Seems germane to recent conversations ...
Netflix has signed a peering agreement with AT&T that will see the video streaming service pay the ISP for direct connection to its network.
Previously, Netflix signed similar agreements with Comcast and Verizon.
http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/29/netflix-and-att-sign-peering-agreement/
Am I nuts in thinking that *someone* has mispelt "Netflix agrees to buy
transit from AT&T"?
Cheers,
-- jra
I think you mean 'on-net transit'.
As several people were kind enough to point out to me off-list, "yes" is
the answer to that question.
Cheers,
-- jr 'on-net transit' a
Thanks Jay. Can you put it in a nutshell just in case others are a
little vague on the finer points of these arrangements and their
significance in the current content provider / network provider row?
The best thing about journalists is that they're always right (unless
they're writing about something you know about, in which case they seem
to always screw it up.) I like how in this case the author declares
that "This is the new normal."
Marcus
Gah,
While I'd agree that Netflix shouldn't get free transit, AT&T shouldn't be
charging for better access than Netflix can get over other tier 1s.
Likewise, for local delivery there's nothing wrong with peering. Besides,
when a small ISP starts up they have to buy transit/lay fibre to a major
PoP. I'd not see them, or ISPs in other remote areas, charging for
"transit".