[155782] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fair Use Policy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Benjamin Krueger)
Wed Aug 22 21:45:40 2012
From: Benjamin Krueger <benjamin@seattlefenix.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAAAwwbVSgWFCXYa=uaq0FPnYrQVs0L7FywfrSoFzy_ZFpM=A3w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 18:46:56 -0700
To: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
A unique position? Unlike those poor residential ISPs who only have =
literally millions of subscribers to use as leverage in peering =
negotiations. Perhaps more accurately, rather than saying "Google can =
afford to start almost any project they want" we should say "Google =
doesn't suffer the temptation of wringing every last penny out of their =
aging infrastructure to ensure maximum profits from minimal =
investments".
I don't want to turn this into a long-drawn debate, so I'll simply say =
that I take Google at their word when they say this is profitable from =
Day 1 and I surely take their product offering at its word. I'm not sure =
who proposed we require anything, but I suppose we can let the market =
decide what ISPs are "required" to do. I can say that I don't know =
anyone who wouldn't drop any existing residential service for what =
Google is selling. Perhaps they will succumb to some unforeseen =
boogeyman as you allude to, but to be honest that sounds a whole lot =
like the wishful thinking of an industry that has been deftly =
out-manueverd at its own game and now finds itself dramatically behind =
the curve. Frankly, if I were in the ISP business I would be shitting my =
pants.
On Aug 22, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On 8/22/12, Benjamin Krueger <benjamin@seattlefenix.net> wrote:
>> Yeah, totally can't be done. It especially can't be done profitably.
>=20
> Google can afford to start almost any project they want, and they are
> in a unique position to negotiate peering and access to a ton of
> bandwidth, with their Youtube, Google Search et al. As to whether it
> will be profitable, well, obviously, that is their claim. It's yet to
> be demonstrated.
>=20
> I gotta reject the idea that broadband providers should be required to
> follow in Google's footsteps though.
>=20
> For now, Google fiber is another risky experiment, that could have a
> great payout if successful, or could be shuttered within a year or so,
> or fees/rate incs tacked on, when they figure out just what a mess
> they have gotten into.
>=20
>=20
>> http://fiber.google.com/
>> =
http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/the-economics-of-google-fiber-and-what-it-mea=
ns-for-u-s-broadband/
>>=20
> --
> -JH
