Verizon seeks payment for carrying Netflix traffic, WSJ reports

[silicon_toad2000]

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/verizon-seeks-payment-for-carrying-netflix-traffic-wsj-reports/

Verizon has been demanding direct payments from Netflix in exchange for carrying any video traffic beyond some numerical limit. That's probably not precisely what's happening, however, because the report says this particular dispute has been simmering for months—meaning it started before the court decision last month that overturned the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules. Prior to that court decision, it would not have been legal for Verizon to refuse to carry Netflix traffic when its payment demands weren't met.

However, there are other ways Verizon can play hardball and affect Netflix performance. Netflix has been pushing ISPs to host its caching equipment within their data centers, and to peer directly with the video provider—that is, exchange traffic without a third-party intermediary.

"Netflix wants broadband companies to hook up to its new video-distribution network without paying them fees for carrying its traffic," the Journal noted. "But the biggest US providers—Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and AT&T Inc. —have resisted, insisting on compensation."

[White Stripes]

um... i may be wrong here but wouldnt helping to host save the isps money by cutting down on the traffic that flows over the rather expensive interconnect points?

[GhostShip]

Its all about middle man fees, the ISP companies make money from their customers and simply want a second bite at those same customers wallets via the third party who could in theory be anyone, the way to deal with this sort of absurd demand is simply to advise folks to select more sensible ISP companies who are happy with one payment instead of say 10,000 , after all whos next on their extortion list ?