On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 04:20:42PM -0400, Derek Balling wrote:
> 
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 4:11 PM, Edward Ned Harvey (lopser) 
> <lop...@nedharvey.com> wrote:
> > That is correct, but both Comcast and Verizon refuse to accept the box.  
> > They don't want L3 to pay for network upgrades.  They don't want Netflix to 
> > provide a box to eliminate the need for network upgrades.  Whenever they 
> > gripe about how it's expensive to operate the network and the content 
> > providers such as Netflix get a "free ride," that's a straw man blatant lie 
> > public image tactic.  The truth of the matter is, they see somebody else 
> > they can grab money from, they go for it.  They're not trying to eliminate 
> > a cost or a burden.  They want positive cash flow from those guys in order 
> > to stop blocking their content from delivery.
> > 
> > All of Netflix, in a box:  Cost to Netflix around $10k to $20k.  They give 
> > 'em away for free to any ISP where it will improve the experience for 
> > customers.
> > http://gizmodo.com/this-box-can-hold-an-entire-netflix-1592590450
> 
> When I want to put hardware in a particular location to improve my customers' 
> performance, I pay for that privilege. It's called "colocation".

I spent a year or two working for Akamai convincing ISP operators to
put some of Akamai's hardware in particular locations to improve their
customers' performance, generally with no money changing hands.

The ISP gave up a little colo space, and received a significant
savings in transit bandwidth that they otherwise would have paid for or
backhaul. Akamai spent the money for the hardware and ongoing management,
and got a cache that many milliseconds closer to end-users.

It was a business decision on both ends, 

-dsr-
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
 http://lopsa.org/

Reply via email to