It may have something to do with that Level3 is now hosting all the streaming content for Netflixs. Cheers Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Donnelly [mailto:tad1214@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 5:52 PM To: Rettke, Brian; Patrick W. Gilmore; NANOG list; Guerra, Ruben Subject: Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast'sActions "On November 19, 2010, Comcast informed Level 3 that, for the first time, it will demand a recurring fee from Level 3 to transmit Internet online movies and other content to Comcast's customers who request such content." If the issue is bandwidth, then why not charge for bandwidth? Picking a specific service says we are trying to squash the competition. On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:48:06 -0600, Guerra, Ruben <Ruben.Guerra@arrisi.com> wrote:
I'd have to agree with Brian. There is no simple answer to this one...
If the ultimate cause is the abuse of bandwidth, I can understand this... BUT if the underlying motive is to squash competition then shame on you!
-----Original Message----- From: Rettke, Brian [mailto:Brian.Rettke@cableone.biz] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:41 PM To: Patrick W. Gilmore; NANOG list Subject: RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions
Essentially, the question is who has to pay for the infrastructure to
support the bandwidth requirements of all of these new and booming streaming ventures. I can understand both the side taken by Comcast, and the side of the content provider, but I don't think it's as simple as
the slogans spewed out regarding "Net Neutrality", which has become so
misused and abused as a term that I don't think it has any credulous value remaining.
I'm hoping that there is an eventual meeting of the minds wherein some
sort of collaboration takes place. If this gets additional government
regulations I fear no one will like the result.
Sincerely,
Brian A . Rettke RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services
-----Original Message----- From: Patrick W. Gilmore [mailto:patrick@ianai.net] Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 3:28 PM To: NANOG list Subject: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's
Actions
<http://www.marketwatch.com/story/level-3-communications-issues-statemen t-concerning-comcasts-actions-2010-11-29?reflink=MW_news_stmp>
I understand that politics is off-topic, but this policy affects operational aspects of the 'Net.
Just to be clear, L3 is saying content providers should not have to
pay
to deliver content to broadband providers who have their own product which has content as well. I am certain all the content providers on
this list are happy to hear L3's change of heart and will be applying
for settlement free peering tomorrow. (L3 wouldn't want other providers to claim the Vyvx or CDN or other content services provided by L3 are
competing and L3 is putting up a "toll booth" on the Internet, would they?)
-- TTFN, patrick
-- Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/