nanog mailing list archives

Re: Did Internet Founders Actually Anticipate Paid, Prioritized Traffic?


From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:52:33 -0500

On 9/16/2010 2:28 PM, sthaug () nethelp no wrote:

If you want control: Don't buy the cheapest commodity product.


+1

Next we'll be arguing that akamai nodes are evil because they can have better service levels than other sites. The p2p guys are also getting special treatment, as they can grab files faster than the direct download guy. Oh, and provider met google's bandwidth requirements for peering, so their peering with google gives better service to google than yahoo/hotmail; which was unfair to the provider who didn't meet the requirements and has to go the long way around. :P

Provider may also have met ll's requirements, so peering accepted there, and here come the better netflix streams. Of course, anywhere a provider has a direct peer, they'll want to prioritize that traffic over any other.

True net-neutrality means no provider can have a better service than another. This totally screws with private peering and the variety of requirements, as well as special services (such as akamai nodes). Many of these cases aren't about saturation, but better connectivity between content provider and ISP. Adding money or QOS to the equation is just icing on the cake.


Jack


Current thread: