Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Residential ISPs have pretty much never, in the history of ever, not had asymmetrical traffic. Netflix may have aggravated that, but they did not change that.



What made me laugh the most was when Comcast posted about a peering dispute with Level3[0]

>Q8: Comcast says that Level 3 sends it 5 times the traffic that Comcast sends Level 3. Is that true? If it is true, why shouldn't Level 3 pay for the traffic it sends to Comcast?

Comcast goes on to argue that Level3 pushes 5X more data onto the Comcast network than Comcast pushes onto the Level3 network. What I find ridiculous about the whole claim is that every single one of Comcast's residential internet packages has 5X higher download speeds than upload speed. (e.g. 105Mbps/20Mbps, 50Mbps/10Mbps, 20Mbps/4Mbps)

Comcast provides internet speeds that force customers to download 5x faster than they can upload and somehow Comcast is surprised that their customers are pulling down 5X more data then they're pushing to Level3?

[0] http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/20-qs-with-accur...


And I don't know how Verizon's backbone is laid out. But they have transit and end-user traffic.

Regardless, if Level3 keeps insisting this is a peering point, and then demonstrating that it's more like a transit to ISP link. Which ISPs pay for.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: