S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

Mon Oct 11 20:23:11 UTC 2021

On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 10:09 AM Michael Thomas <mike at mtcc.com> wrote:

>
> On 10/11/21 12:49 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
>
>
> Instead of a 4K stream, drop it to 480 or 240; the eyeball network
> should be happy at the reduced strain the resulting stream puts
> on their network.
>
> As a consumer paying for my 4k stream, I know who I'm calling when it
> drops to 480 and it ain't Netflix. The eyeballs are most definitely not
> happy.
>
> Mike
>

I apologize for that.  I was tired after two back-to-back days
of board meetings, and I missed putting a clear sarcasm
marker on that last line about "the eyeball networks
should be happy at the reduced strain..."    :(

There should have been a clear ;-P at the end of
the line to make it unmistakeable I was poking a
very sharp stick at the eyeball networks and
what it takes to actually make them happy.  ^_^;

Yes--the end consumers really shouldn't be the hostage
in this battle, being moved about the chess board by
either side, whether by their ISP trying to squeeze
more money out of the content side, or by the content
side trying to force more complaints into the service
desk of the ISP.

I mean, imagine this scenario for any other utility.

Pacific Gas and Electric calling up Hoover Dam to
say "hey, we're going to need to charge you some
additional money this month."

Hoover Dam: "...what?"

PGE: "well, you're sending a lot more electricity to
our customers this month, and we're going to have
to upgrade our power lines to handle it; and since
you're the one sending the electricity, you should
pay for part of the costs."

Hoover Dam: "...we're only sending enough electricity
to meet the demands YOUR customers are placing on
the grid.  If they want to run their air conditioners all
summer long, you need to charge them enough to
cover your costs for it."

Drat.  My analogy just ran out, because I realize the
dollars already flow the other way, and the hydroelectric
station would just laugh at PG&E and threaten to raise
the cost of the electricity simply for having to listen to their BS.   ^_^;

You can run the same scenario with your municipal water
company, and imagine how it would play out if the municipality
that put the pipes in to every home tried to charge the water
supplier more because homes were taking longer showers.

It's just such a fundamentally broken model, we laugh at it
in any other industry.  :(

Again, I'm sorry for being tired and missing the explicit
sarcasm indicator--not just for you, but for others who also
responded to that paragraph.   ^_^;

Thanks!

Matt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20211011/46c9b12d/attachment.html>