Re: What Net Neutrality should and should not cover

["Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>]

On Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Rick Astley wrote:

> > Double-billing Rick. It's just that simple. Paid peering means you're deliberately
> billing two customers for the same byte
>
> Where your statement is short sighted I already explained partly in saying
> its too difficult to decide who gets a free ride and who gets the bill so I
> challenge you to propose an actual policy that prohibits charging for
> peering that doesn't have major unintended consequences. All in all I am
> sort of disappointed to find so few rational opinions around here. One of
> the few decent articles I have read on it is here:
> http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/02/media-botching-coverage-netflix-comcast-deal-getting-basics-wrong.html
>
> I think if you make a law that says all content providers big and small get
> free pipes and the residential subscribers of broadband must pay the tab
> the cost of broadband in the US compared to the rest of the world
> skyrocket.

No one is suggesting that all content providers get a 'free ride', let 
alone a legally-mandated free ride.  Giving last-mile providers an 
implicit (if not explicit) OK to bill providers whose content happens to 
be popular with the last-mile providers' customers sets a horrible 
precedent.

Content providers have infrastructure costs, just like last-mile ISPs. 
Your arguments seem to ignore that minor point.  Those cost cover 
different things than what a last-mile ISP would need to cover, but they 
have costs nonetheless.  They either pay other providers to haul their 
bits to other networks or they build infrastructure to locations that 
allow them to peer with providers.  That could be to a mutually-agreed 
meet point for private peering, or it could be to an exchange point to 
peer with other providers who have a presence at the same exchange point.

Look at the Peering DB.  In general, you will see that content networks 
have more open peering policies than eyeball networks.  It's in their best 
interests to get as topologically close to their consumers as possible. 
Some transit networks do the same, but that's a much more variable 
picture.

jms