Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix Video Speed On FiOS Doubles After Netflix-Verizon Deal

Posted by Soulskill on from the all-about-the-benjamins dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Verizon now joins AT&T and Time Warner Cable in the list of ISPs on which Netflix streaming has significantly improved after Netflix paid for access to their networks. Ars Technica notes that "[t]he interconnection deals give Netflix a direct connection to the edge of the Internet providers' networks, bypassing congested links, but without receiving priority treatment after entering the networks." The success of these deals, however, gives the ISPs no incentive whatsoever to fix their congested links. Toll roads have, in essence, been created for the internet.

7 of 204 comments (clear)

  1. Boycott will end this in less than a week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Verizon now joins AT&T and Time Warner Cable in the list of ISPs on which Netflix streaming has significantly improved after Netflix paid for access to their networks."

    Every company in that list needs a massive boycott. People need to be creating web sites showing a list of who's creating toll roads. (read: default slow lanes)

    It doesn't seem bad now, but this will destroy the internet if we allow it.

    1. Re:Boycott will end this in less than a week by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

      the only way to reach these companies would be to either eschew legal methods of home entertainment (along with 100m other people), or shoot some executives.

      Or?

    2. Re:Boycott will end this in less than a week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Verizon now joins AT&T and Time Warner Cable in the list of ISPs on which Netflix streaming has significantly improved after Netflix paid for access to their networks."

      Every company in that list needs a massive boycott. People need to be creating web sites showing a list of who's creating toll roads. (read: default slow lanes)

      It doesn't seem bad now, but this will destroy the internet if we allow it.

      Bullshit. Direct Peering agreements (as well as CDN's and caching services) have been around for over a decade and in fact do a lot to make the Internet run better for everyone. The scandal here is not the peering, but rather the fact that instead of being mutual (each side foots its own half of the bill), the ISP's are using their customers as leverage to get paid for it. That practice ought to be banned as a monopolistic and/or unfair business practice.

      The summary also makes this erroneous statement:

      The success of these deals, however, gives the ISPs no incentive whatsoever to fix their congested links.

      When 60% of peak traffic over the edge is from Netflix, pulling all that onto a dedicated peering link in many cases means there's no longer a congestion problem. Direct Peering IS a mechanism for fixing edge congestion.

      The problem is that when a company like Comcast refuses to do a mutual direct peering deal with significant traffic sources, it hurts their own users. But the users have no way to get redress or hold their ISP accountable, they can't vote with their wallets either. Netflix doesn't have the option to hold out because there are competing services- the most notable being the cable service Comcast offers. It's also important to note that Comcast also owns Content... something else which needs to be banned.

    3. Re:Boycott will end this in less than a week by thaylin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually settlement free peering has always existed for the last mile providors, who will ALWAYS by definition have a traffic imbalance.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
  2. Need municipal network. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You cannot boycott them while they still control the last mile (the connection to your house).

    In order to take that control from them, people have to be willing to vote to have their local government install/maintain/tax a local network as part of the infrastructure.

    Then the local government can lease connectivity to whomever wants to offer Internet service. If Comcast is charging extra for a service you want then you can go with a different option.

  3. Re:Isn't this what Netflix OpenConnect is for? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Informative

    Could someone explain why all of this is an issue, when Netflix seems to be giving away their OpenConnect CDN boxes for free, so that ISPs can cache most of the Netflix traffic inside their own network?

    Verizon has a competing (to some extent, anyway) video service. Their incentives have been aligned to make Netflix bad for customers.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. Possible solution by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a Netflix subscriber whose ISP does not charge them for peered access, it is simply Wrong that part of my subscription fee is being used to pay Comcast, Verizon, etc. when I have no business relationship with them.

    Netflix should revamp their billing structure. In addition to their monthly fee, there should be a separate line item for an ISP surcharge. If your ISP does not charge Netflix, then that surcharge is $0. If your ISP does charge them, then the surcharge is how much Netflix pays them divided by the number of Netflix customers on that ISP. Let the people using those ISPs eat the costs their ISPs are adding, and make it damn obvious that the ISP is the one responsible for the surcharge. Don't hide it in Netflix's regular bill and make the rest of us pay for it.