[kictanet] Should streaming services pay ISPs for increased traffic?

[Mwendwa Kivuva]

On Sat, 9 Oct 2021 at 09:48, Ali Hussein <ali at hussein.me.ke> wrote:
>
> @Mwendwa Kivuva and all
>
> I think ISPs are not being realistic. On one hand they squeeze us on 'fair usage' on the other hand they are squeezing content providers for 'over using' their pipes. If content creation is so lucrative why not get into it?
>
> Let me remind everyone the principles of Net Neutrality -
>
> Net neutrality is the concept that states that organizations, such as Internet service providers, should treat all data on the internet equally. It promotes a free and open internet, where users can access content without restriction, provided the content does not violate any laws.
>
> If we allow this loop hole you suggest where does it end? Let's take a look at our local scenario in Kenya.


I am actually not suggesting anything. I am bringing the different
scenarios that ISPs and content providers face in their business
models. Kathy and Josiah have talked about some of the strategies
employed ... CDN and mirroring being the most popular.

By the way, big content providers have know of this problem (Orange
Telecom had asked content providers to pay network usage fees
sometimes back), and they have taken measures to adress it. One way is
by paying ISPs incentives, and having local caches. So the problem is
certainly there and both players understand it.

Another strategy ISPs elsewhere have used is to have diferent pricing
packages depending on the origin of the content. So for example, an
ISP has a cheaper internet package for local content with a cap for
international bandwidth, and a more expensive internet package for
international bandwidth. Gaming which is big business in elsewhere
uses such a strategy. This of course brings another problem of
balkanizing the internet.



______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
https://www.linkedin.com/in/mwendwa-kivuva