I said: “So you’re afraid that your ISP will build up infrastructure to support faster lanes for the big guys and not let the little guys ride?”
No, see panel 4. ISPs will (and already do) congest the open side and charge both the user and the content provider for the normal speed.
There’s no evidence of that. And as the article I linked to demonstrated, they would have to GREATLY degrade the open side to have any affect on a small provider.
It starts with targeting the largest sites and the deepest pockets, especially if they’re a content competitor. And anyone left on the congested peering links is affected, not just the ones that were asked to pay.
That’s not the way it works. Last year, maybe you experienced the problem that Netflix would pause while all of the other Internet traffic (Youtube, Spotify, whatever) worked fine. Peering contracts ensure that just because everyone in your neighborhood is watching Orange is the New Black, your broadband speed will not go down to 3mps. They work just like your (relatively unregulated) cellular plan. The more data you use on their network, they more they will charge. Netflix paid a peering company in advance to connect to Comcast’s network. The peering company made them an offer based on how much data they expected Netflix to stream. When Netflix streamed more, the peering company didn’t want to pay for the extra bandwidth. So Netflix was getting screwed, but not by Comcast…but by their peering company.
I repeat. When Netflix buffered, that was Netflix failing to live up to its bargain with you. Comcast was entirely a bystander. When Netflix got its problems worked out with its peering company, your problem would be resolved. (Actually, Netflix just chose to become its own peering company.)
When peering connections are congested, the peers should upgrade the connection, as it helps both sides - a win-win. Refusing to upgrade the peering connection may result in higher profit for the ISP, but the users, the peer and the content providers all lose.
No. No. No. Comcast would have loved to upgrade their connection. So would Netflix. But Netflix didn’t want to pay more to the peering company they had already contracted to have it upgraded. The peering company didn’t want to pay more to upgrade their peering plan. Comcast didn’t want to give the peering company (a big wealthy corporation) free access to its networks–you shouldn’t want that either, because then Comcast’s customers see ALL their bandwidth deprecated. Everyone was acting rationally. The hold up was between Netflix and its peering company. Not Comcast. But NN advocates point to Comcast as the problem…because they don’t understand how streaming content gets to their house.
ISPs will not stop trying to bend the law to their side as long as there is profit to gain. But I don’t see how conceding to them without a fight, as you seem to be suggesting, is a better option.
Doing something you know will make things worse is not an option at all. As I said, the regulations the abet the big players at the expense of consumers and smaller competitors is a feature of government regulation, not a bug. Big corporations LOVE regulation. It drives up the cost of entry to compete with them. It means they will control the rules by which the game gets played. It is the method by which GE managed to make millions selling consumer washing machines that don’t work as well as those made 20 years go while paying no tax on their profits.
