[169995] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on ISPs' refusal to upgrade
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Blake Dunlap)
Sat Mar 22 16:06:29 2014
In-Reply-To: <77fb8d18d5fb3b46b651f438257e2899@mail.dessus.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:59:42 -0500
From: Blake Dunlap <ikiris@gmail.com>
To: Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf@dessus.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I see this argument, and then I remember working for a company that happily
sold 6 and 12 meg dsl from a dslam that was backhauled by a 3mb pair of t1s.
There needs to be some oversight that it is at least possible / likely to
reach a reasonable expectation of normal destinations with the service
limits you were sold.
-Blake
On Mar 22, 2014 12:17 PM, "Keith Medcalf" <kmedcalf@dessus.com> wrote:
>
> >I don't see this as a technical problem, but one of business and ethics.
> >ISP X advertises/sells customers "up to 8Mbps" (as an example), but when
> >it comes to delivering that product, they've only guaranteed 512Kbps (if
> >any) because the ISP hasn't put in the infrastructure to support 8Mbps
> >per customer. Customer believes he/she has 8Mbps, Content provider says
> >we provide 8Mbps content, but ISP can (theoretically and in practice)
> >only deliver a fraction of that. That feels like false advertising to me.
>
> The problem is that the consumer is too stupid to own a computer and use a
> network.
>
> The consumer purchased a product advertized as "up to 8Mbps" but really
> wanted "not less than 8Mbps".
>
> It is not false advertizing. What was delivered is exactly what was
> advertized and exactly what was purchased.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
