×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Level 3 Wants To Make Peering a Net Neutrality Issue

thule Re:Peering and Bandwidth Symmetry (182 comments)

No, I believe the article stated that Yahoo! was getting the bandwidth for "free". That is, Yahoo! is its own national network with POP's in all the big cities. Yahoo! is like an ISP, but unlike an ISP, Yahoo! did not sell transit. The only point of their network was to peer with large ISP's. They would drop in a router and get as many ISP's to connect their POP's to their router for free.

The difference today is that Netflix has a lot more data. A LOT more. Gone are the days of simple web sites. Depending on the size of the ISP that router and interface port might cost a heck of a lot of money. They might even have to upgrade the routers within their network. As demand for things like Netflix grows, the cost of that equipment grows. For what? Just so their customers can get Netflix? They think to themselves, "Why upgrade that port?" Customer start complaining to Netflix. The solution? Let Netflix (or Cogent) pay for the router/port. Seems fair to me. In the mean time, customers have to complain loud enough to get something done.

Not all content providers have this kind of network. Netflix is not Yahoo! or Google. They used Cogent to do all the work for them. In some ways that is better. If I was a small start up that was going to launch a new streaming service, I know where I would place my servers for good connectivity to Comcast. I'd place them in a Cogent colo!

about a month ago
top

Level 3 Wants To Make Peering a Net Neutrality Issue

thule Re:Peering and Bandwidth Symmetry (182 comments)

Since the beginning of peering, the rules have always been that if you have roughly the same amount of traffic inbound and outbound, peering has no charge.

That must have been *very* early on. I remember reading an article in the late 90's that stated that Yahoo! only payed for half of their total bandwidth requirements. Transit was costing them too much money. So they peered with large ISP's to cut their transit costs. They were connecting eyeballs to content. Both sides of the equation won because ISP's would take traffic off of their transit connection and so did Yahoo!. Yes, it does cost money to peer, but for Yahoo! it saved them money. How is this any different than Netflix? Same deal, eyeballs and content. The difference is that Netflix sends a lot more data. Even more reason that ISP's should want the traffic off of their transit connections.

about a month ago
top

Level 3 Wants To Make Peering a Net Neutrality Issue

thule Re:The Slippery Slope (182 comments)

The scenario with Netflix and ISP's is exactly what I've been describing for years. That is, use congestion on links to beat net neutrality. I would point this out and people would still focus on filtering and shaping. Who needs to filter when an ISP can just peer with a preferred VoIP provider? The link would have plenty of extra capacity and get very good quality of service. No neutrality rules have been broken because the ISP isn't shaping or filtering. They are using the inherit capability of the Internet to route traffic. So did the net neutrality people always see this issue or do they just not understand? Was the goal, all along, to control peering and they just hid their motives?

I've been skeptical of net neutrality because as soon as it was implemented, it wouldn't be "good enough" and they'd move on to more and more control. We all should be very skeptical of the government stepping in to regulate peering.

about a month ago
top

ISP Fights Causing Netflix Packet Drops

thule Re:Net Neutrality laws? (289 comments)

You are mixing apples and oranges.

Peering agreements have been the same forever. As long as there is nearly a 1:1 ratio between the providers, everything is fine. The issue comes up when one side is using more bandwidth than they are giving in return.

Not entirely true. I remember reading an article years and years ago that Yahoo was only paying for half of their total bandwidth usage. At the time Yahoo was generating a lot of traffic. It helped Yahoo and the larger ISP's to bypass their expensive transit links, bypass the backbone, and connect eyeballs to content directly.

Netflix is breaking the long standing status quo. Last I checked, they accounted for ~30% of ALL of the traffic on the internet. Obviously that is going to skew the metrics, and that is why Netflix is trying to push their own CDN. I do not know the particulars there. IMO, if Netflix expects ISPs to pay for their CDN, they are on drugs.

It is a little bit more complicated than this. Netflix uses Cogent. Cogent has pissed off other backbone providers over the years. Netflix is suffering with Verizon because of the relationship with Cogent. Netflix should see if Verizon would be interested in peering with them "directly".

What they should do is run the numbers and figure out what costs more; "overage" charges from Cogent, or eating the cost of paying to deploy their CDN hardware and network links to the other Tier1 ISPs.

Are you suggesting that net neutrality should address situations like this? Are you saying that it is a good idea to have the government force a business to eat the cost of supporting someone else's business model? To me, that sounds like a big fat subsidy for Netflix at the expense of everyone else.

I DO NOT want the government to have any say in this stuff. I would rather the market figure out the details. Yeah, there might be bumps along the road, but I would rather have that than the long arm of government regulation causing stagnation.

about 2 months ago
top

ISP Fights Causing Netflix Packet Drops

thule Re:Network vs Content providers (289 comments)

Cogent likes to think of themselves as a pure bandwidth company. No frills bandwidth for a great price. No content, no VoIP, nothing. They have colocation data centers, but that came when they purchased a company for their network.

about 2 months ago
top

ISP Fights Causing Netflix Packet Drops

thule Net Neutrality laws? (289 comments)

I've been saying this for ages! Even mentioned this here on slashdot. Peering is peering. They are not degrading performance by configuration, they just let the link get congested. How do any of the proposed net neutrality laws address this issue? Answer is, they don't. To me that means that Net Neutrality laws are about something different than neutrality. More likely with government regulation, it becomes Net Control. With that, increased stiffing and limiting reaction to market dynamics, not improving it.

about 2 months ago
top

Is Verizon Already Slowing Netflix Down?

thule Re:Your task: explain how Net Neutrality stops (298 comments)

Why would it be illegal to have a saturated peering link? Are you saying that the government would control to whom and what the link speed for each peering link should be?

I'm not saying that the Verizon to AWS link is saturated for this reason. I'm just pointing out that Verizon could handle all traffic in a neutral way to the letter of the law and still have an issue with traffic going to AWS/Netflix. It would be the responsibility of Netflix and Verizon to work out a mutually beneficial agreement that would carry the traffic without congestion between their respective networks. That is exactly how this all works right now.

about 2 months ago
top

Creationism In Texas Public Schools

thule Re:Creationists love Social Darwinisim (770 comments)

Yes, it is confusing. It is a reflection of the sad state of affairs with American churches. They should have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with Ayn Rand. Unfortunately people think Ayn Rand aligns with their thinking. Yes, there is *some* overlap. But it is not at all Christian thought. I certainly hope that a majority Christians don't adopt Ayn Rand thinking. Ayn Rand was against charity. Christianity is *for* charity as has been for hundreds of years. Charity without government. True charity, not "charity" with the force of the government. That is what is wrong with charity these days. People expect the government to be the agent of charity when it is incapable of true charity.

about 3 months ago
top

Creationism In Texas Public Schools

thule Re:Creationists love Social Darwinisim (770 comments)

I think this is only true because the government has stepped in. If it was only the church's responsibility to take care of the poor then you would see more action. Traditionally, the church is one of the few organizations to take care of the poor... all over the world. Just look at the larger charities, they all have their roots with churches or Christians.

about 3 months ago
top

Creationism In Texas Public Schools

thule Re:Creationists love Social Darwinisim (770 comments)

Yes, I know what is happening. Even James Dobson admitted it was a bad approach. Dobson admitted that the gospel took a back seat to the gospel. He is right. The Bible is right. Politics is not above the gospel. I really, really, really hope that some big denominations get this. Politics is rendering to Ceasar. Let the church be the church and take care of the poor and needy. The government does a terrible job at that task.

about 3 months ago
top

Creationism In Texas Public Schools

thule Re:Creationists love Social Darwinisim (770 comments)

People take what happened in Israel and try to apply it to the US. That is incorrect. The US is not Israel. The Bible doesn't tell Christians to create a government and force people to live as Christians. It is silent on the issue. It just tells them to go into the world and preach the gospel. No matter what the government is.

BTW, The communal living described in Acts was in the church, not the government.

So as Jesus said (Matthew 22:20-22):
and he asked them, “Whose image is this? And whose inscription?” “Caesar’s,” they replied. Then he said to them, “So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

about 3 months ago
top

Is Ruby Dying?

thule not dying in DevOps (400 comments)

Chef and Puppet are huge in DevOps. It seems Ruby has found its niche.

about 4 months ago
top

NYC's 250,000 Street Lights To Be Replaced With LEDs By 2017

thule Re:High-pressure sodium isn't "incandescent" (372 comments)

Isn't it LOW pressure sodium? The low pressure ones have that orange look. They are extremely power efficient, but they give off a narrow spectrum of light. I have heard cops and paramedics hate them because it is hard to tell what is blood, oil, or water spilled on a street.

about 6 months ago
top

GNOME 3.10 Released

thule Re:Gnome 3.10 looks good! (218 comments)

I'm a Linux systems admin... specifically the hot word these days is "DevOps". I code Ruby/Chef all day. So I flip desktops from web/terminals/email/irc all day. A lot of terminal/ssh stuff. A lot of editing files. I run about 3-5 KVM machines on my desktop box for testing (using virt-manager).

about 7 months ago
top

GNOME 3.10 Released

thule Gnome 3.10 looks good! (218 comments)

I understand some of the complaints. It get it. But, wow, Gnome is looking really good! It will be interesting to see how this new menu layout works. So far I haven't had any complaints in Gnome 3. I've been using Gnome everyday since it was initially released in the RedHat/Fedora distros. I've had more complaints with the bumps in the road with Fedora over the years than Gnome itself.

about 7 months ago
top

Ask Slashdot: Are We Witnessing the Decline of Ubuntu?

thule Re:Seriously, just learn Arch guys... It ain't har (631 comments)

I just starting playing with Arch. It's okay, but it is not a solution for serious work. RHEL/CentOS the way to go for serious tasks. RedHat has done a great job writing real management tools that allow an admin to control and manage hundreds of machines. The FreeIPA/RH IDM project itself has be long overdue in the land of Linux. For me, I stick with Fedora on my notebook and RHEL/CentOS on the server. Fedora keeps me up to date with that is on the horizon of RHEL. Fedora has the management tools that other distros lack. I have tons of respect for RedHat. Keep up the good work!

about 7 months ago
top

Middle-Click Paste? Not For Long

thule Re:GNOME: We don't want Microsoft to have all the (729 comments)

Don't get me wrong, I do like my middle-click paste. If this is due to Wayland, I'm okay with it. I would not be surprised that Wayland removes this most basic function because it is redundant to have more than one type of copy buffer. One of the main reasons for Wayland is to get rid of the crud in X that has built up over the yeas. If that means loosing one of the past buffers, fine with me. People, get over it!

about 7 months ago
top

Your preferred Linux distribution for 2013?

thule Re:No RHEL/CentOS? (627 comments)

There *was* an issue with updates for the initial CentOS 6 release, but that hasn't been an issue for awhile. The last update to RHEL (6.4), CentOS had the release out in something like 9 days. Normal day-to-day updates keep pace. I haven't had any issues.

about 8 months ago
top

Obama Reveals Climate Change Plan

thule Re:It's clever, no? (577 comments)

Coal plants have already been shutting down due the fact that natural gas is cheaper. Since we've been building natural gas plants, our carbon emissions are down to 1990's levels. Funny thing, we didn't even sign Kyoto, yet we did better than most (all?) countries in reducing carbon.

about 10 months ago

Submissions

top

Level 3 wants to make peering a net neutrality issue

thule thule writes  |  about a month ago

thule (9041) writes "A story at gigaom talks about how Level 3 is trying to pull peering into the net neutrality issue. Regulating peering could hamper how the Internet is interconnected. IMHO, turning it into a bureaucratic mess. Should peering be regulated?"
top

How most games are like the Pussycat Dolls

thule thule writes  |  more than 4 years ago

thule writes "joystiq interviews Trent Reznor. Trent is a huge fan of Nintendo because, as he puts it, Nintendo makes games into timeless art. He compares most of the "gaming industry" to the music industry and most games — that people consider hardcore — to the Pussycat Dolls."
Link to Original Source

Journals

thule has no journal entries.

Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...