NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: NY Times: People are watching much more online video

There is a fallacy in focusing on inbound/outbound traffic here because it's
more about where the meter is than the direction. It would be better to talk
about local vs distant but the problem is that it's about an abstract
topology according to the accidental properties of the peering

I agree that explaining this to people is a problem -- but that precise
difficulty is the entire point of the Internet. We create applications
without worrying about the accidental properties of the path and thus focus
on discovering new possibilities.

Those who focus only on the current costs from Thomas Malthus to those who
argued that relational databases and higher level languages were too
expensive to those who said that the Internet couldn't really be that
cost-effective have proven dramatically wrong and had we heeded their
warnings we'd be far worse off.

Yet again and again we let ourselves be hobbled by business models which
depend on high prices. Those who know history are frightened by the
knowledge that their business model is doomed so they tell their
shareholders stories about why this time history will stand still for them.
And they give billions to the carriers in hopes that this time the paper
pyramid won't collapse.

-----Original Message-----
From: nnsquad-bounces+nnsquad=bobf.frankston.com@nnsquad.org
[mailto:nnsquad-bounces+nnsquad=bobf.frankston.com@nnsquad.org] On Behalf Of
Kriss Andsten
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 13:07
To: nick hatch
Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: NY Times: People are watching much more online

On 31 okt 2008, at 05.27, nick hatch wrote:

> I see Comcast's move to cap at 250GB as a sticking their toes in the  
> water, and perhaps trying to set a precident at the same time. I  
> don't see a techincal reason for the caps. They don't even  
> differentiate between outbound/inbound traffic. Considering their  
> network architecture where last-mile egress bandwidth is so scarce,  
> that alone makes the whole move seem like a farce.

I'm not sure that I agree there. I don't think I've seen (which is not  
a synonym for "I categorically deny that it exists") a single capped  
service that differentiated between upstream and downstream bandwidth.  
Why? Support.

It's easy enough to shape the available bandwidth for each direction  
independently if that's what you want to do, but it's a whole other  
ballgame explaining a differentiated quota to millions of users.

> -Nick