Comment on Forget Net Neutrality; Comcast Might Break the Web by KW ENGLAND

You say "Comcast wouldn’t deliver Level 3′s content" if fees aren't paid and that isn't quite true. Level3 (and Comcast) are looking for mutually advantageous interconnections that improve transport speeds. If Level3 refused to pay the fees for the special peering arrangement, Comcast would still accept their traffic, just not at the more-desirable interconnection points. If Level3 and Comcast had the same kind of traffic, their advantage in the proposed interconnection would be the same. The fact that Level3 carries Netflix traffic means that the interconnection is more important to Level3 than Comcast, which does not have a Netflix-like customer. Since it is more important for Level3's business than Comcast's, Level3 pays. You had better believe if Comcast had the Netflix contract, Level3 would be asking Comcast for money. But the fact that the traffic will, in fact, be exchanged between Level3 and Comcast, either according to current backbone interconnects or according to the new peering interconnects, this IS NOT a net neutrality issue. This isn't really even news. Backbones tussle over settlement-free peering all the time, since the beginning of the commercial Internet. The fact that Level3 brings the argument out of the smoke-filled backroom doesn't make it newsworthy, extraordinary or suspicious.

Comment on Forget Net Neutrality; Comcast Might Break the Web by KW ENGLAND

Backlink: http://gigaom.com/2010/11/29/forget-net-neutrality-comcast-might-break-the-web/#comment-528740