In message <e24772e7-a95b-4866-9630-2b1023ebd...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s: > > > On Nov 23, 2015, at 14:16 , Christopher Morrow > <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > >> Except thereâs no revenue share here. According to T-Mobile, the > streaming partners > >> arenât paying anything to T-Mo and T-Mo isnât paying them. Itâs kind > of like zero-rating > >> in that the customers donât pay bandwidth charges, but itâs different > in that the service > >> provider isnât being asked to subsidize the network provider (usual > implementation of > >> zero-rating). > > > > equal exchange of value doesn't have to be dollars/pesos/euros > > changing hands right? > > -chris > > Sure, but I really donât think thereâs an exchange per se in this case, > given that T-Mo > is (at least apparently) willing to accommodate any streaming provider > that wants to > participate so long as they are willing to conform to a fairly basic set > of technical criteria.
No. This is T-Mo saying they are neutral but not actually being so. This is like writing a job add for one particular person. Its just as easy to identify a UDP stream as it is a TCP stream. You can ratelimit a UDP stream as easily as a TCP stream. You can have congestion control over UDP as well as over TCP. Just because the base transport doesn't give you some of these and you have to implement them higher up the stack is no reason to throw out a transport. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org
