nanog mailing list archives

Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3)


From: Blake Dunlap <ikiris () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 12:12:19 -0500

And the "unbalanced" peers / transit?

-Blake

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:41 AM, McElearney, Kevin
<Kevin_McElearney () cable comcast com> wrote:
This is a smart group. If if that was true I think every internet site / service one visits from home would be a 
negatively impacted.  That is not the case

As I said before, Comcast also has over 40 balanced peers with plenty of capacity.  Wholesale $$ are very small, 
highly competitive and only "skin in the game" to promote efficiencies

      - Kevin


On May 15, 2014, at 12:01 PM, "Jared Mauch" <jared () puck nether net> wrote:


On May 15, 2014, at 11:50 AM, McElearney, Kevin <Kevin_McElearney () cable comcast com> wrote:

There is no gaming on measurements and disputes are isolated and temporary with issues not unique over the history 
of the internet.  I think all the same rhetorical quotes continue to be reused

Kevin,

in the past most issues were transient for a few months as both sides got complaints, but while at RIPE earlier this 
week someone commented to me: there's no one provider you can buy access from to get a packet-loss free connection 
to all their other business partners/customers.  This hurts the entire marketplace when there is persistent 
congestion.

Some of these issues are related to (as Craig called them) "Hypergiants" (OTT) but others are due to providers 
having poor capital models so they don't have "budget" for upgrading unless someone pays for that upgrade, vs seeing 
their existing customer base as that source for the capital.

As an engineer, I'm hopeful that those responsible for budgeting will do the right thing.  As a greedy capitalist, 
please pay me more $$$.  It does feel a bit like tic-tac-toe with zero players in wargames though, the only way to 
win is to not play [games].

- Jared



Current thread: