provisioning (was: endless pissing about vz and netflux)

> I recall phoning AT&T once asking for 100m service at a commercial > address and it took a swat-team of people on the phone to tell me they > would be 4x/mo what I was paying.. I politely told them they were too > expensive and to not schedule a 8 person conference call for a basic > service lev

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:05:21PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: > At 09:40 PM 7/14/2014, John Curran wrote: > > >Myself, I'd call such fees to be uniform, > > Ah, but they are not. Smaller providers pay more per IP address than larger > ones. And a much > larger share of their revenues as the bas

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Brett Glass wrote: > Netflix's arrangement isn't "peeering." (They call it that, misleadingly, as > a way of attempting to characterize the connection as one that doesn't > require money to change hands.) 'peering' here probably really means 'bgp peer', and it pr

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 15/07/14 10:39, Matt Palmer wrote: > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:25:22AM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote: >> - Original Message - >>> From: "Matthew Petach" >> >>> It's now called "Any2 Denver": >>> >>> Annoyingly enough, I can't find a street >>> address for it anywhere among their literature

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Charles: Not trying to seize the last word here, but did want to make one final point. Just because I let each of my upstreams route for me does NOT mean I am single-homed; only that I handle multi-homing differently. There are commercial appliances available that do this, though I happen to have

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

In message <201407150421.waa26...@mail.lariat.net>, Brett Glass writes: > Mike: > > An ASN is, literally, just a number. One that's used by a very > awkward and primitive routing system that requires constant > babysitting and tweaking and, after lo these many years, still > doesn't deliver th

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:21 AM, Brett Glass wrote: > Perhaps it's best to think of it this way: I'm outsourcing some backbone > routing functions to my upstreams, which (generously) aren't charging me > anything extra to do it. In my opinion, that's a good business move. Last comment on the thr

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Thanks, I am so happy I now understand what an ASN and BGP are. I had no clue! Fuck it, we don't need BGP anywhere. Everyone go static! Back to the binge drinking now as I started when I first started reading this thread... -Mike On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Brett Glass wrote: > Mike: >

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Mike: An ASN is, literally, just a number. One that's used by a very awkward and primitive routing system that requires constant babysitting and tweaking and, after lo these many years, still doesn't deliver the security or robustness it should. Obtaining this token number (and a bunch of IP

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

> But regardless of the financial arrangements, such a connection doesn't > require an ASN or BGP. In fact, it doesn't even require a registered IP > address at either end! A simple Ethernet connection (or a leased line of any > kind, in fact; it could just as well be a virtual circuit) and a stati

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 7/15/2014 午後 12:51, Brett Glass wrote: But regardless of the financial arrangements, such a connection doesn't require an ASN or BGP. In fact, it doesn't even require a registered IP address at either end! A simple Ethernet connection (or a leased line of any kind, in fact; it could just as

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

At 09:40 PM 7/14/2014, John Curran wrote: >Myself, I'd call such fees to be uniform, Ah, but they are not. Smaller providers pay more per IP address than larger ones. And a much larger share of their revenues as the base fee for being "in the club" to start with. >but do recognize that such

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 03:54:52PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: > [...] > > And then the bandwidth catches up and it's no big deal anymore. > I think I want this on a T-shirt.

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

So we are splitting hairs with what "peering" means? And I am sure Netflix (or any other content / network / CDN provider) would be more than happy to statically route to you? Doubtful. Dude, put your big boy pants on, get an ASN, get some IP space, I am a smaller ISP than you I am sure and I hav

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Netflix's arrangement isn't "peeering." (They call it that, misleadingly, as a way of attempting to characterize the connection as one that doesn't require money to change hands.) ISPs peer to connect their mutual Internet customers. Netflix is not an ISP, so it cannot be said to be "peering."

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Jul 14, 2014, at 11:10 PM, Brett Glass wrote: > ... > You're assuming that the only way to be multi-homed is to have an ASN. That's > not correct. > ARIN's fees are discriminatory; a small ISP must pay a much higher percentage > of its revenues than a large one for IPs, ASNs, etc. Interest

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

So if Netflix was at 1850 Pearl, you wouldn't be able to peer with them anyways cuz u have no ASN? On Monday, July 14, 2014, Brett Glass wrote: > At 07:47 PM 7/14/2014, Matthew Petach wrote: > > And as long as they're happy with their single upstream >> connectivity picture, more power to the

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

At 07:47 PM 7/14/2014, Matthew Petach wrote: And as long as they're happy with their single upstream connectivity picture, more power to them. You're assuming that the only way to be multi-homed is to have an ASN. That's not correct. ARIN's fees are discriminatory; a small ISP must pay a mu

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Hi Brett, Why don't you simply ask me? I can only speak for myself, but I thought that's kind of what I and others were doing in replying to your messages, stating either support or counterpoints, and asking questions (?). With this being a list and your (as of recently) being a member of

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Jul 14, 2014, at 9:47 PM, Matthew Petach wrote: > Oh, yes; totally agreed. It's a one-way relationship > in my mind; it's nigh-on impossible to be a competitive > ISP without an ASN; but in no way shape or form does > having an ASN make you an ISP. I think here is where you are wrong. Ther

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Scott Helms wrote: > Matt, > > While I understand your point _and_ I agree that in most cases an ISP > should have an ASN. Having said that, I work with multiple operators > around the US that have exactly one somewhat economical choice for > connectivity to the

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Jul 14, 2014, at 5:39 PM, Matt Palmer wrote: > I assume that there's a leopard involved there somewhere? It's noodling around in the disused lavatory with Moaning Myrtle. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:25:22AM -0400, Jay Ashworth wrote: > - Original Message - > > From: "Matthew Petach" > > > It's now called "Any2 Denver": > > > > Annoyingly enough, I can't find a street > > address for it anywhere among their literature. :( > > It's in a closet in the baseme

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

At 02:42 PM 7/14/2014, George Herbert wrote: > On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Matthew Petach wrote: > > Brett's concerns seem to center around his > ability to be cost-competitive with the big > guys in his area...which implies there *are* > big guys in his area to have to compete with. He 's r

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 2014-07-14 09:48, Dave Temkin wrote: We inquired about space & power in the location that Brett mentions (Level3) as well as the Coresite location. We were told there was no power to be had in either building, hence we went for the third option. We have transport options available back to both

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Matt, While I understand your point _and_ I agree that in most cases an ISP should have an ASN. Having said that, I work with multiple operators around the US that have exactly one somewhat economical choice for connectivity to the rest of the Internet. In that case having a ASN is nice, but se

Re: Net Neutrality...

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Naslund, Steve wrote: > I think what will really drive everything is the market forces. You > either provide what your end user wants or you go out of business. There's the problem. In my neck of the woods, there is one and only one provider. They have a guar

Re: Net Neutrality...

Steve, the key piece you're missing here is that the major broadband providers are both - near-monopolies in their access areas - content providers Not a situation where market forces can work all that well. Miles Fidelman Naslund, Steve wrote: Net Neutrality is really something that has me w

RE: Net Neutrality...

Net Neutrality is really something that has me worried. I know there have to be some ground rules, but I believe that government regulation of internet interconnection and peering is a sure way to stagnate things. I have been in the business a long time and remember how peering kind of evolved

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 1:42 PM, George Herbert wrote: > > > > > On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Matthew Petach > wrote: > > > > Brett's concerns seem to center around his > > ability to be cost-competitive with the big > > guys in his area...which implies there *are* > > big guys in his area to h

Net Neutrality...

On Jul 13, 2014, at 7:55 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Randy Bush wrote: ahhh. so not government regulated == wild west >>> lawless, big guys fighting with little guys in the middle == wild west >> at this point, maybe john curran, who you may remember from nearnet, >> usually steps

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

> On Jul 14, 2014, at 10:41 AM, Matthew Petach wrote: > > Brett's concerns seem to center around his > ability to be cost-competitive with the big > guys in his area...which implies there *are* > big guys in his area to have to compete with. He 's running wireless links, from web and prior i

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:25:34 -0400, Jay Ashworth said: > everything cause he's at right angles to it; the majority of ASs, I would > venture to speculate, veer sharply in one direction or the other -- even > if that's because a transit operator acquired an eyeball operator, or > vice versa, and th

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

- Original Message - > From: "Valdis Kletnieks" > On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:17:33 -0400, Jay Ashworth said: > > > You're a terminating, or 'eyeball', network if the preponderance of > > your > > customers are end-users, resi or biz. Small-biz networks that are > > single > > uplink count he

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 2014-07-10 21:40, Randy Bush wrote: Trying to play both sides of the issue like that in the same paragraph is just...dizzying. if we filtered or otherwise prevented conjecturbation, jumping to conclusions based on misuse of tools, hyperbole, misinformation, fud, and downright lying, how woul

RE: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

The choice for ISPs at larger scale is peering or caching, peering is cheaper than caching as power is not as cheap as you think as well as the requirement to have two of everything for failover if you do caches (ie can't have my transits or more likely my backhaul blow up if the caches go away)

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

I do agree that Netflix could offer caching services for smaller ISPs. But that's a fight for another day, right now were focusing on whether Netflix should pay for caching content, let's look at the cost comparison. NOT CACHING with Netflix - up to 8gbps of transit - what's that, several grand a

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Sun, 13 Jul 2014 22:17:33 -0400, Jay Ashworth said: > You're a terminating, or 'eyeball', network if the preponderance of your > customers are end-users, resi or biz. Small-biz networks that are single > uplink count here, yes. > > You're a transit network, if the preponderance of your custome

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 7/14/14 10:06 AM, Rubens Kuhl wrote: >> If Netflix were a good citizen, it would (a) let ISPs cache content; (b) >> pay them >> equitably for direct connections (smaller and more remote ISPs have higher >> costs >> per customer and should get MORE per account than Comcast, rather than >> receivi

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 7/13/2014 4:00 PM, Brett Glass wrote: At 10:25 AM 7/13/2014, Charles Gucker wrote: ALL ISPs are in the business of providing access to the Internet.If you feel the need to rebel, then I suggest you look at creative ways to increase revenue from your customers, My customers do not want

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

As far as the LARIATs of this world go, wouldn't the optimum CDN solution be satellite multicast caching? -- --- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 7/14/2014 8:31 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: > Oh, *sure* Dave; write your own RFC just so you can refer to it in an > argument, 19 years later... Well, after all, one does need to /earn/ the title of visionary... However, you've provided nice closure to some childhood trauma: I've no math skills

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 7/14/2014 9:09 AM, David Farber wrote: > Three years > > On Jul 12, 2014, at 9:28 PM, Dave Crocker wrote: ... > Also, although CSNet started with NSF money, it was required to become > self-funded within 5 years. Hmmm... I believe the point of confusion is the difference between the initi

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Scott Helms wrote: > Benson, > > > The difference, and its a large one, is that the large operators have no > interest in building in the less dense rural (and sometimes suburban) > areas. The smaller operators are often the only provider in the area and > unlik

Re: Best practice for BGP session/ full routes for customer

Mark, BGP to RIB filtering (in any vendor implementation) is targeting RR which is not in the forwarding path, so there¹s no forwarding towards any destination filtered out from RIB. Using it selectively on a forwarding node is error prone and in case of incorrect configuration would result in bla

Comcast DNS Team

Good Afternoon, Could a member of the Comcast DNS team contact me off-list at archi...@comcast.net? Thank you, Aaron [cid:image002.jpg@01CF9F67.2CC35380] Aaron Childs Associate Director [cid:image003.png@01CF5889.646358F0] Infrastructure Services Information Te

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: > [...] I already have a hard-on for VZN. :-) > > I think Jay just won the TMI award for this thread... ;P Matt

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

From: Benson Schliesser >Thanks for adding this perspective, Barry. I think it's realistic. But I >also think it might miss an orthogonally connected issue - this isn't just >about bandwidth, but about commoditization, consolidation, size etc. It may >be that small ISPs just can't compete (at lea

Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Benson, The difference, and its a large one, is that the large operators have no interest in building in the less dense rural (and sometimes suburban) areas. The smaller operators are often the only provider in the area and unlike a bookstore if someone wants broadband in an area they can't driv

RE: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Let's just dispel this, internet bandwidth is not a very significant cost for access networks when compared to moving the data internally and maintaining the last mile access. That being said, incremental usage can drive huge capex, almost always in the very expensive last mile. Most of our c

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

> > If Netflix were a good citizen, it would (a) let ISPs cache content; (b) > pay them > equitably for direct connections (smaller and more remote ISPs have higher > costs > per customer and should get MORE per account than Comcast, rather than > receiving > nothing); and (c) work with ISPs to dev

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 14July2014Monday, at 9:52, Barry Shein wrote: > > On July 14, 2014 at 08:17 d...@dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) wrote: >> On 7/12/2014 3:19 PM, Barry Shein wrote: >>> On July 12, 2014 at 12:08 ra...@psg.com (Randy Bush) wrote: or are you equating shell access with isp? that would be nove

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On July 14, 2014 at 08:17 d...@dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) wrote: > On 7/12/2014 3:19 PM, Barry Shein wrote: > > On July 12, 2014 at 12:08 ra...@psg.com (Randy Bush) wrote: > > > or are you equating shell access with isp? that would be novel. unix > > > shell != internet. > > > > You me

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 07/14/2014 09:42 AM, George Herbert wrote: On Jul 14, 2014, at 6:03 AM, Jared Mauch wrote: In my experience the bandwidth is typically the lowest part of the cost equation. Why transcode on 1k nodes when you can do it once and distribute it at lower cost, including in electricity to run

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

> On Jul 14, 2014, at 6:03 AM, Jared Mauch wrote: > > In my experience the bandwidth is typically the lowest part of the cost > equation. > > Why transcode on 1k nodes when you can do it once and distribute it at lower > cost, > including in electricity to run the host CPU. > > Centralize

Re: paleolithic inquiry

On Jul 12, 2014, at 12:45 AM, Sean Lazar wrote: > I think we should paint the garden shed blue... I will say I'm starting to see a larger number of devices in the marketplace and locations where cellular data are making sense to replace POTS as OOB. The problem I always have is, if you are g

Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Thanks for adding this perspective, Barry. I think it's realistic. But I also think it might miss an orthogonally connected issue - this isn't just about bandwidth, but about commoditization, consolidation, size etc. It may be that small ISPs just can't compete (at least in the broader market) as t

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

We inquired about space & power in the location that Brett mentions (Level3) as well as the Coresite location. We were told there was no power to be had in either building, hence we went for the third option. We have transport options available back to both should we need it. That said, that shows

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

- Original Message - > From: "Dave Crocker" > > You mean when you sat at a unix shell using a dumb terminal on a > > machine attached to the internet in, say, 1986 you didn't think you > > were "on the internet"? > > > An question with more nuance than most folk tend to realize: > > To

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 7/12/2014 3:19 PM, Barry Shein wrote: > On July 12, 2014 at 12:08 ra...@psg.com (Randy Bush) wrote: > > or are you equating shell access with isp? that would be novel. unix > > shell != internet. > > You mean when you sat at a unix shell using a dumb terminal on a > machine attached to the

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

- Original Message - > From: "Miles Fidelman" > Jay Ashworth wrote: > > [ As you might imagine, this is a bit of a hobby horse for me; Verizon's > behavior about municipally owned fiber, and it's attempts to convert > post- Sandy customers in NYS from regulated copper to unregulated FiOS

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

- Original Message - > From: "Mark Andrews" > And in some parts of the world bandwidth caps are the norm even for > terrestial lines. My DOCIS home line has a 120G (down + up on this > plan) limit then it is rate limited for the rest of the month. I > don't hit the 120G limit though I reg

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

- Original Message - > From: "Matthew Petach" > It's now called "Any2 Denver": > > Annoyingly enough, I can't find a street > address for it anywhere among their literature. :( It's in a closet in the basement of a parking garage. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Bay

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

- Original Message - > From: "Bill Woodcock" > (Yes, yes, I know, feeding the troll, etc.) I'd like to note for the record, Bill, that I don't think this conversation is in fact troll-feeding; I think that the accumulated weight of various reasoned explanations as to why the situation is

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Jul 14, 2014, at 9:46 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote: > 7. In the absence of some reasonably balanced formal policies and regulations > about settlements - we're going to keep seeing this kind of stuff. I think here is where many of us may disagree. While the current (public) dispute between Ver

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Jay Ashworth wrote: [ As you might imagine, this is a bit of a hobby horse for me; Verizon's behavior about municipally owned fiber, and it's attempts to convert post- Sandy customers in NYS from regulated copper to unregulated FiOS service leave a pretty bad taste in my mouth about VZN. ] J

Multi-Vendor Configuration Pusher

I have a chunk of code for a multi-vendor configuration push tool under the Apache 2.0 license. Some of you may be interested. https://code.google.com/p/ldpush/ This is an easily extensible framework on top of paramiko and pexpect in Python for distributing configuration to (or running commands o

Re: ESPN worldcup streaming traffic

On Jul 13, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Mehmet Akcin wrote: > Hi > > I can't be the only one watching world cup final on my roku espn app and > wonder how many TBps is ESPN pushing right now. It would be interesting to > see people who can share some network stats on their ISPs / IXPs. This very > well

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Jul 14, 2014, at 8:58 AM, Daniel Ankers wrote: > On 14 July 2014 13:44, Dave Temkin wrote: > >> With multiple different encodes (driven by >> differing DRM and device types) the odds of two people watching the exact >> same thing are relatively low. The law of large numbers rules the game.

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On 14 July 2014 13:44, Dave Temkin wrote: > With multiple different encodes (driven by > differing DRM and device types) the odds of two people watching the exact > same thing are relatively low. The law of large numbers rules the game. > > -Dave What are the chances of performing transcoding o

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

The box doesn't even download 10% of the whole catalog and churns less than 1% a day. Obviously our demand curve is proprietary information, but I can assure you that a lot of people - engineers, mathematicians, etc. have looked at and improved the algorithm - but we are still constantly working t

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Monday, July 14, 2014, Matthew Petach wrote: > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Brett Glass > wrote: > > > [...] > > > > If Netflix tries to use its market power to harm ISPs, or to smear > > us via nasty on-screen messages as it has been smearing Verizon, ISPs > have > > no choice but to rea

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Software is... herrr configurable. Maybe Netflix could be convinced so their box had a switch from complete catalog hosting / caching most used data. I get from this discussion thread that small ISP feel having these box download the whole catalog is more than what their customers (<1000) ne

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

Hi, Here is a different tale from another small ISP. We quite like Netflix (and HBO Nordic and all the other streaming services). We are a FTTH provider and services like Netflix is why people are buying our service instead of going with 4G LTE or ADSL. Without content we have nothing. Yes we hav

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Brett Glass wrote: > [...] > > If Netflix tries to use its market power to harm ISPs, or to smear > us via nasty on-screen messages as it has been smearing Verizon, ISPs have > no choice but to react. One way we could do this -- and I'm strongly > considering it -

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

In message , Mikael Abraha msson writes: > On Sun, 13 Jul 2014, Brett Glass wrote: > > > My customers do not want me to "creatively" find ways to extract > > additional money from them so as to cover expenses that Netflix should > > be covering. Nor do they want me to subsidize Netflix subscrib

Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix

On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > > We've never been asked to POP that location. > > what location? i gobbled and found the rocky mtn ix, but it seems to be > in coresite and defunct. there is some "any2" exchange claiming to be > the second largest on the left coast, which i