Interesting People mailing list archives
Re: Do the Happy Dance people...
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 19:14:16 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Vint Cerf <vint () google com> Date: August 30, 2008 1:04:04 PM EDT To: "Nick Weaver" <nweaver () gmail com> Cc: nnsquad <nnsquad () nnsquad org> Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: Do the Happy Dance people... Nick,for me, the question is whether an aggregate constraint of the form 250 GB/month will prove to be effective. An alternative is to try to institute rate constraints (or perhaps equivalent reduction in priority?) during times of congestion on the up (most common) or downlink. The limit for Comcast is bit rate capacity (bits per second) rather than aggregrate byte delivery. Of course they are related since the higher the capacity in bits/second the more bytes you can delivery per unit time but the congestion is more associated with bit rate over short periods than absolute byte carrying over a period of a month.
vint NOTE NEW BUSINESS ADDRESS AND PHONE Vint Cerf Google 1818 Library Street, Suite 400 Reston, VA 20190 202-370-5637 vint () google com On Aug 30, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Nick Weaver wrote:
When you get an ISP to implement a policy that is transparent, neutral, and only has anticompetitive effects where the bandwidth needed for 8 hours a day of HD content is considered insufficient [1], you should be doing a major happy dance. Yet the response that this is some evil plot by Comcast is ridiculous. If Comcast was interested in building a policy that IS anticompetitive, the solution would be simple: A soft cap at 50 GB, and $1/GB beyond that. Voila: that WOULD kill video over the net. Easy. Signed, sealed, and delivered. And if your reaction to a benign policy like Comcast's is as stern as your reaction to a true anticompetitive policy, they are just going to write you off: "if you are going to do the time, might as well do the crime." All the other cable ISPs and wanna-be-cable company ISPs are going to look at your reaction and go "these guys can't be reasoned with. They can't be satisfied. So since they will always be angry, who cares what they think?" It makes your arguments far easier to counter when you can be painted as extremists. So do the happy dance! The network neutrality types got an almost pure victory in this case. You WON this battle. Don't go turning a tactical victory into a strategic defeat by failing to acknowledge your victory. [1] HD today, 720P, is 2.5 Mbps over Hulu. As Hulu is the biggest player in the HD game, this should be taken as a reasonable amount for what HD content really costs for Internet delivery. 8 hours a day is a LOT of HDTV. [ Today's 2.5 Mbps streaming Hulu is not (as far as I'm concerned) true HD quality vis-a-vis broadcast HD. Nor should subscribers be constrained to real-time streaming rates when an obviously more powerful model is faster-than-real-time delivery of very high quality content to local staging (e.g. local disk) facilities. Not only does local staging allow for a more responsive interface, but permits off-peak transfers to be handled in a much more effective manner. Off peak transfers are available to be viewed at the consumer's convenience (during prime time, if desired) without adding to peak traffic loads). If ISPs should decide -- as per your speculation -- that they can just "ignore" the analysis of those who question various of their (often proprietary) network management decisions, they do so at an ever increasing peril of additional and continuing regulatory and legislative interventions. -- Lauren Weinstein NNSquad Moderator ]
------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Re: Do the Happy Dance people... David Farber (Aug 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Do the Happy Dance people... David Farber (Aug 30)