[133689] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rettke, Brian)
Wed Dec 15 20:16:05 2010
From: "Rettke, Brian" <Brian.Rettke@cableone.biz>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:15:52 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4D0965D6.3090907@brightok.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
This should also be a wake-up call that for whatever reason (who cares what=
for this discussion), if our bandwidth demands exceed our bandwidth supply=
, we must become more efficient at using our bandwidth. I'm hoping that we =
not only discuss peering and bandwidth, management and implementation, but =
look at the Content providers with the same level of scrutiny that we hold =
the Backbone transit providers to. We should look at video compression and =
codecs with the same level of urgency that we do bandwidth, because there w=
ill never be enough if both sides are not looked at.
Sincerely,
Brian A . Rettke
RHCT, CCDP, CCNP, CCIP
Network Engineer, CableONE Internet Services
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Bates [mailto:jbates@brightok.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 6:05 PM
To: Adam Rothschild
Cc: Kevin Neal; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style
On 12/15/2010 4:47 PM, Adam Rothschild wrote:
> Folk in
> content/hosting should find this all more than a little bit scary.
So you don't think the money content providers will pay Comcast won't
reflect on other eyeball networks who aren't important/large enough to
request financing? ie, Comcast could run lower rates and offer better
service by charging the content provider, while competitive eyeball
networks won't get the option to receive compensation from content
providers and have to charge appropriate rates to their customers.
Jack
