On 04/27/2014 03:15 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hugo Slabbert" <hslabbert@stargate.ca>
But this isn't talking about transit; this is about Comcast as an edge network in this context and Netflix as a content provider sending to Comcast users the traffic that they requested. Is there really anything more nuanced here than:
1. Comcast sells connectivity to their end users and sizes their network according to an oversubscription ratio they're happy with. (Nothing wrong here; oversubscription is a fact of life). 2. Bandwidth-heavy applications like Netflix enter the market. 3. Comcast's customers start using these bandwidth-heavy applications and suck in more data than Comcast was betting on. 4. Comcast has to upgrade connectivity, e.g. at peering points with the heavy inbound traffic sources, accordingly in order to satisfy their customers' usage.
You may be new here, but I'm not, and I read it exactly the same way.
How is this *not* Comcast's problem? If my users are requesting more traffic than I banked on, how is it not my responsibility to ensure I have capacity to handle that? I have gear; you have gear. I upgrade or add ports on my side; you upgrade or add ports on your side. Am I missing something?
It is absolutely the problem of the eyeball carrier who gambled on a given oversubscription ratio and discovered that it's called gambling because sometimes, you lose.
+1 What I don't understand is why Netflix et al are not doing a PR campaign to explain this to the end users. Doug