Level 3 versus Comcast peering dispute

This video gives a full explanation of what happened between Level 3 Communications.

Level 3 asserted that Comcast wanted to tax Netflix under the threat of blocking them which was therefore a "Net Neutrality" violation. Comcast said they threatened no such thing and this was just a private peering dispute between Level 3 and Comcast, and no website companies or applications were singled out or threatened.

This video gets to the bottom of this by explaining how peering and Internet transit functions, and by examining the known facts surrounding this dispute.

Note that video got slightly ahead of audio towards end because YouTube didn't sync it right in their encoding.
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/12/video-level-3-versus-comcast-peering-di...

Correction: Level 3 and Tata are the only transit providers for Comcast as of December 2010.

Additional links.
http://www.digitalsociety.org/2010/12/division-of-labor-between-broadband-and...

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• nvc
• final

[gyrfalcon]

Where do you come up with the idea that Comcast has to add capacity on their back haul to give Level 3 more peering capacity? Bandwidth at NAP's is virtually infinite and doesn't cost anything!

[DigitalSocietyOrg]

@gyrfalcon Show me a place where I can get a free 10 Gbps port at an Internet Exchange, and where you can get a free 10 Gbps Ethernet switch, and I'll give you my youtube account.

Dump 300 Gbps of extra data on an ISP's network and it will most certainly require upgrading every part of the network.

[gyrfalcon]

@DigitalSocietyOrg 90% of Comcasts infrastructure is on leased fiber from Level 3 and a few other vendors. Comcast was already getting CDN through Akamai and charging them a toll, so they could turn around and get money from not just their users, but the CDN.... With an optical switch you can change the connection from 1GbE to 100GbE without any need for more "capacity". If you're really naive enough to believe this argument is over a few thousand dollars worth of equipment you're crazy.

[DigitalSocietyOrg]

@gyrfalcon "90% of Comcasts infrastructure is on leased fiber from Level 3 and a few other vendors." And there's your problem, you've got your facts reversed.

In reality, 90% of the infrastructure involved in Netflix or CDN distribution goes over the ISP's infrastructure. The division of labor link in the video description explains this.

[tantoedge]

Good strategy on Level 3's part. Get the 'know-nothings' riled about losing their precious Netflix, and they'll be up in arms against ComCast.

Social engineering and misinformation ftw.

Great explanation, thank you!

[DigitalSocietyOrg]

@tantoedge Yes, Level 3 wants free business connectivity subsidized by residential connectivity.

[gyrfalcon]

youtube.com/watch?v=-Riqr8Ntl4­k

[gakkerout]

Netflix's early contracts made when they were small have run out. Now that they are a big company, they need to make big money contracts. Idiots, launch you're own satelites are set up your own infrastructer. What's that, you can't? Then charge your customers the real price of streaming. DirecTV knows it costs at least $4.99 per vewing. Stop giving your customers everything at the cost of biting the hand that feeds you. Let them pay if want unlimited entertainment, don't follow GM's 0% apr deal.

[johanhammy]

@DigitalSocietyOrg I am not privy to all of the details, but I wouldn't put it past them.

[ShwangShwing]

@gyrfalcon lol... infinite bandwidth... lol

[ShwangShwing]

@gyrfalcon lol... infinite bandwidth... lol...

[gyrfalcon]

@DigitalSocietyOrg "In reality, 90% of the infrastructure involved in Netflix or CDN distribution goes over the ISP's infrastructure."

Wow no kidding.. is that why they call it a content distribution network instead of a content collection network? You've ignored my point that bandwidth at the NAP's is virtually infinite and any argument by Comcast over not having ports is BULLSH@#....