Hi Kevin, It is only for Comcast last-mile subscribers, indeed. This is the first time ever that a major ISP has made and succeeded in a demand for a major backbone provider to pay in order to fulfilll THE VERY REQUESTS of that ISP's OWN CUSTOMERS. It's pretty bizarre and, while most peering disputes are about the use of a provider's network to transit to third-party networks, this is a new front on the net neutrality battle.
Also, hello to everyone from the new Fordham Law SFC chapter! We hope to get involved in Conf11 planning (on the appropriate list of course) as soon as time permits. It is about to be finals period, so that may not be immediate. - Jimmy Kaplowitz Fordham Law, JD class of 2014 [email protected] >>> Kevin Donovan 11/30/10 11:29 PM >>> Here's good coverage: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/how-comcast-became-a-toll-collecting-hydra-with-a-nuke.ars What's the word on this? I haven't followed too closely, but, if in fact, Level 3 is no longer a 'peer' of Comcast, why should they not have a contractual relationship? I understand that should be negotiated, but this is interconnection, not net neutrality, right? Is the difference that it is only for Comcast last-mile subscribers? What do people think? -- Kevin Donovan Georgetown '11: SFS 630.849.8285 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss FAQ: http://wiki.freeculture.org/Fc-discuss
