[132590] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Guerra, Ruben)
Mon Nov 29 17:49:40 2010
From: "Guerra, Ruben" <Ruben.Guerra@arrisi.com>
To: "Rettke, Brian" <Brian.Rettke@cableone.biz>, "Patrick W. Gilmore"
<patrick@ianai.net>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:48:06 -0600
In-Reply-To: <96CA80CDCD822B4F9B41FB3A109C9359A3E664A22B@E2K7MAILBOX1.corp.cableone.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I'd have to agree with Brian. There is no simple answer to this one... If t=
he ultimate cause is the abuse of bandwidth, I can understand this... BUT i=
f the underlying motive is to squash competition then shame on you!
-----Original Message-----
From: Rettke, Brian [mailto:Brian.Rettke@cableone.biz]=20
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:41 PM
To: Patrick W. Gilmore; NANOG list
Subject: RE: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's A=
ctions
Essentially, the question is who has to pay for the infrastructure to suppo=
rt the bandwidth requirements of all of these new and booming streaming ven=
tures. I can understand both the side taken by Comcast, and the side of the=
content provider, but I don't think it's as simple as the slogans spewed o=
ut regarding "Net Neutrality", which has become so misused and abused as a =
term that I don't think it has any credulous value remaining.
I'm hoping that there is an eventual meeting of the minds wherein some sort=
of collaboration takes place. If this gets additional government regulatio=
ns I fear no one will like the result.
Sincerely,
Brian A . Rettke
RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP
Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick W. Gilmore [mailto:patrick@ianai.net]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 3:28 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actio=
ns
<http://www.marketwatch.com/story/level-3-communications-issues-statement-c=
oncerning-comcasts-actions-2010-11-29?reflink=3DMW_news_stmp>
I understand that politics is off-topic, but this policy affects operationa=
l aspects of the 'Net.
Just to be clear, L3 is saying content providers should not have to pay to =
deliver content to broadband providers who have their own product which has=
content as well. I am certain all the content providers on this list are =
happy to hear L3's change of heart and will be applying for settlement free=
peering tomorrow. (L3 wouldn't want other providers to claim the Vyvx or =
CDN or other content services provided by L3 are competing and L3 is puttin=
g up a "toll booth" on the Internet, would they?)
--
TTFN,
patrick
