FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler told members of the U.S. House of Representatives on Monday that Internet "fast lanes" that have net neutrality advocates concerned would be "commercially unreasonable" and therefore forbidden in newly proposed broadband regulations.

That may be too little too late.

Paid peering, an arrangement in which companies set up direct links to bypass traditional Internet traffic, is far more common than generally thought, according to a new report by Frost & Sullivan analyst Dan Rayburn.

Rayburn analyzed the public data and found that nearly every major Internet content producer has direct connections with Internet service providers, allowing their data to sidestep the clogged connections between backbone providers of Internet traffic and ISPs.

"What you can see on the chart is that all of the major content owners have negotiated direct business relationships with multiple ISPs for their [content delivery network]," Rayburn wrote.

Major Internet content providers have each built out their own content delivery networks (CDNs) — servers placed in a variety of locations that allow for data to be served locally instead of from a central location. These CDNs tap directly into the networks of ISPs. Speed is not necessarily improved, but avoidance of the broader Internet means improved service.

Netflix signed such a peering arrangement with Comcast, resulting in improved service for Comcast customers. Companies without the money to invest in a private CDN or pay for an ISP-specific peering agreement are left to fend for themselves on the open Internet.

The current FCC proposal for Internet regulations do not touch on the issue of peering. Netflix has called for peering to be a part of the new rules; Comcast disagrees.

Not only are these deals common, but they have been around for years, Rayburn wrote.

"The search results won’t come right out and say which relationships are settlement-free versus settlement-based, but you can infer from traditional business relationships and public peering policies who’s paying whom," he wrote.

Paid peering agreements between companies are private and essentially unregulated, said Earl Comstock, an attorney at Eckert Seamans who has worked on Internet and telecommunications regulation for more than 20 years.

"You're talking about a market that is not as transparent as a lot of other markets. A lot of companies have arrangements that aren't disclosed," he said. "It's pretty much an unregulated marketplace."

Mashable reached out to companies for a response to the study. A Pandora spokesperson wrote in a statement: "Transit and peering relationships are not a new phenomenon. These kinds of agreements are part of the operation of the Internet for any service at large scale. Pandora, for example, has many transit and peering relationships with bandwidth providers and ISP's."

The lack of regulation has forced companies to abandon any sense of fair play, forcing sides to take necessary action to look out for their own interests.

"Their job is to look out for themselves," Comstock said of the companies that have agreed to paid peering deals. "That's the problem. That's why we have rules in football ... otherwise it just turns into a game of 'kill the other guy.'"