Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions

Ren Provo ren.provo at gmail.com
Mon Nov 29 18:55:32 CST 2010


On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Dave CROCKER <dhc2 at dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 11/29/2010 2:40 PM, Rettke, Brian wrote:
>> Essentially, the question is who has to pay for the infrastructure to
>> support
>> the bandwidth requirements of all of these new and booming streaming
>> ventures. I can understand both the side taken by Comcast, and the side of
>> the content provider, but I don't think it's as simple as the slogans
>> spewed
>> out regarding "Net Neutrality", which has become so misused and abused as
>> a
>> term that I don't think it has any credulous value remaining.
> I find it helpful to distinguish "participant neutrality" from "service
> neutrality".  The first says that you and I pay the same rate.  The second
> says the my email costs the same as my voip.
> As described, it appears that Level3 is being singled out, which makes for
> participant non-neutrality.  On the other hand, if Comcast were charging
> itself for xfinity traffic, this might qualify as service non-neutrality
> (assuming there is a plausible meaning to "charging itself"...
> d/
> --
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net

More information about the NANOG mailing list