S.Korea broadband firm sues Netflix after traffic surge

Matthew Walster matthew at walster.org
Thu Oct 21 18:12:51 UTC 2021

On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 at 17:43, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> > On Oct 21, 2021, at 06:30 , Allen McKinley Kitchen (gmail) <
> allenmckinleykitchen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I totally agree that this is not a perfect analogy. But I have some
> sympathy for both parties in this debate.
> Close enough on the analogy, but under the circumstances, I fail to
> understand the need for sympathy for the eyeball
> providers.

For the most part, with the advent of adaptive streaming, any congestion
should (not quite that simple at large scale, of course) mean the quality
of the viewed content should only degrade rather than stop working. That
implies that the eyeball networks can wait until links are a lot more
utilised before being upgraded, because there isn't this catastrophe of
streaming media ceasing to work once available bandwidth is exhausted.

This is the UK, though, and so many ISPs have been doing that for a long
time already. In fact, there have been several marketing campaigns over the
years differentiating services solely on "we're faster during the internet
rush hour" and similar.

I'll be quiet now, though, I'm not advancing the discussion in a useful way
any longer :P

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20211021/b539c466/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list