nanog mailing list archives
Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve theComcast - L3 dispute
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:32:21 -0600
On 12/17/2010 12:45 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
But content providers already pay more for their 'service' than the typical asymmetric-towards-the-customer bandwidth user does.
Agreed, though I think they pay less than most eyeball networks pay (the ISP, not the user), depending on where they host it (we have a lot of hauling we have to do).
I'd also note, that the Internet is continuing to push more towards blurring the lines of content provider/eyeball, as p2p continues to be deployed with more technologies and for more uses. As households are constantly on, there is benefit in the household hosting content which can be reached directly by those you are sharing it to. As the market shifts to containing a larger market share of households with symmetric bandwidth, we can expect to see this improve (asymmetric last miles has hindered many innovations).
Jack
Current thread:
- "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute LorĂ¡nd Jakab (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Benson Schliesser (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Joe Greco (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Benson Schliesser (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Jeff Wheeler (Dec 17)
- RE: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve theComcast - L3 dispute George Bonser (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve theComcast - L3 dispute Lamar Owen (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve theComcast - L3 dispute Jack Bates (Dec 17)
- RE: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve theComcast - L3 dispute david raistrick (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve theComcast - L3 dispute Marshall Eubanks (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Joe Greco (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Benson Schliesser (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Benson Schliesser (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Steve Schultze (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Joly MacFie (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Steve Schultze (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Patrick Giagnocavo (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Richard A Steenbergen (Dec 17)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Joly MacFie (Dec 18)
- Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the Comcast - L3 dispute Dave Temkin (Dec 18)