I stand corrected. That's what I get for going off memory. Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106 ---------------------------------------- From: "Scott Whyte" <swhyte@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 4:48 PM To: nick@flhsi.com Subject: Re: Google/Youtube problems On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Nick Olsen <nick@flhsi.com> wrote:

I think this would be true if they offered some form of paid peering.

Google want's a good fast route to your customers, And your customers want a good fast route to Google.

IF Google ran its transit at or near congestion. This could degrade your customers performance. After so long, You'd contact Google and attempt to troubleshoot. And they would say if you want good peering with them, You should pay them to peer. Where you could control just how much traffic was on your port and expand it if needed. Pretty sure this was Comcast and level3/Netflix did. But Comcast had the winning leverage (more eyeballs) in the discussion.

But, I don't think Google does this. My knowledge on AS15169 is limited. But I recall them having a very strict peering policy.

Strict? Really? https://peering.google.com/about/peering_policy.html

Nick Olsen Network Operations (855) FLSPEED x106

---------------------------------------- From: "Joly MacFie" <joly@punkcast.com> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 1:21 PM To: "joel jaeggli" <joelja@bogus.com> Subject: Re: Google/Youtube problems

WIth my limited understanding of such topics I've long been confused by something I read a couple of years back - in an Arbor report perhaps -

the effect that by being the originator of so much traffic, and as they built out their own network, Google were making money on transit.

Can anyone elaborate or refute?

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:55 AM, joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:

...

On 11/19/12 5:59 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:

...

What I'm trying to say, I can't see youtube generating anywhere nearly enough revenue who shift 10% (or more) of Internet. And to explain

to this

...

...

conundrum to myself, I've speculated accounting magic (which I'd frown upon) and leveraging market position to get free capacity (which is ok, I'd do the same, had I the leverage)

Or there's a simpler explanation. Which is that it makes money either directly or as part of a salubrious interaction with other google properties.

They had about 2.5Billion left over for their trouble in the quarter ending 9/30 which isn't too shabby on a gross of 14 billion.

-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -