Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
Owen DeLong
owen at delong.com
Fri Jul 11 16:50:22 UTC 2014
On Jul 10, 2014, at 8:46 PM, Jima <nanog at jima.us> wrote:
> On 2014-07-10 19:40, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> From another list, I think this puts it nicely (for those of you who
>> don't know Brett, he's been running a small ISP for years
>> http://www.lariat.net/)
>
> While trying to substantiate Mr. Glass' grievance with Netflix regarding their lack of availability to peer, I happened upon this tidbit from two months ago:
>
> http://dewaynenet.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/re-netflix-inks-deal-with-verizon-wont-talk-to-small-isps/
>
> As for Mr. Woodcock's point regarding a lack of http://lariat.net/peering existing, https://www.netflix.com/openconnect/locations doesn't seem to do what I'd expect, either, although I did finally find the link to http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=2906 . To Mr. Glass' point, I'm not seeing any way the listed PoPs could feasibly be less than 900 wire-miles from Laramie -- to be fair, cutting across "open land" is a bad joke at best.
>
> Life is rough in these "fly-over" states (in which I would include my current state of residence); the closest IXes of which I'm aware are in Denver and SLC (with only ~19 and 9 peers, respectively). Either of those would be a hard sell for Netflix, no doubt about it.
>
> I guess I'm just glad that my home ISP can justify anteing up for a pipe to SIX, resources for hosting OpenConnect nodes, and, for that matter, an ASN. Indeed, not everyone can.
>
> Jima
I’m always surprised that folks at smaller exchanges don’t form consortiums to build a mutually beneficial transit AS that connects to a larger remote exchange.
For example, if your 19 peers in Denver formed a consortium to get a circuit into one (or more) of the larger exchanges in Dallas, Los Angeles, SF Bay Area, or Seattle with an ASN and a router at each end, the share cost of that link an infrastructure would actually be fairly low per peer.
Owen
More information about the NANOG
mailing list