[186343] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Binge On! - And So This is Net Neutrality?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jean-Francois Mezei)
Thu Dec 10 21:13:07 2015
X-Original-To: Nanog@nanog.org
To: "Nanog@nanog.org" <Nanog@nanog.org>
From: Jean-Francois Mezei <jfmezei_nanog@vaxination.ca>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 21:13:03 -0500
In-Reply-To: <51D7F3C0-2E04-4A27-93D0-2AD9025C208B@delong.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 2015-12-10 20:58, Owen DeLong wrote:
> What if the rate charged is the same?
>
> Wouldn’t it still be problematic if:
>
> I pay VZ $15/Gigabyte for all data I use except Netflix which gets billed
> automatically to Netflix instead of me?
If Netflix gets charged the same retail rate, then I guess challenging
this under 27(2) in Canada would be hard since there might not be a
preference. Howeever, we all know that large ISPs signing such deals
won't be charging "retail rates" for data to their partners.
And in all likelyhood, the offending ISP would likely charge the outfit
such as Netfix in capacity (gbps) and not number of bytes transfered, so
this introduces a preference.
(Retaul users are charged for capacity (bits per second) and usage
(bytes). Charging a partner only for capacity introduces a preference.
> Telephone companies… Any belief that they are communications companies
> is purely coincidental to their business model. In fact, they are law firms.
I know all too well, I have met with and argued against some of Bell
Canada's 10,000 regulatory lawyers :-(
There are also revenue maximizing people in telcos. With such a deal,
the residential customer pays for the saye 100 gigagyutes per month,
while Netflix now pays a second time for the data that was paid as part
of the purchase for 100 gygabytes by the retail customer.
