Re: the iab & net neutrality

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