[132633] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Mon Nov 29 21:45:00 2010
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimfJJmPMCH7KHALTidKfYeVO9b3QjQ7btz6pmhq@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:44:55 -0500
To: Steven Fischer <sfischer1967@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Nov 29, 2010, at 9:03 PM, Steven Fischer wrote:
> Trying to follow this - so, if I have followed it correctly, L3 hosts =
high-bandwitdh services (namely NetFlix) to which an abundance of =
Comcast users subscribe?
That is my understanding.
> And Comcast is crying foul, and claiming a portion of L3's revenue is =
rightfully theirs, for being "last mile" to a significant portion of the =
CDN/NetFlix customer base?
That is my reading of these diplomatic notes.
> Does L3 even service a home user market, in the same vein as Comcast =
or Verizon? =20
>=20
Not as far as I know, although they made enough acquisitions I wouldn't =
be surprised if they had the=20
odd neighborhood.=20
Regards
Marshall
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Nov 29, 2010, at 6:24 PM, Phil Bedard wrote:
>=20
> > Is L3 hosting content for Netflix?
>=20
> You bet.
>=20
> =
http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/11/11/level-3-signs-deal-to-=
be-a-primary-netflix-cdn-shares-rally/
>=20
> =95 NOVEMBER 11, 2010, 9:13 AM ET
>=20
> Level 3 Signs Deal To Be A Primary Netflix CDN; Shares Rally
>=20
> Regards
> Marshall
>=20
> > Netflix has become a large source of
> > traffic going to end users. L3 likely could have held out on this =
one if
> > the content they were hosting is valuable enough to Comcast's =
customers,
> > but maybe what Comcast was asking for wasn't much in the grand =
scheme of
> > things.
> >
> > Obviously someone has to pay for the access infrastructure and =
Comcast
> > would much rather get the content provider to pay for it versus =
passing it
> > along to their customers. I think they probably just took a stab =
and L3
> > complied.
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/29/10 5:28 PM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net> wrote:
> >
> >> =
<http://www.marketwatch.com/story/level-3-communications-issues-statement-=
> >> concerning-comcasts-actions-2010-11-29?reflink=3DMW_news_stmp>
> >>
> >> I understand that politics is off-topic, but this policy affects
> >> operational 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 putting up a "toll booth" on the Internet, =
would
> >> they?)
> >>
> >> --
> >> TTFN,
> >> patrick
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before =
his glorious presence without fault and with great joy
