Re: the iab & net neutrality

Geoff, things were indeed different then, as long distance
bandwidth costs were a serious concern. That has changed. I think
the fact that content providers who are paid for that content
don't (in effect) pay for the congestion that they cause hasn't
changed. But mainly I was interested to see PHB making arguments
quite close to the ones I made ten years ago.

    Brian

Geoff Huston wrote:
> To quote from the Carpenter draft:...
> 
> "One approach to resolving the current crisis in Internet
>  performance is to institute an efficient system of
>  inter-carrier settlements."
> 
> Progress is often hard when you are heading in off in the weeds.
> 
> Try http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-01/interconn.html as an 
> alternative view of the ISP settlement world.
> 
> regards,
> 
> 
>     Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> At 12:12 PM 25/03/2006, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
>> I know I'm going to regret saying this, but we haven't made much progress
>> in ten years.
>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-metrics-00.txt
>> I got a lot of interest in that draft, none of which came from
>> ISPs...
>>
>>    Brian
>>
>> Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
>>
>>> I think that people need to consider that maybe there might be 
>>> advantages to
>>> non-flat rate, non-consumer pays charging models.
>>> I don't expect the attempted shakedown of Google to work and there are
>>> certainly tactics that they could use to preclude any desire on the 
>>> part of
>>> the carriers to do any such thing.
>>>
>>> A much more interesting case would be delivery of video on demand. 
>>> This is
>>> surely what the proponents of the sender pays scheme are really thinking
>>> about.
>>> If I am going to send a copy of a $200 million action movie to a 
>>> viewer I am
>>> going to expect to be paid for that. The viewer is going to expect a 
>>> high
>>> quality viewing experience. The problem is that the bandwidth they 
>>> subscribe
>>> to for Web browsing purposes may not be great enough to support that 
>>> viewing
>>> experience.
>>> If I am charging $8 for a movie I might well be willing to pay $0.50 
>>> to the
>>> carrier as a distribution fee in exchange for access to high bandwith 
>>> pipe
>>> for an interval.
>>>
>>> The point here is that higher bandwidth costs more to provide. If the
>>> bandwidth is provided to every subscriber all the time the costs are 
>>> much
>>> greater than providing the ultra-high speed to a small pool of 
>>> subscribers
>>> who need it for a limited time and purpose. If the high bandwidth is 
>>> added
>>> to the general pool then it will be diluted by contention and the folk
>>> running file sharing &ct.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf mailing list
>> Ietf@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf