nanog mailing list archives
Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality
From: Bruce H McIntosh <bhm () ufl edu>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:37:10 -0500
On 2015-02-27 12:27, Naslund, Steve wrote:
That statement completely confuses me. Why is asymmetry evil? Does that not reflect what "Joe Average User" actually needs and wants? The statement that the average users *MUST* have the same pipes going UP as he does going DOWN does not reflect reality at all. Do a lot of your users want to stream 4K video to their friends UHD TV? Given that all transmission media has some sort of bandwidth limit it would seem to me that asymmetry is actually more fair for the user since he gets more of what he needs which is download speed. There is no technical reason that it can't be symmetric it is just a reflection of what the market wants. As an ISP I can tell you that a lot more people complaint about their download speeds than their upload speeds. Do you think that you (or the average home user) would be happier with 27.5 down and 27.5 up vs your 50 down and 5 up you have today? Don't tell me you want 50 down and 50 up because that is a different bandwidth total that requi!
res a fast er transmission media.
Do you actually believe that average users are suffering with a 5 mbps upstream? I don't. I just don't see the average user "freely interchanging ideas" at more than 5 mbps. I don't feel like "Big Brother" forced me to watch Netflix and my next door neighbor just doesn't provide a lot of engaging HD content that I just must see.
I guess I know more than the "average" number of creative types who might be interested in things like video collaboration, music/video recording, sharing around large hunks of content to edit/modify/etc., and of course my previously mentioned hobby horse, backing it all up in a timely manner to someplace maybe not in the path of seasonal hurricanes :).
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bruce H. McIntosh bhm () ufl edu Senior Network Engineer http://net-services.ufl.edu University of Florida Network Services 352-273-1066
Current thread:
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality, (continued)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Jack Bates (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Scott Helms (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Stephen Satchell (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Mark Tinka (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Jack Bates (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Scott Helms (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Bruce H McIntosh (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Michael Thomas (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Christopher Morrow (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Miles Fidelman (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Mark Tinka (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality William Waites (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 27)
- RE: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Naslund, Steve (Feb 27)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality William Waites (Feb 28)
- Re: Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality Mark Tinka (Feb 27)