nanog mailing list archives
Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality
From: Scott Helms <khelms () zcorum com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 15:00:31 -0400
AFAIK Comcast wasn't consuming, "mass amounts of data" from Level 3 (Netflix's transit to them). Are you implying that a retail customer has a similar expectation (or should) as a tier 1 ISP has for peering? I hope not, that would be hyperbole verging on the silly. Retail customer agreement spell out, in every example I've seen, realistic terms and expectations for service and those are very different from peering arrangements. Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -------------------------------- On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Blake Dunlap <ikiris () gmail com> wrote:
I agree, and those peers should be then paid for the bits that your customers are requesting that they send through you if you cannot maintain a balanced peer relationship with them. It's shameful that access networks are attempting to not pay for their leeching of mass amounts of data in clear violation of standard expectations for balanced peering agreements. Oh... you meant something else? -Blake On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Livingood, Jason <Jason_Livingood () cable comcast com> wrote:On 5/15/14, 1:28 PM, "Nick B" <nick () pelagiris org<mailto:nick () pelagiris org>> wrote:By "categorically untrue" do you mean "FCC's open internet rules allowus to refuse to upgrade full peers"?Throttling is taking, say, a link from 10G and applying policy toconstrain it to 1G, for example. What if a peer wants to go from a balanced relationship to 10,000:1, well outside of the policy binding the relationship? Should we just unquestionably toss out our published policy – which is consistent with other networks – and ignore expectations for other peers?Jason
Current thread:
- Re: Rick Astley, Network Engineer [was: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3)], (continued)
- Re: Rick Astley, Network Engineer [was: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3)] Warren Bailey (May 16)
- Re: Rick Astley, Network Engineer [was: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3)] Blake Hudson (May 16)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Mark Tinka (May 17)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Owen DeLong (May 18)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Mark Tinka (May 16)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Scott Helms (May 16)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Mark Tinka (May 17)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Mark Tinka (May 16)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality arvindersingh (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality Blake Dunlap (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality Scott Helms (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality Jerry Dent (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Joe Greco (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality arvindersingh (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality David Conrad (May 15)
- Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality Owen DeLong (May 15)