On Nov 29, 2010, at 6:24 PM, Phil Bedard wrote: > Is L3 hosting content for Netflix?
You bet. http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2010/11/11/level-3-signs-deal-to-be-a-primary-netflix-cdn-shares-rally/ • NOVEMBER 11, 2010, 9:13 AM ET Level 3 Signs Deal To Be A Primary Netflix CDN; Shares Rally Regards Marshall > Netflix has become a large source of > traffic going to end users. L3 likely could have held out on this one if > the content they were hosting is valuable enough to Comcast's customers, > but maybe what Comcast was asking for wasn't much in the grand scheme of > things. > > Obviously someone has to pay for the access infrastructure and Comcast > would much rather get the content provider to pay for it versus passing it > along to their customers. I think they probably just took a stab and L3 > complied. > > Phil > > > > On 11/29/10 5:28 PM, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patr...@ianai.net> wrote: > >> <http://www.marketwatch.com/story/level-3-communications-issues-statement- >> concerning-comcasts-actions-2010-11-29?reflink=MW_news_stmp> >> >> I understand that politics is off-topic, but this policy affects >> operational aspects of the 'Net. >> >> Just to be clear, L3 is saying content providers should not have to pay >> to deliver content to broadband providers who have their own product >> which has content as well. I am certain all the content providers on >> this list are happy to hear L3's change of heart and will be applying for >> settlement free peering tomorrow. (L3 wouldn't want other providers to >> claim the Vyvx or CDN or other content services provided by L3 are >> competing and L3 is putting up a "toll booth" on the Internet, would >> they?) >> >> -- >> TTFN, >> patrick >> >> > > > >