Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions
Marshall Eubanks
tme at americafree.tv
Tue Nov 30 01:55:11 UTC 2010
On Nov 29, 2010, at 6:24 PM, Phil Bedard wrote:
> Is L3 hosting content for Netflix?
You bet.
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/11/11/level-3-signs-deal-to-be-a-primary-netflix-cdn-shares-rally/
• NOVEMBER 11, 2010, 9:13 AM ET
Level 3 Signs Deal To Be A Primary Netflix CDN; Shares Rally
Regards
Marshall
> Netflix has become a large source of
> traffic going to end users. L3 likely could have held out on this one if
> the content they were hosting is valuable enough to Comcast's customers,
> but maybe what Comcast was asking for wasn't much in the grand scheme of
> things.
>
> Obviously someone has to pay for the access infrastructure and Comcast
> would much rather get the content provider to pay for it versus passing it
> along to their customers. I think they probably just took a stab and L3
> complied.
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> On 11/29/10 5:28 PM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick at ianai.net> wrote:
>
>> <http://www.marketwatch.com/story/level-3-communications-issues-statement-
>> concerning-comcasts-actions-2010-11-29?reflink=MW_news_stmp>
>>
>> I understand that politics is off-topic, but this policy affects
>> operational aspects of the 'Net.
>>
>> Just to be clear, L3 is saying content providers should not have to pay
>> to deliver content to broadband providers who have their own product
>> which has content as well. I am certain all the content providers on
>> this list are happy to hear L3's change of heart and will be applying for
>> settlement free peering tomorrow. (L3 wouldn't want other providers to
>> claim the Vyvx or CDN or other content services provided by L3 are
>> competing and L3 is putting up a "toll booth" on the Internet, would
>> they?)
>>
>> --
>> TTFN,
>> patrick
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list