[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
- Subject: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
- From: corbe at corbe.net (Daniel Corbe)
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 10:20:15 -0400
- In-reply-to: <CAD6AjGSFJnnWJZ_vKzP37fN4fCiWb=10sx-goS1=aQFsexeUWw@mail.gmail.com> (Ca By's message of "Tue, 22 Jul 2014 07:12:54 -0700")
- References: <CAKJkDEsmWEPv001v_t-mQSV-6TstkJdvvZ1TfBzjiZvOVkHUPQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6AjGSYZo_j+XpYDBBkNmq+X1=dLiL5z9EvMFQdSWHXqkgg8w@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAD6AjGSFJnnWJZ_vKzP37fN4fCiWb=10sx-goS1=aQFsexeUWw@mail.gmail.com>
Ca By <cb.list6 at gmail.com> writes:
> On Jul 22, 2014 7:04 AM, "Jared Mauch" <jared at puck.nether.net> wrote:
>>
>> Verizon wireless has other transits apart from 701.
>>
>
> That's interesting that they have a different capacity management strategy
> for the competitive wireless market than they have for their captive
> landline customers.
>
> Seems market forces are making wireless a functional network without the
> peering brinksmanship while market failings are allowing landline to take
> advantage of a captive install base
>
Or it could be that they're just functionally two different business
units. From what my contacts at Verizon Wireless tell me, Verizon
Business move at a glacial pace, so they buy circuits from whomever they
can.