[171831] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Observations of an Internet Middleman (Level3)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Thu May 15 12:02:16 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <8AFC1EC8-5F2E-4645-B57C-A147FC56B390@cable.comcast.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 12:01:34 -0400
To: "McElearney, Kevin" <Kevin_McElearney@cable.comcast.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On May 15, 2014, at 11:50 AM, McElearney, Kevin =
<Kevin_McElearney@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> There is no gaming on measurements and disputes are isolated and =
temporary with issues not unique over the history of the internet. I =
think all the same rhetorical quotes continue to be reused
>=20
Kevin,
in the past most issues were transient for a few months as both sides =
got complaints, but while at RIPE earlier this week someone commented to =
me: there's no one provider you can buy access from to get a packet-loss =
free connection to all their other business partners/customers. This =
hurts the entire marketplace when there is persistent congestion.
Some of these issues are related to (as Craig called them) "Hypergiants" =
(OTT) but others are due to providers having poor capital models so they =
don't have "budget" for upgrading unless someone pays for that upgrade, =
vs seeing their existing customer base as that source for the capital.
As an engineer, I'm hopeful that those responsible for budgeting will do =
the right thing. As a greedy capitalist, please pay me more $$$. It =
does feel a bit like tic-tac-toe with zero players in wargames though, =
the only way to win is to not play [games].
- Jared
