Netflix And AT&T Sign Peering Agreement

Tue Aug 5 05:38:37 UTC 2014

Gah,

While I'd agree that Netflix shouldn't get free transit, AT&T shouldn't be
charging for better access than Netflix can get over other tier 1s.

Likewise, for local delivery there's nothing wrong with peering. Besides,
when a small ISP starts up they have to buy transit/lay fibre to a major
PoP. I'd not see them, or ISPs in other remote areas, charging for
"transit".
On 5 Aug 2014 10:57, "Marcus Reid" <marcus at blazingdot.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:21:05PM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Jay Ashworth" <jra at baylink.com>
> >
> > > > Previously, Netflix signed similar agreements with Comcast and
> > > > Verizon.
> > > >
> > > >
> http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/29/netflix-and-att-sign-peering-agreement/
> > >
> > > Am I nuts in thinking that *someone* has mispelt "Netflix agrees to
> > > buy transit from AT&T"?
> >
> > As several people were kind enough to point out to me off-list, "yes"
> > is the answer to that question.
>
> Thanks Jay.  Can you put it in a nutshell just in case others are a
> little vague on the finer points of these arrangements and their
> significance in the current content provider / network provider row?
>
> The best thing about journalists is that they're always right (unless
> they're writing about something you know about, in which case they seem
> to always screw it up.)  I like how in this case the author declares
> that "This is the new normal."
>
> Marcus
>