Ever wonder what Comcast's connections to the Internet look like? In the 
tradition of WikiLeaks, someone stumbled upon these graphs of their TATA links. 
For reference, TATA is the only other IP transit provider to Comcast after 
Level (3). Comcast is a customer of TATA and pays them to provide them with 
access to the Internet.

1 day graphs:

Image #1: http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/78/ntoday.gif
Image #1 (Alternate Site): 
http://www.glowfoto.com/viewimage.php?img=13-224638L&rand=6673&t=gif&m=12&y=2010&srv=img4

Image #2: http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/749/sqnday.gif
Image #2 (Alternate Site): 
http://www.glowfoto.com/static_image/13-205526L/4331/gif/12/2010/img6/glowfoto

Notice how those graphs flat-line at the top? That's because they're completely 
full for most of the day. If you were a Comcast customer attempting to stream 
Netflix via this connection, the movie would be completely unwatchable. This is 
how Comcast operates: They intentionally run their IP transit links so full 
that Content Providers have no other choice but to pay them (Comcast) for 
access. If you don't pay Comcast, your bits wont make it to their destination. 
Though they wont openly say that to anyone, the content providers who attempt 
to push bits towards their customers know it. Comcast customers however have no 
idea that they're being held hostage in order to extort money from content.

Another thing to notice is the ratio of inbound versus outbound. Since Comcast 
is primarily a broadband access network provider, they're going to have 
millions of eyeballs (users) downloading content. Comcast claims that a good 
network maintains a 1:1 with them, but that's simply not possible unless you 
had Comcast and another broadband access network talking to each other. In the 
attached graphs you can see the ratio is more along the lines of 5:1, which 
Comcast was complaining about with Level (3). The reality is that the ratio 
argument is bogus. Broadband access networks are naturally pull-heavy and it's 
being used as an excuse to call foul of Level (3) and other content heavy 
networks. But this shoulnd't surprise anyone, the ratio argument has been used 
for over a decade by many of the large telephone companies as an excuse to deny 
peering requests. Guess where most of Comcasts senior network executive people 
came from? Sprint and AT&T. Welcome to the new monopoly of the 21st century.

If you think the above graph is just a bad day or maybe a one off? Let us look 
at a 30 day graph...

Image #3: http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/8917/ntomonth.gif
Image #3 (Alternate Site): 
http://www.glowfoto.com/static_image/13-205958L/4767/gif/12/2010/img6/glowfoto

Comcast needs to be truthful with its customers, regulators and the public in 
general. The Level (3) incident only highlights the fact that Comcast is 
pinching content and backbone providers to force them to pay for uncongested 
access to Comcast customers. Otherwise, there's no way to send traffic to 
Comcast customers via the other paths on the Internet without hitting congested 
links.

Remember that this is not TATA's fault, Comcast is a CUSTOMER of TATA. TATA 
cannot force Comcast to upgrade its links, Comcast elects to simply not 
purchase enough capacity and lets them run full. When Comcast demanded that 
Level (3) pay them, the only choice Level (3) had was to give in or have its 
traffic (such as Netflix) routed via the congested TATA links. If Level (3) 
didn't agree to pay, that means Netflix and large portions of the Internet to 
browse would be simply unusable for the majority of the day for Comcast 
subscribers.


Love,

Backdoor Santa
                                          

Reply via email to