A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

If you thought BT was bad....



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 25th 13, 10:50 AM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
The Natural Philosopher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,728
Default If you thought BT was bad....

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-896435.html

"let's throttle everything except our *own* content"

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

  #2  
Old April 25th 13, 02:46 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Boulding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default If you thought BT was bad....

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:50:07 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote in :

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-896435.html

"let's throttle everything except our *own* content"


That's not how I read the article. It appears to suggest that German ISP
customers, unlike us in the UK, are used to having NO monthly data limit
imposed on their connections, and that Deutsche Telekom want to introduce
them--and that they might throttle connections that exceed them. Monthly
data transfer limits and throttling have long been common here.

Just one paragraph suggests that Deutsche Telekom might--*as a telco*--be
wanting to do away with net neutrality by imposing limits on the competition
that it does not place on its own ISP services. That is a much more serious
matter, and should be fought with all possible vigour--in Germany, and in
the US (where it net neutrality is under serious and continuing threat) and
elsewhere.

The greatest threat we face is the possibility that telcos start to get away
with throttling content providers who can't pay enough to avoid it.

--
Regards, Peter Boulding
(to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal Images and Music:
http://www.pboulding.co.uk/
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/defa...&content=music
  #3  
Old April 25th 13, 08:08 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
alexd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,765
Default If you thought BT was bad....

Peter Boulding (for it is he) wrote:

The greatest threat we face is the possibility that telcos start to get
away with throttling content providers who can't pay enough to avoid it.


It is, but how do you distinguish that from telcos not charging/discounting
content served from certain content providers with infrastructure in their
own networks, eg https://www.netflix.com/openconnect

--
http://ale.cx/ (AIM:troffasky) )
20:01:33 up 41 days, 10:57, 5 users, load average: 0.28, 0.26, 0.21
Qua illic est reprehendit, illic est a vindicatum

  #4  
Old April 25th 13, 09:29 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Boulding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default If you thought BT was bad....

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 20:08:48 +0100, alexd wrote in
:

The greatest threat we face is the possibility that telcos start to get
away with throttling content providers who can't pay enough to avoid it.


It is, but how do you distinguish that from telcos not charging/discounting
content served from certain content providers with infrastructure in their
own networks, eg https://www.netflix.com/openconnect


You don't. That's the whole point of net neutrality.

Not sure of the implications of your netflix link. You'll have to explain
that one.


--
Regards, Peter Boulding
(to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal Images and Music:
http://www.pboulding.co.uk/
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/defa...&content=music
  #5  
Old April 26th 13, 10:08 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
alexd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,765
Default If you thought BT was bad....

Peter Boulding (for it is he) wrote:

You don't. That's the whole point of net neutrality.


Then it's nonsense. If you mandate rules contrary to the underlying economic
realities, you create perverse incentives and encourage inefficiency,
driving up costs.

Not sure of the implications of your netflix link. You'll have to explain
that one.


They provide you with a caching server, which you locate in your network. It
syncs the most popular content with Netflix's servers in off hours. All
requests for video from your customers are served from the cache in your
network where possible rather than leaving your network. So, if you have one
of these caches, it costs you less for your customer to watch a video from
Netflix than it does from Youtube, yet no money has changed hands between
you and Netflix.

--
http://ale.cx/ (AIM:troffasky) )
21:47:59 up 42 days, 12:43, 5 users, load average: 0.29, 0.21, 0.16
Qua illic est reprehendit, illic est a vindicatum

  #6  
Old April 26th 13, 11:30 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Peter Boulding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default If you thought BT was bad....

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:08:20 +0100, alexd wrote in
:

If you mandate rules contrary to the underlying economic
realities, you create perverse incentives and encourage inefficiency,
driving up costs.


Yeah, yeah, you can't buck the cold, hard logic of economics.

Such a pity that economists can never agree about the nature of the
underlying economic realities.


--
Regards, Peter Boulding
(to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal Images and Music:
http://www.pboulding.co.uk/
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/defa...&content=music
  #7  
Old April 27th 13, 07:25 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Phil W Lee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 482
Default If you thought BT was bad....

alexd considered Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:08:20
+0100 the perfect time to write:

Peter Boulding (for it is he) wrote:

You don't. That's the whole point of net neutrality.


Then it's nonsense. If you mandate rules contrary to the underlying economic
realities, you create perverse incentives and encourage inefficiency,
driving up costs.

Not sure of the implications of your netflix link. You'll have to explain
that one.


They provide you with a caching server, which you locate in your network. It
syncs the most popular content with Netflix's servers in off hours. All
requests for video from your customers are served from the cache in your
network where possible rather than leaving your network. So, if you have one
of these caches, it costs you less for your customer to watch a video from
Netflix than it does from Youtube, yet no money has changed hands between
you and Netflix.


You mean the same way that Usenet used to work, before the ISPs
decided it would be more efficient /for them/ to outsource it, that to
have news servers running on their own networks?
  #8  
Old April 27th 13, 09:25 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
alexd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,765
Default If you thought BT was bad....

Phil W Lee (for it is he) wrote:

You mean the same way that Usenet used to work, before the ISPs
decided it would be more efficient for them to outsource it, that to
have news servers running on their own networks?


Presumably if it made sense for an ISP to host a caching server inside their
network for a high-bandwidth [== high cost] destination, that's what they'd
do; outsourcing a service to a third party doesn't preclude colocating it
inside one's own network.

--
http://ale.cx/ (AIM:troffasky) )
21:11:37 up 43 days, 12:07, 5 users, load average: 0.31, 0.23, 0.17
Qua illic est reprehendit, illic est a vindicatum

  #9  
Old April 27th 13, 09:30 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
The Natural Philosopher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,728
Default If you thought BT was bad....

On 27/04/13 19:25, Phil W Lee wrote:
alexd considered Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:08:20
+0100 the perfect time to write:

Peter Boulding (for it is he) wrote:

You don't. That's the whole point of net neutrality.

Then it's nonsense. If you mandate rules contrary to the underlying economic
realities, you create perverse incentives and encourage inefficiency,
driving up costs.

Not sure of the implications of your netflix link. You'll have to explain
that one.

They provide you with a caching server, which you locate in your network. It
syncs the most popular content with Netflix's servers in off hours. All
requests for video from your customers are served from the cache in your
network where possible rather than leaving your network. So, if you have one
of these caches, it costs you less for your customer to watch a video from
Netflix than it does from Youtube, yet no money has changed hands between
you and Netflix.

You mean the same way that Usenet used to work, before the ISPs
decided it would be more efficient /for them/ to outsource it, that to
have news servers running on their own networks?

except they were running huge caches for no customers


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

  #10  
Old April 28th 13, 08:47 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Andy Champ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 187
Default If you thought BT was bad....

On 27/04/2013 21:30, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
except they were running huge caches for no customers


Can't parse that.

If it's a cache, but no-one is using it, it's not really running and
certainly won't be huge.

Or was it locally pre-fetched whether anyone wanted the data or not?

Andy
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I thought this might amuse.. The Natural Philosopher uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 1 January 31st 13 04:38 PM
I never thought i'd say this... Michael Brooslin uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 4 August 28th 06 05:16 PM
Totally OT but thought you could help Jason uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 8 July 22nd 04 12:22 AM
PlusNet not Quite as cheap as I thought! Rick uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 6 February 29th 04 04:27 PM
My local exchange - better than I thought trappeduser uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 September 10th 03 09:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2019 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.