Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality

Sat Feb 28 05:48:54 UTC 2015

> On Feb 27, 2015, at 21:15 , Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 28/Feb/15 07:07, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Even in that case, Mark, you have a conference call where each person is sending a stream out to a rendezvous point that is then sending it back to N people where N is the number of people in the chat -1. So the downstream bandwidth will be N*upstream for each of them.
> 
> But you're assuming the video chat is the only thing taking place in the
> upward direction...
> 
> When my wife is doing her iCloud backup, I can't log into a router to do
> some work without gouging my eyes out.

No, I’m not assuming anything other than that you claimed the video chat justified a need for symmetry when in reality, it does not.

I’m all for better upstream bandwidth to the home. I’d love to have everyone have 1G/1G capability even if it’s 100:1 oversubscribed on the upstream.

However, I’d much rather have 384M/128M than 256M/256M to be honest.

In general, I find my 30M/7M is not too terribly painful most of the time. Do I wish I had more upstream? Yes, but not as much as I wish I had more downstream. I think an ideal minimum that would probably be comfortable most of the time today would be 100M/30M.

YMMV.

Owen