Comments on: OFC 2007 – Carriers Speak Out On Peer to Peer http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/ More Signal. Less Noise. Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:29:57 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: knujlla http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1140 knujlla Sun, 01 Apr 2007 06:49:23 +0000 http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1140 Back to the first comment for this blog entry Andrew, the guy from Comcast is being disingenuous - Comcast has a fairly sophisticated p2p b/w throttling solution in place. Based on the throttling, yes, maybe the ratio has not changed. And the AT&T and BT guys are basically saying that traffic carried over these 'overlay' p2p networks - video - is the growth area. Ducked the aspect, if theya re able to monetize it or simply ferry bits across their networks. knujlla Back to the first comment for this blog entry Andrew, the guy from Comcast is being disingenuous – Comcast has a fairly sophisticated p2p b/w throttling solution in place. Based on the throttling, yes, maybe the ratio has not changed.

And the AT&T and BT guys are basically saying that traffic carried over these ‘overlay’ p2p networks – video – is the growth area. Ducked the aspect, if theya re able to monetize it or simply ferry bits across their networks.

knujlla

]]> By: solomon.yang http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1137 solomon.yang Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:59:12 +0000 http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1137 I am a mere engineer. My understanding is that AKAM holds 2 critical patents, which twist DNS entry to redirect stream destination. Without these key tech, it is hard for other competitors to reach same level of efficiency. And AKAM has a very well distributed system to host contents. I know Vital Steam system residing on 2 DC center in CA. Don't know how they implement it. Limelight network set their infrastructure on top of Level 3 network, as Level 3 becomes its competitor after accquiring Savvis's CDN assets. Level 3 could be a serious competitor because they have a solid network across NA. Maybe I am wrong about above infomation. Like to know your opinions. I am a mere engineer. My understanding is that AKAM holds 2 critical patents, which twist DNS entry to redirect stream destination. Without these key tech, it is hard for other competitors to reach same level of efficiency. And AKAM has a very well distributed system to host contents.

I know Vital Steam system residing on 2 DC center in CA. Don’t know how they implement it.

Limelight network set their infrastructure on top of Level 3 network, as Level 3 becomes its competitor after accquiring Savvis’s CDN assets.

Level 3 could be a serious competitor because they have a solid network across NA.

Maybe I am wrong about above infomation. Like to know your opinions.

]]> By: J-MAC http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1138 J-MAC Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:40:13 +0000 http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1138 Great article "who will pay for online video boom". Your comments might suggest AKAM is a short here. Despite the tremendous growth the company has consistently put up in the last few years, there is now LLNW coming public and pricing at major discount to AKAM. It's a love fest on the buyside with AKAM, and where analysts are in print at 35% growth in 07, they will tell you 50% ... hard to beat without plenty of acquisitions. Any thoughts? Great article “who will pay for online video boom”. Your comments might suggest AKAM is a short here. Despite the tremendous growth the company has consistently put up in the last few years, there is now LLNW coming public and pricing at major discount to AKAM. It’s a love fest on the buyside with AKAM, and where analysts are in print at 35% growth in 07, they will tell you 50% … hard to beat without plenty of acquisitions.

Any thoughts?

]]> By: chuck goolsbee http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1139 chuck goolsbee Tue, 27 Mar 2007 21:36:07 +0000 http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2007/03/27/carriers-speak-out-on-peer-to-peer-ofc-2007/#comment-1139 The guy from Verizon obviously didn't understand your question, or chose to dodge it with a marketing parry. First off, "speed" is is a measure of distance/time. Last I checked, nobody cares how *far* a bit goes, only how many bits per second can be moved. If he wants to be taken seriously he should have said "uplink capacity" not "speed." But more to the point, your question was about the percentages of traffic, and more importantly what *content* was contained within that percentage. None of them seemed to see your question of threat as anything other than a capacity problem. These guys are still fighting the last war. --chuck The guy from Verizon obviously didn’t understand your question, or chose to dodge it with a marketing parry. First off, “speed” is is a measure of distance/time. Last I checked, nobody cares how *far* a bit goes, only how many bits per second can be moved. If he wants to be taken seriously he should have said “uplink capacity” not “speed.”

But more to the point, your question was about the percentages of traffic, and more importantly what *content* was contained within that percentage. None of them seemed to see your question of threat as anything other than a capacity problem.

These guys are still fighting the last war.

–chuck

]]>