Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3) (was: RIP Network Neutrality

arvindersingh at mail2tor.com arvindersingh at mail2tor.com
Thu May 15 19:03:34 UTC 2014


Jason, like Kevin, thank you very much for opening up to us.  It is not
every day that someone so close to the issues posts with insight.

>From what we see here in India, it is true only Comcast and Verizon are
access networks with peering problems.  We are able to reach Cox, RCN,
Charter, Sonoma Interconnect, other without congestion from AS 6453
"Tata".

Please can you explain what it is about your network design or management
that causes the choke?

Arvinder

> So by extension, if you enter an agreement and promise to remain balanced
> you can just willfully throw that out and abuse the heck out of it? Where
> does it end? Why even bother having peering policies at all then?
>
> To use an analogy, if you and I agree to buy a car together and agree to
> switch off who uses it every other day, can I just say "forget our
> agreement – I’m just going to drive the car myself every single day – its
> all mine”?
>
> And as you say, “interestingly enough only Comcast and Verizon are having
> this problem” someone else might say “interestingly enough one content
> distributor is at the center of all of these issues.” I’m frankly
> surprised that no one is stepping back to try to understand what was and
> is driving those changes.
>
> Jason
>
> On 5/15/14, 1:43 PM, "Nick B"
> <nick at pelagiris.org<mailto:nick at pelagiris.org>> wrote:
>
> Yes, throttling an entire ISP by refusing to upgrade peering is clearly a
> way to avoid technically throttling.  Interestingly enough only Comcast
> and Verizon are having this problem, though I'm sure now that you have set
> an example others will follow.
> Nick
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list