- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
VUser,
Agree
Hub,
Please keep in mind that Dan Rayburn works for Forst & Sullivan.
Verizon is a client of Forst & Sullivan.
http://www.verizonenterprise.com/resources/whitepapers/wp_meetings-around-the-world-ii_en_xg.pdf
Forst & Sullivan has a side business of giving awards to Verizon (many of these)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
How is Dan Rayburn associated with Comcast?
his article wasn't written about Verizon, it was writtent about Comcast and Netflix and was written in advance of Netflix's latest Media PR stunt against Verizon and ISP's.
Good people can disagree, I think netflix is trying to get something for free, that noone else in the industry is entitled to. Microsoft, Apple, Google. Amazon, Hulu etc....
All of these companies use balanced peering without abusing it, and when they don't, they make business choices that are good for their business. I.E. They use CDN's when appropriate and they run their own CDN's when needed and they use interexchanges appropriately.
Netflix is trying to get Co Location services for free and free bandwidth.
I use netflix and I actually Like Netflix services BETTER than Verizon's.
But let's call a spade a spade here.
Let's not pretend it's some corporate technocracy trying to assert dominance.
This isn't about net neutrality in the least.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
The issue has been summarized well in this thread.
Netflix is trying to get co-location and transport for free, this has been made clear.
Verizon is trying to maintain the status-quo, which has also been made clear.
Dan's employment at a firm that contracts to broadband companies may not be of interest to you, I find it interesting and relevant.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
but he isn't associated with comcast?
I mean other than your assertion?
I genuinely don't know, but you asserting something doesn't make it true
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
He works for a firm that conducts bespoke reseach and consulting for the industry and has Verizon as a client. Comcast, no idea, no time to find out.
He may be completely independent, but the optics aren't great.
This is a fun read.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
@Hubrisnxs wrote:Netflix is trying to get Co Location services for free and free bandwidth.
I use netflix and I actually Like Netflix services BETTER than Verizon's.
But let's call a spade a spade here.
The agreement in Open Connect is that Netflix installs and maintains the hardware at no cost to the ISP, things like cache boxes that help them ensure video streams smoothly and in high quality. The big three US ISPs all refused that arrangement. (Soon to be two if Comcast is successful in buying enough votes to get the OK on the TWC acquisition).
Part of this is no doubt ISPs looking to extract rents, as “natural” monopoly owners that is their capitalist right until the FCC deems them utilities and they are subject to regulation.
But another issue is network management. Comcast and FIOS are in many ways a competitor with Netflix. They don't want you using Netflix, they have competing streaming products that they want you to pay for. This where all the net neutrality accusations come from. FIOS Redbox conveniently directly tied to the FIOS network. Netflix…hmm maybe we won’t worry about those CDN ports that we know are saturated. They want the same direct connect as Redbox? Forget it, we own Redbox and it needs help!
- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »