Re: Many players make up application performance (was Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity)

[Paul WALL <pauldotwall () gmail com>]

The devil is in the details.  Ken Florance
(http://blog.netflix.com/2014/04/the-case-against-isp-tolls.html)
paints a different picture in his blog, for example.

As a manager at Comcast, can you refer the people on this list to any
ISPs who do not have a history of congestion into your network?  This
question comes up about once a month, absent any good solutions, so
insight would be appreciated.

Drive Slow,
Paul Wall

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 5:25 PM, McElearney, Kevin
<Kevin_McElearney () cable comcast com> wrote:
> On 7/29/14, 12:45 PM, "Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 14:33:28 -0000, "McElearney, Kevin" said:
> >
> > > (w/ a level of quality).  <$IP_PROVIDER> plays a big role in delivering
> > > your *overall* Internet experience, but eyecandysource plays an even
> > > bigger role delivering your *specific* eyecandy experience.  If
> > > eyecandystore has internal challenges, business negotiation/policy
> > > objectives, or uses poor adaptive routing path decisions, this has a
> > > direct and material impact to your *specific* eyecandy experience (and
> > > some have found fixable by hiding your source IP with a VPN).
> >
> > Very true.  But what we're discussing here is the *specific* case where
> > eyecandystore's biggest challenge at delivering the experience is an
> > external
> > challenge, namely that $IP_PROVIDER's service sucks.  It's particularly
> > galling when $IP_PROVIDER's internal net is actually up to snuff, but they
> > engage in shakedown tactics to upgrade peering points.
>
>
> There is a great analysis by Dr Clark (MIT) and CAIDA which shows while
> there are some challenged paths and relationships between providers, this
> is the exception vs the rule.  Using the “exceptions" are business
> decisions.
>
> Performance is a two way street (as are shakedowns)
>
>         - Kevin