Google to Name and Shame ISPs With YouTube Buffering Issues Back in January you might recall that Google started heavily promoting a video quality report for YouTube that tracked YouTube streaming performance by ISP. The effort appears to be an attempt to educate users on the numerous steps between YouTube servers and your PC, and, like Netflix's ISP streaming rankings, highlight how some ISPs perform worse than others.

Ultimately, Google says they'll tag ISPs with good YouTube streaming performance as "HD verified." The actual reporting seems minimal to non-existent so far: clicking on " your results " still does nothing for U.S. users as the reports only work in Canada at the moment. The effort is pretty clearly, like Netflix's effort, an attempt to "name and shame" certain ISPs that provide sub-standard streaming performance, either incidentally or intentionally as part of the new ISP effort to kill settlement-free peering and create a new revenue stream. Interestingly, Google seems to sell Ars Technica on the idea that this naming and shaming really helps ISPs by convincing customers to buy faster and more expensive broadband service for better streaming speeds: quote: “It has effectively drawn attention to ISPs that are able to, at least on one of their products, offer an HD experience,” Keith McCallion, technical program manager of peering and content delivery for Google, said in a presentation at the Content Delivery Summit in New York. “What we’re able to do here is work with those ISPs to differentiate between their fiber product and their legacy ADSL product. The idea is this will upsell users to packages where they can actually sustain HD rates of video." Except as many of our users on ultra-fast connections (like FiOS) will attest, speed doesn't necessarily mean you'll avoid the YouTube buffering monster. That's because many YouTube slowdowns are courtesy of somebody along the chain either not upgrading necessary infrastructure -- or as in the case of AT&T, Comcast and Verizon vs. Netflix -- Except as many of our users on ultra-fast connections (like FiOS) will attest, speed doesn't necessarily mean you'll avoid the YouTube buffering monster. That's because many YouTube slowdowns are courtesy of somebody along the chain either not upgrading necessary infrastructure -- or as in the case of AT&T, Comcast and Verizon vs. Netflix -- intentionally letting peering points congest to make an extra buck . Google says their YouTube reports should launch in other countries and the United States soon, and you can be pretty sure that AT&T, Comcast and Verizon won't find the results particularly helpful.







News Jump California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news FCC Cited False Broadband Data Despite Warnings; ZTE, Huawei Replacement Cost Is $1.87B, But Only $1B Allocated; + more Cogeco Rejects Altice USA's Atlantic Broadband Bid; AT&T Is Astroturfing The FCC In Support Of Trump Attack; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 57 comments



battleop

join:2005-09-28

00000 4 recommendations battleop Member This is NOT how settlement free peering works. Settlement free peering is almost always a 1:1. I don't know why companies EXPECT to get a free ride on a 100:1 ratio. In the end Netflix and Youtube are trying to shame their ways into free bandwidth with sleazy tactics. They have to pay someone for their connection to the internet which they have been paying Level3 and Cogent. Now they are trying to directly peer with large ISPs while cutting Level3 and Cogent out of the picture. They are attempting to shame ISPs into just rolling over and giving them settlement free peering which would greatly reduce their bandwidth costs.

Anoo

@68.62.236.x 3 recommendations Anoo Anon Shouldn't the ISP be the one paying, not the middle tier 1 providers? I don't get all the people who defend ISP's saying Netflix and Google etc. should be paying.



Settlement peering would never truly work as a 1:1 and that was just an excuse used to get it going.



Why should Comcast get to charge Netflix to provide data that Comcast PAYING subscribers are REQUESTING?



Comcast is the one who does NOT have global access, this is why tier 1 providers exists. They will always be heavy one way because an ISP that is primarily residential has NOTHING to offer the rest of the world.



Yes Comcast offers peering and business services etc, but how many major companies get Comcast and want to use them to serve content globally? Umm, none, because Comcast can't provide that service.



Thus you get a company like Level 3. They are a GLOBAL company. No body is getting a free ride.



Netflix paid Level 3 for internet, just like you pay Comcast for internet. All Comcast and other ISP's are trying to do is FORCE large companies to peer directly with them.



The problem with that? Everyone doing it means Netflix, google etc, will need to have 10 different ISP to server traffic and pay all 10. The whole point of tier 1 providers are that they provide connection to everyone, that's why they exist and you pay them.



Regardless, it doesn't matter. Google and Netflix are not putting the load/traffic on Comcast or Verizon or anyone, the customers of those ISP's are. So to me. Comcast should have to pay Level 3 and every other peer they peer with because Comcast provides no value to them, they in fact provide the value to the ISP by allowing the ISP customer access to the Internet. Comcast connection is an Intranet, it's not Internet unless I can get to the world.



Regardless, companies like Comcast are putting Caps in areas and claim it's for bandwidth management, but don't count they own IPTV or VoIP service. Why? They say because it's on net. Well how come my traffic from my house to say a business I have with Comcast business service counts against my residential cap? It's all on net still?



It all comes down to greed. Nothing is free, everyone is paying for bandwidth. The ISP's gain the most by peering because without it, they are not an ISP, they are just a large intranet.



These games screw no one but me and you. We already pay steady raising overpriced fee's for internet. This is nothing but a way to increase profit for shareholders. How about this is just the cost of doing business. But because companies like Comcast, Verizon, ATT etc. are soo greedy they blackmail (oops I mean lobby) to make sure laws pass to make it expensive or almost impossible, or even in some cases ILLEGAL for anyone else to be an ISP.



I don't have any options for internet because Comcast stuffed money into some peoples pockets to buy what they want.



I hope the merger fails, regardless if it doesn't impact my area, I know it will because as they grow they get more greedy and prices keep going up. It should be the larger the company and more customers the more successful it should be and thus the customers and everyone rewarded together.



**sorry for long msg and rant lol** I just don't get people saying everyone should be forced to pay multiple providers. how would you like it if you had a business and you can't get to google because google saying you must buy google internet, and yahoo, and netflix or any other company you want to use. sorry you have ATT or Comcast, you have to buy ours if you want access. That's what's happening. It's stupid and childish.