| |IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
Figures... Despite Verizon's pushback and pretzel twisting, the truth is coming out. Thanks Netflix!
Re: Figures... Yeah, Verizon's statement last week was really an amazingly transparent smoke and mirrors attempt. Glad they were directly called out on it.
Re: Figures... Verizons release last week said it was all about peering (34% egress utilzization and 100% ingress utilization). That is a Verizon issue since they haven't upgraded their peering agreement.
Boynton Beach, FL
Re: Figures... Not really, peering points - like arguments - have at least two sides.
said by AVonGauss:Good point. When is Verizon going to pay for Cogent's upgrades? Verizon's numbers show that they're clearly a subscriber to Cogent's network.
Not really, peering points - like arguments - have at least two sides.
Santa Monica, CA
·Time Warner Cable
said by pumpkinhead7:Honest and open?
I disagree, Netflix has a company history of being honest and open.
Tell that to the DVD subscribers who found themselves throttled.
Tell that to the California taxpayers who are told he's a Republican.
| |said by Plus One :In what context? Everyone-- including Verizon-- knows Verizon is letting their peers saturate, and we all know why. said by IPPlanMan:
Despite Verizon's pushback and pretzel twisting, the truth is coming out. Thanks Netflix!
LOL. Netflix is as likely lying as is Verizon. Until Netflix turns over their network statistics to a 3rd party, we shouldn't trust them either.
said by dfxmatt:»Re: Figures...
the usual people who trot out to defend verizon are noticeably quiet today. surprise surprise.
said by AVonGauss:+1
Since I'm probably on "your list", its also possible that its less a desire to defend Verizon (or Comcast) but rather a desire to dispel the junk propaganda NetFlix has been putting out more so the last six months...
And the propaganda put out by dslreports.
Re: So here we are Why pay $50k in ports when you can negotiate with a content provider to actually pay you millions?
That is quite a turnaround for the profit hungry ISP that is holding their subscribers hostage.
| |said by elefante72:I have access to a few peering locations for a few providers, Comcast, BHN and AT&T included and let me just say it's a sad state.
Intercon agreement? My routes are still the same. No changes, but also no congestion PQ issues in my area.
Unless someone walks into the intercon com closet and looks at the traffic flows, or ports this is all smoke and mirrors.
We will never truly know if it's the CDN cheaping out,(somewhat likely) or Verizon standing fast at the border (very likely).
Financially speaking Verizon has the most to gain (like retrans) by forming the argument and twisting the truth. The CDN has little to gain by holding back ports, but if there is a balance contract, maybe they say no to paying and Verizon simply lets the intercon ports suck wind (VERY VERY LIKELY).
Since Verizon is an ISP and they charge out the ying yang for internet, they also have a duty to provide competent network management, and fix flows if they are getting continually throttled. Netflix provides the data, so what's next?
The $50k in in ports is mice nuts compared to the BILLIONS they are raking in.
I won't single any provider out specifically but in some cases.
CDN side 40GE, ISP, 10GE
CDN 100GE, ISP 10GE
In other cases it's:
CDN 10GE, ISP 10GE, CDN willing to give another port, ISP wants to be paid for it.
Situations of course exist where in almost all of these money changes hands but in my opinion the ISP should be the one paying, they are the ones selling "internet" to customers, when they don't have internet, they have "intranet". Comcast doesn't reach globally, Level 3 and Cogentco do. Without these peers these residential ISPs have NOTHING to offer customers. Just like Comcast and others want Netflix to pay them for putting BW load on the residential network, I think the peers are fair if they charged the ISP for the same thing, but instead it's other way around and even if the tables turned the customers end up paying more. The fact is in a lot of cases the CDN are willing to provide the links/connections free and the ISPs still don't want, they want money... CDN makes money from the content owner.
Now yes, sometimes they double dip too but who doesn't these days.
Verizon is the guilty one here. They blame netflix for who they pick as a provider but netflix simply picked a global provider for simplicity and costs. Does Verizon offer global service? Nope! Who would you pick if you had a global company? a global provider or 20 small ones that want to be greedy?