This is a copy of something I posted on a Forum Recently, it’s probably full of typos/spelling errors.etc  but I felt I needed to get my view accross.

The forum is for a UK ISP and thus my example assumes that you are in the UK.

“Even now Net Neutrality doesn’t exist it’s an idealism and I just don’t see how it can work.

Most ISP’s will have private Interconnects with large content providers/CDN’s that use a lot of bandwidth.

Why would they pay a transit provider a lot of money to shift all that data when both parties can agree to connect directly to each other and save a fortune on both sides.

It generally costs less to reach a server in Europe via one of the major peering exchanges than to reach something on the other side of the world via a transit provider who is charging you per Mbit/s of traffic you push through their network.

The increasing amount of data demand is a real problem for ISP’s, their whole business model revolves around the fact that people tend to only send bursts of traffic.

At the moment it averages out that most people end up using a few hundred kbps (if that) so they can get away with selling 20Mbit+ broadband for less than £20/mo as long as there’s enough head room for people to burst when they do actually want to download something everything is ok.

The problem is with this new generation content that average data rate is going up and more people want to burst at the higher speeds for a longer duration, which means the ISP has to buy more bandwidth, install larger interconnects and buy more expensive equipment that can handle these higher data rates.

So either the ISP’s treat everything equally and the END USER (I.e YOU) pay a significantly lot more for their connectivity or they find some way of managing the traffic on their network/getting someone else to pay.


Of course not, but life is anything but fair.”