[163903] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: net neutrality and peering wars continue
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Thu Jun 20 19:19:33 2013
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
In-Reply-To: <51C3869A.4080008@enger.us>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:18:48 -0500
To: "Robert M. Enger" <NANOG@enger.us>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--Apple-Mail=_CEDCB7B8-00CF-4475-AAFF-BD0342DD5E4E
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
On Jun 20, 2013, at 5:47 PM, Robert M. Enger <NANOG@enger.us> wrote:
> Perhaps last-mile operators should
> A) advertise each of their metropolitan regional systems as a separate =
AS
> B) establish an interconnection point in each region where they will =
accept traffic destined for their in-region customers without charging =
any fee
C) Buck up and carry the traffic their customers are paying them to =
carry.
Least I just sound like a complainer, I actually think this makes =
rational business sense.
The concept of peering was always "equal benefit", not "equal cost". No =
one ever compares the price of building last mile transport to the cost =
of building huge data centers all over with content close to the users. =
The whole "bit-mile" thing represents an insignificant portion of the =
cost, long haul (in large quantities) is dirt cheap compared to last =
mile or data center build costs. If you think of a pure content play =
peering with a pure eyeball play there is equal benefit, in fact =
symbiosis, neither could exist without the other. The traffic flow will =
be highly asymmetric.
Eyeball networks also artificially cap their own ratios with their =
products. Cable and DSL are both 3x-10x down, x up products. Their TOS =
policies prohibit running servers. Any eyeball network with a =
asymmetric edge technology and no-server TOS need only look in the =
mirror to see why their aggregate ratio is hosed.
Lastly, simple economics. Let's theorize about a large eyeball network =
with say 20M subscribers, and a large content network with say 100G of =
peering traffic to go to those subscribers. =20
* Choice A would be to squeeze the peer for bad ratio in the hope of =
getting them to pay for, or be behind some other transit customer. =
Let's be generous and say $3/meg/month, so the 100G of traffic might =
generate $300,000/month of revenue. Let's even say you can squeeze 5 =
CDN's for that amount, $1.5M/month total.
* Choice B would be to squeeze the subscribers for more revenue to carry =
the 100G of "imbalanced traffic". Perhaps an extra $0.10/sub/month. =
That would be $2M/month in extra revenue.
Now, consider the customer satisfaction issue? Would your broadband =
customers pay an extra $0.10 per month if Netflix and Amazon streaming =
never went out in the middle of a movie? Would they move up to a higher =
tier of service?
A smart end user ISP would find a way to get uncongested paths to the =
content their users want, and make it rock solid reliable. The good =
service will more than support not only cost recovery, but higher =
revenue levels than squeezing peers. Of course we have evidence that =
most end user ISP's are not smart, they squeeze peers and have some of =
the lowest customer satisfaction rankings of not just ISP's, but all =
service providers! They want to claim consumers don't want Gigabit =
fiber, but then congest peers so badly there's no reason for a consumer =
to pay for more than the slowest speed.
Squeezing peers is a prime case of cutting off your nose to spite your =
face.
--=20
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
--Apple-Mail=_CEDCB7B8-00CF-4475-AAFF-BD0342DD5E4E
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
iQIVAwUBUcON27N3O8aJIdTMAQI8fQ/9Gqde0bOepHu3uaD/LuiVDec5oy+I/iZu
2dtpVL7UDeXzr4caV5UFIouj4JNWt4w2CndboePQjt4QNM8iId4wydjZiqlY4Q5A
tkU99Oa+BSMU5lLkN/IEuq77r0Y4+xtfv87pdi802jRXjRooEl8eOTtOzFP/X1ao
Bl3E4SCBur57GePxLRL3dsA01W9W74OSLrwqVytK1CsAKXHN0Y7ukDavNrFFHdAd
ehfAO570U6pGOhNZ2LIPZCvMW7B46E2h9uXd2YPcKcsg9i5qxNZMXyjsbw1eksH4
0BAfCwwJiOWP5UdYj2sH8CRb8rz2ze3J7D4Lar3sFCB6d7S2sT89yT6JeCEIK/lW
IYTxQOzvjfaQtWe8NPXq67WPAI8MDo1DEuHoRtTELvkZIIHO+BPbFxAeHxfn1ijN
oTt+FGBiATlEi2xqSDoHdcBgpIMqTMi0SiZocc+qZgI2P89TWxakx6WTGMxowR1O
21bR4vKVuJ0//v9V4ZylbfyTztWozKxmpssltKzTRrwx0M9wGiIWOaZb156Y/f3b
qCEO3BG2tOH24byCpPXxureSXsGsvC5UgAJIWbLhQnN68jy3IyiheM45HeKX7Uhy
HpwwV8e+v9bkaDj0M+/kCAteGFGaSLR0ehCQd8K7A+sPPh+ao0BP9jWkPnZC8bPR
uZLTW6xfJAc=
=2UQ9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_CEDCB7B8-00CF-4475-AAFF-BD0342DD5E4E--
