dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
11

PhoenixDown
FIOS is Awesome
Premium Member
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY

5 recommendations

PhoenixDown to IowaCowboy

Premium Member

to IowaCowboy

Re: Consumer protection lawsuits

Netflix should be suing the the people they contracted with for CDN service providers for not living up to the contract if that is the case. They have nothing to sue Comcast for. Netflix is not a comcast customer.
AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL

7 recommendations

AVonGauss

Premium Member

said by PhoenixDown:

Netflix is not a comcast customer.

Was not a Comcast customer. Even though its a fairly unpopular view on boards such as this, the NetFlix transit deals are actually very good for consumers and NetFlix. They establish a direct relationship between the content provider (NetFlix) and the ISPs who service their customers. Its not a new paradigm nor unique to the US market, any content provider that grows beyond a certain size eventually has to cross this bridge.

PlusOne
@73.160.110.x

1 recommendation

PlusOne

Anon

said by AVonGauss:

said by PhoenixDown:

Netflix is not a comcast customer.

Was not a Comcast customer. Even though its a fairly unpopular view on boards such as this, the NetFlix transit deals are actually very good for consumers and NetFlix. They establish a direct relationship between the content provider (NetFlix) and the ISPs who service their customers. Its not a new paradigm nor unique to the US market, any content provider that grows beyond a certain size eventually has to cross this bridge.

+1
98778011 (banned)
join:2014-08-24
Charlotte, NC

98778011 (banned) to AVonGauss

Member

to AVonGauss
Comcast's Peering/Transit is different and actually a different company.

alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT

alchav to AVonGauss

Member

to AVonGauss
said by AVonGauss:

said by PhoenixDown:

Netflix is not a comcast customer.

Was not a Comcast customer. Even though its a fairly unpopular view on boards such as this, the NetFlix transit deals are actually very good for consumers and NetFlix. They establish a direct relationship between the content provider (NetFlix) and the ISPs who service their customers. Its not a new paradigm nor unique to the US market, any content provider that grows beyond a certain size eventually has to cross this bridge.

You are absolutely right, you are one of the few that gets it. Netflix has started a trend that is only going to get bigger. People feel that content on the Internet should be free for the most part, and Content Providers think the same way. This only runs into problems when these Providers get too big and clog up the low cost or free Peering Points. Then a Direct Link or Transit has to be established for their Customers, that's where these Direct Connect agreements come into play. No Lawsuits needed just access for their Customers.

BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium Member
join:2004-04-13
Canada

BonezX

Premium Member

that would be true if Consumers weren't already footing the bill for upgrades of peeing points with transit providers.

The customer is requesting the data from Netflix, the ISP's part of this is to fulfill the customers request, which is the data from Netflix, these peering agreements are just a way for the ISP to gain income from the customer who they are paid by to provide a service, and the content providers by either negligence or just pure greed by letting peeing points saturate and charging a "fee" to content providers for access to their customers.

Customers pay for an internet connection, first and foremost, until the TOS states otherwise the ISP's role is to provide the service that the customer requests, be it streaming video or just browsing webpages.

Not to mention that a couple ISP's are starting their own on streaming video services, and others have plans to do so in the future.

alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT

1 edit

1 recommendation

alchav

Member

said by BonezX:

The customer is requesting the data from Netflix, the ISP's part of this is to fulfill the customers request, which is the data from Netflix, these peering agreements are just a way for the ISP to gain income from the customer who they are paid by to provide a service, and the content providers by either negligence or just pure greed by letting peeing points saturate and charging a "fee" to content providers for access to their customers.

Customers pay for an internet connection, first and foremost, until the TOS states otherwise the ISP's role is to provide the service that the customer requests, be it streaming video or just browsing webpages.

Okay BonezX you are thinking like the Average Person, that ISP's have control over congested Incoming Traffic from all Peering or Transit Providers. This Traffic, in this case between Netflix and the Peering or Transit Providers, has to be negotiated for more Bandwidth into the ISP. Once negotiated then the Peering or Transit Provider can increase the Bandwidth with paid Orders from the ISP. With Direct Connect the Peering and Transit Providers are left out and the negotiations are with Netflix and the ISP for the needed Bandwidth.

BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium Member
join:2004-04-13
Canada

1 edit

BonezX

Premium Member

so it's perfectly OK that you as a consumer has to have a Comcast, TWC, Verizon, and AT&T connection to access the entire internet, because that is basically what your saying is perfectly OK.

If a company for instance was hosting on Comcasts network and they got big, should they be required to also hold connections with other networks to provide their product ?, that's like saying i have to pay every trucking company in the country to move my product to different states, financially it's stupid from a sellers perspective, and logistically it's stupid because you would need to maintain upkeep on redundancy that doesn't need to exist.

And just so you know, the average person thinks bandwidth is a finite resource that if you use it once it's gone forever, or that Data is a finite resource, do you know why they think that, because companies have taken years of effort to convince people that using data is like burning gas. The only way data is a finite resource is capacity, and YOU are paying your ISP to provide capacity, and they are blatantly failing at it prime time should not exist, throttling should not exist, data caps should not exist, and anyone that knows anything about how networks work can tell you that, and the only reason they do exist is when someone promises beyond the networks capacity(except for data caps, they are complete bullshit regardless).

And lets through a hypothetical in there, Redbox Instant is a streaming service hosted by Verizon, what kind of legal mess would there be if Comcast required Verizon to create a special connection to their network to provide the service, you can bet your ass that Verizon would have them in court claiming net neutrality faster then a politician can change stances.

alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT

alchav

Member

said by BonezX:

so it's perfectly OK that you as a consumer has to have a Comcast, TWC, Verizon, and AT&T connection to access the entire internet, because that is basically what your saying is perfectly OK.

If a company for instance was hosting on Comcasts network and they got big, should they be required to also hold connections with other networks to provide their product ?, that's like saying i have to pay every trucking company in the country to move my product to different states, financially it's stupid from a sellers perspective, and logistically it's stupid because you would need to maintain upkeep on redundancy that doesn't need to exist.

Come on BonezX if you know anything about Networks and Traffic, you should know there are always more than one way to get to a location. I worked in The Industry it has been a few years, but the basics are still there. Just because you have a Direct Connection doesn't mean you can't Route Advance to another Path like a Peering or Transit Provider to get to a location. So if Netflix is smart they can manage their Outgoing Traffic for Efficiency, Congestion, and Economy. Streaming Video takes up a lot of Bandwidth, and it's not going to get any better these Streaming Providers will have to manage their Networks better.

BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium Member
join:2004-04-13
Canada

BonezX

Premium Member

There is more the one way, and that's why people who are smart enough to use a VPN on Comcasts network can almost stream at 4k, but if they use the default routing they are stuck in buffering hell, not a smoking gun in this situation, but it definitely does not bode well(and Comcast likely has multiple paths out to the Cogent network, yet they still have congestion).

I know enough about networks to know there there is something rotten going on in upper management, because if the guys on the ground were consulted in any way shape or form, we wouldn't be having these conversations, as an IT guy at one of my jobs says "we are pretty much paid to be stupid", and at the end of the day, who do you want designing your car, the guys in accounting or the guys in engineering(GM/Chrysler would be a good example of this).

PhoenixDown
FIOS is Awesome
Premium Member
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY

PhoenixDown to BonezX

Premium Member

to BonezX
BonezX -- you are entirely wrong. Not even going into it.