funsec mailing list archives
Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality
From: Greg Poirier <grep () reflexsecurity com>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 16:05:34 -0400
On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 15:47 -0400, Dude VanWinkle wrote:
So the internet is really made up of: 360networks AboveNet
<snip>
Xspedius
Yes.
So comcast sells client access to the pipe they lease from Quest. This connection would not be messed with, however if Google has a pipe on Telstra, they may rate limit packets from Quest to Google in order to force google to pay more bucks. Is that right? does it matter if google leases a pipe from Quest rather than Telstra?
No, because the point at which they're rate-limiting is before the packets ever hit Qwest. The rate-limiting would occur within Comcast's network since Comcast owns everything from their border routers to the client they're selling Internet connectivity to.
What to stop ISPx from not rate limiting at all and getting the big content providers (google) to switch to their networks, as well as the big end user bandwidth resellers (comcast)?
What you're starting to describe is the best case scenario. ISP X tells Google to pony up the dough, Google refuses and stops peering/buying bandwidth from ISP X. ISP Y offers Google a sweet deal, so Google switches over there and enjoys unfettered access to ISP Y's subscribers. ISP X's subscribers cancel their memberships for ISP Y because they can't live without Google. Unfortunately at the level we're talking, ISP X and ISP Y are probably so well interconnected that it will cost Google more to shift things around, possibly running them into the ground in the process, than to pony up the dough.
Will wireless technologies save us from the ISP's and this is just their death throes (remember the price of Kodak film just before the digital camera?)?
Wireless providers stand to make money off of this as well. It's in their best interest to charge Google money too. -- Greg Poirier | Reflex Security, Inc. Sigma Team | Network Security. Simplified.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Fergie (May 02)
- RE: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Blanchard_Michael (May 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Fergie (May 02)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Dude VanWinkle (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Greg Poirier (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Drsolly (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Greg Poirier (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Drsolly (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Greg Poirier (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Dude VanWinkle (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Greg Poirier (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Dude VanWinkle (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Brian Loe (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Dude VanWinkle (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Kevin McAleavey (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Drsolly (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Brian Loe (May 03)
- Message not available
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Kevin McAleavey (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Brian Loe (May 03)
- Message not available
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Kevin McAleavey (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Drsolly (May 03)
- Re: U.S. Finance Sector Weighs In on Net Neutrality Kevin McAleavey (May 03)