Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Mon Nov 29 19:18:29 CST 2010

In summary:
	Level3 is crying foul while their CDN competitors have quietly bought
into Comcast's racket.

	I applaud Level3 for calling attention to this matter.

(Speaking strictly for myself)

On Nov 29, 2010, at 4:55 PM, Ren Provo wrote:

> http://blog.comcast.com/2010/11/comcast-comments-on-level-3.html
> 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