[87305] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Two Tiered Internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Wed Dec 14 09:06:16 2005
In-Reply-To: <1134561921.13325.249768915@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@merit.edu>
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:05:43 -0500
To: Per Heldal <heldal@eml.cc>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
To me, this seems likely to lead to massive consumer dissatisfaction,
and a disaster of the
magnitude of the recent Sony CD root exploit fiasco.
Typical Pareto distribution models for usage mean that no matter
how popular "tier 1" sites are, a substantial part of the user time
will be spent on degraded "tier 2" sites.
If these don't work, people will complain. Just imagine for a second
that cable providers started
a service that meant that every channel not owned by, say, Disney,
had a bad picture and sound. Would this
be good for the cable companies ? Would their customers be happy ?
Of course, based on some recent experience this probably means that
this will be adopted enthusiastically.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
On Dec 14, 2005, at 7:05 AM, Per Heldal wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 19:12:31 -0800, "Joe McGuckin" <joe@via.net> said:
>>
>> What good is 6Mbit DSL from my ISP (say, SBC for example) if only
>> a small
>> portion of the net (sites that pay for non-degraded access) loads
>> at a
>> reasonable speed and everything else sucks?
>>
>
> All providers in your market would have to agree to do the same thing.
> Capped services only work for monopoly providers.
>
>
> //per
> --
> Per Heldal
> heldal@eml.cc
>
