffic remained relatively balanced at all stages of the P2P revolution and that was perfect for settlement-free arrangements. With Netflix though, all traffic comes directly from Netflix's CDNs and their preferred routes so most of the traffic is one-sided and tunneled through a subset of all possible routes, which is exactly the opposite of what settlement-free peering has traditionally been about.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

3 recommendations

KrK

Premium Member

Except the Traffic they are taking is not for transit, it's their own customers generating the traffic demand and they are the end point. So the whole argument of "We are a transit company that provides free peering for equitable data exchange" collapses. They are the consumer.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

2 recommendations

InvalidError

Member

Netflix is the consumer here - they paid transit providers and CDNs to host and deliver that data.

In any case, Verizon has no obligation to upgrade their side of things if they cannot come to mutually agreeable terms with whoever is on the other side of those links. If Verizon says they are not eating the cost of propagating 200Gbps more traffic from transit/peer/CDN-X for free, that's the end of that.

200Gbps may not seem like much in carrier terms but upgrading and re-wiring stuff nation-wide to efficiently propagate or fan-out an extra 200Gbps across the network can still cost hundreds of millions of dollars so there is some legitimacy to Verizon not wanting to put all their bandwidth eggs in the same PoP baskets with the same peers/CDNs without compensation: Netflix switching CDNs and transit providers can invalidate a large chunk of Verizon investments to accommodate the previous CDNs' network layouts and having 30-50% of your peak hour load distribution change drastically from coast to coast practically overnight would require considerable network re-engineering. Forcing geographic diversity by refusing to upgrade links at over-invested locations can be one way to reduce this risk - spread costs, assets, traffic ingress/egress, etc. more evenly.
pandora
Premium Member
join:2001-06-01
Outland

1 recommendation

pandora

Premium Member

Verizon can route traffic over the imbalanced network, it shouldn't be a problem. Regardless, Verizon customers are paying for a pipe that can run at speed, and Verizon is creating choke points preventing that speed. The traffic isn't going through Verizon to other networks, but to Verizon customers who paid for bandwidth.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by pandora:

Verizon customers are paying for a pipe that can run at speed

I would not be so sure about that since it is physically impossible to build a network that can guarantee it; never mind a cost-effective one with millions of edge connections.

There are so many different costs blended in at every point of the pipes between two endpoints it is impossible to tell exactly who pays for exactly how much of what. All we know for sure is that most telecoms make considerable profits on most of their tiers.
pandora
Premium Member
join:2001-06-01
Outland

1 recommendation

pandora

Premium Member

said by InvalidError:

I would not be so sure about that since it is physically impossible to build a network that can guarantee it; never mind a cost-effective one with millions of edge connections.

If as Verizon indicates high speed customers can't stream Netflix due to congestion at an exchange, and Verizon refuses to increase bandwidth at that exchange, Verizon is misrepresenting their speeds.
Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

Bengie25 to InvalidError

Member

to InvalidError
It's physically impossible to feed everyone in the USA, yet here we are.

People in the USA have the buying capacity to decimate the food market, yet we don't. It's a self limiting issue with natural maximums.

The same thing is true with networks. You can guarantee that everyone has what they want without having to assume everyone will consume as much as the max.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError to pandora

Member

to pandora
Verizon subscribers can still get full speed when accessing sites on other routes. No "misrepresentation" there.

Putting nearly all your major NNIs in a single location with most of the traffic coming from a single other party is not a healthy network-building practice since you are screwed every time load distribution changes so it is quite understandable that Verizon might want to force route and geographic diversity by refusing to upgrade peering sites beyond a certain point.
pandora
Premium Member
join:2001-06-01
Outland

1 recommendation

pandora

Premium Member

said by InvalidError:

Verizon subscribers can still get full speed when accessing sites on other routes. No "misrepresentation" there.

Putting nearly all your major NNIs in a single location with most of the traffic coming from a single other party is not a healthy network-building practice since you are screwed every time load distribution changes so it is quite understandable that Verizon might want to force route and geographic diversity by refusing to upgrade peering sites beyond a certain point.

Verizon sells customers internet bandwidth, not select network bandwidth. If Verizon has saturated exchanges with other networks, and doesn't seek to resolve the problem, they shouldn't advertise internet bandwidth, just intranet bandwidth imo.
intok (banned)
join:2012-03-15

intok (banned) to InvalidError

Member

to InvalidError
Youtube existed long before Netflix's streaming service. Porn streamers as a whole are a massive chunk of bandwidth.
intok

intok (banned) to InvalidError

Member

to InvalidError
Get a VPN and watch as your connection to Netflix is magically completely unthrottled.

Verizon has the physical capacity, they have just become a crime syndicate.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

1 recommendation

InvalidError

Member

There is no need for any conspiracy theory there: Netflix pays middlemen to carry their traffic, those middlemen choose their lowest-cost routes to get that traffic from Netflix to Verizon, there probably is some form of dispute between those middlemen and Verizon and the middlemen are not re-routing traffic through other Verizon peering points because that would increase their costs.

That makes both Netflix and Verizon claims true: there is plenty of capacity on either side if the middlemen split traffic more evenly across peering points instead of trying to shove everything through their absolute lowest-cost paths that Verizon does not want to sink any more money in because there is plenty of under-used capacity elsewhere.
intok (banned)
join:2012-03-15

intok (banned)

Member

Theres no conspiracy, get a VPN and you instantly bypass Verizon's traffic shaping and get all of the bandwidth you are paying for. Netflix included.

Verizon is just shaking down Netflix to get paid twice for the same service.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

1 recommendation

InvalidError

Member

No need for shaping if the middle-network is trying to dump all their Netflix traffic through their lowest-cost path to Verizon and that path happens to be congested.

Unless you can prove your VPN also goes through the same allegedly congested links, being able to get full speed to Netflix through VPNs proves nothing that Verizon did not already say: there is plenty of bandwidth available through alternate routes that Netflix is not using.
intok (banned)
join:2012-03-15

intok (banned)

Member

Netflix and Google offered to put server inside of Verizon's network so that traffic to 2 of the largest data consumers would never hit the actual internet and as such never incur a transit cost. Verizon flat out refused. Why? So they can extort millions out of everyone else.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT

1 recommendation

BiggA

Premium Member

Exactly.