

Google Fiber: Working with content providers to minimize buffering - ninox
http://googlefiberblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/minimizing-buffering.html

======
jljljl
Pretty brilliant move on Google's part.

By launching Google Fiber, they have a huge wedge for any "Fast Lane"
negotiations with the ISPs. If ISPs try to charge content providers too much,
and start to impact Google's bottom line, Google can simply start expanding
Fiber to bite into the ISP's business.

It effectively sets a ceiling for how much the ISPs can charge Google or it's
customers, since Google can simply emphasize Fiber if it becomes more cost
effective vs. paying the Fast Lane tolls.

------
ticktocktick
ISPs are trying to become Netflix. Google is trying to become an ISP.

Netflix is trying to commoditize bits.

Netflix should try to become an ISP.

------
stutsmansoft
Google Fiber: we're also not available where you live.

~~~
throwawayLSKDNF
If you're in the US, you can fix that by moving.

I did.

------
Oculus
This is basically a giant fuck you to the whole Comcast/Time-Warner/net
neutrality issue.

~~~
ryanburk
and by giving away for free the most expensive part of hosting - power - for
the folks colo'ing with them, it is almost free for netflix and others to do
this. it makes the offering something that other ISPs won't be able to compete
with easily if at all.

~~~
tcas
At Netflix's scale I'm almost certain that paying for the space and power
would still be much cheaper than having to pay direct bandwidth costs /
external CDN costs.

I wonder how they decide who gets to put a server in there for free, I always
thought it was just a matter of money.

------
thinkmassive
It's good that Google is doing this, and it's great PR at this moment in time,
but Netflix has been offering ISPs their Open Connect Appliance for a while
now:

[https://www.netflix.com/openconnect](https://www.netflix.com/openconnect)

This is one aspect that confuses me about the whole net neutrality debate
revolving around Netflix. They basically provide a CDN point of presence to
any major ISP who wants it, and that's less outside bandwidth the ISP needs to
worry about. It's a win for everyone, except for much smaller competitors who
don't have the budget to offer a free appliance, nor do they have the
popularity for an ISP to want to power their device. Netflix is an odd poster
child for the net neutrality debate.

~~~
takeda
The issue is that (as shown by Level3 [1]) the congestion isn't really at the
intranet but within regional ISP networks. The regional ISPs (Comcast/TWC etc)
realized that actually not spending money to augment their networks to
accommodate for the traffic can be more profitable than actually providing a
better service to their customers.

When the traffic on their network is congested, they can force companies like
Netflix to actually run a fiber directly to their data center not only they
can have Netflix pay for it (and therefore they don't have to pay anything to
their uplink (such as Level3 and others), they also will receive money from
these companies in order to not throttle their traffic.

And they can do all that only because they have regional monopoly, and users
don't have anywhere else to go.

[1] [http://blog.level3.com/global-connectivity/observations-
inte...](http://blog.level3.com/global-connectivity/observations-internet-
middleman/)

------
rrss1122
If Google Fiber spreads to enough locations, the ISPs could start seeing
effects on their subscribers. Content providers can dismiss the ISPs demand
for money, and Google and content providers can go and say, "get all your
favorite services, fastest on Google Fiber". The ISPs would be forced to put
content on the "fast lane" or risk losing customers.

Unfortunately, Fiber is not available in enough locations yet.

------
hoka
I lived in Chattanooga for a summer and was on the EPB gigabit fiber; having a
peered YouTube CDN was a gigantic win. The speeds were unreal!

------
StuffMaster
I was under the impression that such colocation by Youtube, Netflix, etc. had
been going on for years.

------
zoowar
We new net neutrality codified in regulations so that google et. al. can't
change their minds.

------
dang
We changed the url from [http://gigaom.com/2014/05/21/google-fiber-we-dont-
charge-for...](http://gigaom.com/2014/05/21/google-fiber-we-dont-charge-for-
peering-dont-have-fast-lanes/), which was entirely lifted from this post.

Submitters: Please read what you post and, if it's just an excerpt from a more
original source, post the original source instead. HN does not want blogspam.

------
whoismua
If Google became as large as AT&T and Comcast they'd be worst. I'm sure At&T
and Comcast would support making Google's bread and butter (say Adwords or
tracking data) open source or more open too.

Google makes a lot of their money when people download /upload /view a lot of
files and videos since they slap ads on them. At&t etc must carry them, so
there's a conflict of interests. No one is really on your side, just some of
their interests may align with ours..for now.

------
dragonwriter
...and still prohibit running servers in our Terms of Service, contrary to the
net neutrality principle of allowing users to use any legal software on the
network.

CORRECTED:

...and still restrict running servers _based on commercial use_ rather than
anything related to network impact in our Terms of Service, contrary to the
net neutrality principle of allowing users to use any legal software on the
network.

~~~
mediocregopher
Except that that's not true:

[http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2013/10/google...](http://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2013/10/google-fiber-now-explicitly-permits-home-servers/)

Unless you're trying to run a commercial website from your apartment, but I
don't think that's unreasonable.

~~~
deathanatos
And why shouldn't I be able to run a commercial server? But apparently a
commercial client is okay? You don't mind me making money, you don't mind
traffic, but you care very much which direction TCP connections are initiated,
but only when there might be commercial activity involved? _Why?_

(And "Too much traffic" isn't a valid answer here: if I have a client, I can
use as much bandwidth as I like — respecting the other sections of the ToS,
which are outside the scope of this discussion.)

~~~
brixon
If you get a commercial account/connection then you should be fine.

Even if it is not technical, it might be like garbage services in my area
where commercial operations subsidize residential operations. Residential
connections might be getting a discount that is paid by commercial entities
and you would be cheating their pricing model.

~~~
Consultant32452
I had never considered that before but I presume you're onto something there.
There's likely some commercial interest or government subsidy/tax implications
that come into play as to why business and residential pay different rates for
the same line.

