[170035] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on ISPs' refusal to upgrade
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew Petach)
Sun Mar 23 16:02:56 2014
In-Reply-To: <20140323192751.GD36211@burnout.tpb.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:02:34 -0700
From: Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Niels Bakker <niels=nanog@bakker.net>wrote:
> * mpetach@netflight.com (Matthew Petach) [Sun 23 Mar 2014, 20:06 CET]:
>
> Doesn't sound too outlandish. Mind you, I'm sure
>> it would raise costs, as that testing and validation
>> wouldn't be free. But I'm sure we'd all be willing to
>> pay an additional $10/month on our service to be
>> sure it could deliver what was promised, or at least
>> to ensure that what was promised was scaled down
>> to match what could actually be delivered.
>>
>
> Nice strawman you erected there.
>
>
Thanks! I thought it looked quite nice up on its pole. :)
Now it's time for people to take turns poking
holes in it. ^_^
Thanks!
>>
>
> Yeah, thanks for standing up for industries holding their customers
> hostage to extract rents from companies trying to serve those customers.
>
I'm not so much standing up for them as
pointing out that simply calling for additional
oversight and regulation often brings increased
costs into the picture. Oddly enough, I'm having
a hard time identifying exactly *where* the money
comes from to pay for government verification of
industry performance claims; I'm sure it's just my
weak search-fu, however, and some person with
more knowledge on the subject will be able to
shed light on how such validation and
compliance testing is typically paid
for.
>
> -- Niels.
>
>
Thanks!
Matt
