Slashdot Mirror
Netflix Blinks, Will Pay Comcast For Network Access
We've mentioned several times the tension between giant streaming sources (especially Netflix), and ISPs (especially Comcast, especially given that it may merge with Time-Warner). Now, Marketwatch reports that Netflix has agreed to pay Comcast (amount undisclosed) for continued smooth access to Comcast's network customers, "a landmark agreement that could set a precedent for Netflix's dealings with other broadband providers, people familiar with the situation said." From the article:
"In exchange for payment, Netflix will get direct access to Comcast's broadband network, the people said. The multiyear deal comes just 10 days after Comcast agreed to buy Time Warner Cable TWC -0.79% Inc., which if approved would establish Comcast as by far the dominant provider of broadband in the U.S., serving 30 million households" I wonder how soon until ISPs' tiered pricing packages will become indistinguishable from those for cable TV, with grouped together services that vary not just in throughput or quality guarantees, but in what sites you can reach at each service level, or which sports teams are subject to a local blackout order.
Not long. The cable guys are, in this way, just like the Bellheads. They see their real moneymaker as these blasted tiered services (never mind their historical roots in equipment limitations). Soon you will probably have to buy the Disney package to be able to get the Google package to be able to get slashdot.
What I think of the judges that thought this was a good idea is not fit for slashdot, much less polite company.
Maybe it is time for Google, Facebook, etc.. start charging Comcast for access to their networks?
What a shame Netflix took a step back on this and what a shame Netflix didn't get any support by the giants of the internet.
Netflix is having all these problems because they use Cogent, the cut-rate morons of the transit world...
This has happened hundreds of times, long before they carried Netflix streaming video:
http://www.pcworld.com/article...
https://secure.dslreports.com/...
https://secure.dslreports.com/...
https://secure.dslreports.com/...
http://www.complaints.com/2008...
http://publicpolicy.verizon.co...
http://www.prnewswire.com/news...
http://www.fiercetelecom.com/s...
https://www.datacenterknowledg...
etc., etc.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
That is not true. There have been several implementations of communism. They have all been relatively small scale. As far as I am aware, the only ones which were at all successful were religious communities (See Hutterites). The thing to notice about all of the implementations of communism is that they were purely voluntary (that is, those who did not wish to take part in communism were free to leave the group).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
The no cost peering agreements between the major ISPs is based on the premise that traffic flows both ways in approximately equal amounts.
Netflix is something like 30% of internet traffic and it's mostly one way. They are so big they produce more traffic than many entire ISPs.
They may be so big that no ISP can peer with Netflix's ISP without disturbing this balance.
Is it possible that the solution is that Netflix basically are forced to have multiple ISPs and connect directly to many networks?
I can see that this could lead to problems as has been mentioned elsewhere in this and many other threads, but maybe there have to be exceptions to the general rule.