News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on “Not” Neutrality?. Parent comment

Re:“Not” Neutrality? by opendais on Wednesday October 01, 2014 @05:21PM (#8397815)
If you deliver enough traffic to the ISP that you are more than 5% of their network utilization? Ya, you should or at least at a peering location by one of their DCs.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Not” Neutrality? by Karunamon on Wednesday October 01, 2014 @11:45PM (#8399330)
You mean if the ISP's customers request enough traffic to take up any arbitrary percentage of the pipe?

Netflix isn't shoving their packets down anyone's throat here, the ISP's whining notwithstanding.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Not” Neutrality? by opendais on Thursday October 02, 2014 @10:05AM (#8400756)
Regardless of your pedantry, I was talking about when it makes sense to start doing something like OpenConnect.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Not” Neutrality? by Karunamon on Thursday October 02, 2014 @12:01PM (#8401284)
It seems like a minor point, but it really isn't. Worded the first way makes one sound like an ISP attempting to slant perception (like Netflix is doing something wrong), worded the second makes it sound like what's actually happening in the real world (ISP's doing what their customers pay them to do).

Please be careful on this, at least until the NN debate is settled. Words are important.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Not” Neutrality? by opendais on Thursday October 02, 2014 @03:09PM (#8402468)
"you deliver ... to ... ISP"

Pizza delivers to me. Amazon delivers to me. NewEgg delivers to me.

Please provide a counter example that implies what you suggest? All of these imply the first noun delivers something requested by the second noun. I'm uncertain why that is unclear?

[ Parent | on HN ]