Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?
jfmezei_nanog at vaxination.ca
Fri Dec 11 02:51:38 UTC 2015
On 2015-12-10 21:39, William Herrin wrote:
> Personally, I'm not opposed to this. When each packet has one payer,
> it doesn't much matter whether the payer is sender or recipient.
If the retail customer pays for $70 for 100 gigs of UBB, and uses 50
gigs of Netflix, then the result is that the customer is still paying
$70 for 100 gigs of data, and Netflix now has to pay for 50 gigs of data.
The principle of paying "once" is fine, the problem is that no ISP is
going to reduce your actual bill/ARPU in exchange for charging part of
your iusage to someone else. You will still pay $70 for the same
package except your bill will show you used only 40 gigs instead of 90
(because 50 were not charged to you).
So the end result is that thoes big ISPs will charge twice for the data,
it is their goal: make more money.
More information about the NANOG