Post by O Post by Bozo Post by Bob Harper
Again a non-answer. What *benefits*, specifically, has so-called 'net
neutrality brought you?
³Chairman Pai wants to ditch Title II and return the FCC to a ³light touch²
Title I approach. Translation: Pai wants to give control of the internet to
the very companies that violated Net Neutrality for years before the FCC
adopted its current rules in 2015. "
It's my understanding that what's meant by Net Neutrality, is that
ISP's (the people who deliver the internet to you, the user) cannot be
'bribed' to favor content from one internet vendor over another. For
example, Netflix could not pay Comcast to make sure that Netflix
streams go through without hiccups or pauses, at the cost of denying
bandwidth to, say, HBO GO, or YouTube. Net Neutrality is a doctrine
that dictates that all channels suffer equally from lack of bandwidth.
It's a bit similar to telephone land lines, where you could pay extra
to get better sound, less noise on a special line between two points,
to carry things like radio and television broadcasts.
As bandwidth speeds keep increasing, it may soon become a moot point.
There may be an ISP who might want to punish a vendor who didn't supply
a bribe, but this is unlikely, as what ISP wants to be slower to
deliver content than a competitor? More likely, it's a decision made
to allocate bandwidth.
Another view, highly simplified, but perhaps illustrative
(I didn't write this):
Peering agreements are what the Internet is built on.
Let's simplify it to help you understand. (WARNING: If you
are reading this and are pedantic, the following is greatly
Let's say you have a network that has connections in
Chicago, Nashville, and Atlanta. But you have no connections
you own in New York.
You have a customer who wants to connect to a server in New
York, so you need to pass that traffic off to my company
that has connections in New York, Nashville, and Dallas.
My customer in Dallas wants to connect to a server in
Chicago - but I can't get them all the way, I can get them
to Nashville (where we both have connections) but then they
have to go to your network.
Well, to make things work smoothly, networks like your and
mine set up peering arrangements to make these types of
handoffs faster (all our customers get better service, we
have less problems to deal with) and usually that's a simple
handshake type deal, it really makes no sense for us to
monitor the usage and bill each other, since 99.9% of the
time the traffic is going to be roughly equal and therefore
we're going end up cancelling out each other's bill, so it
would really just be making busy work for no real gain.
Pretty much all the major providers do this, it is part of
how the network is global and usable and fast.
Now, Netflix comes along, and they have customers in
Chicago, New York, Atlanta, Dallas and Nashville. So they
want us to peer with them - and that will improve things for
the customers we have in those cities, but unlike a
traditional peering arrangement - the mutual benefit
basically goes out the window - because unlike the agreement
and peering me and you have setup, Netflix pretty much just
pushes data downstream - and they push a metric shit ton of
it. Nothing is going back up the pipe to offset our
addtional costs or improve overall connectivity etc.
So, me and you look at the situation and say "hey, these
fuckers are basically getting a free ride by abusing the
system we've spent ~30 years as engineers making work. Maybe
they should help spread some of that cost around since
between 20-30% of the traffic going through our network is
theirs." So we go to Netflix and point out our concerns and
say, hey, we figure with our bi-directional peers, we're
spending X and getting Y in return, with your peering, we're
spending X and getting... basically nothing. Maybe if you
pay us an equal amount the Y would get with a traditional
peering setup, we can keep doing this, otherwise, we're not
going let you put this server in our data center and pay for
the electricity and maintenance etc."
Netflix turns around and screams to their customer base -
"These two fuckers are screwing you over - they expect us to
pay for bandwidth both ways, this goes against the
historical agreements networks are built on, and you know
what they expect us to pay so much, that we might have to
raise all of your bills $0.05 per month (wait this sounds
better) $0.60 a year to cover our added costs!!! Make
government force them to not charge us!!"