"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:49efa6a7$1@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:

> > I'm pretty sure providing NNTP a sever service, especially with the
volume
> > of binary postings, isn't all that cheap either.

> But that's not what the bill is about. It's about the ISP disallowing you

No, it's about *allowing* the ISPs to disallow you...

> from using someone else's NNTP server unless you pay extra. It's about the
> ISP saying "you have to pay more to get to news.povray.org than to
> www.povray.org."  It has nothing to do with the cost of providing the bits
> and everything to do with the profit to be made from popular content.

Still cuts down on bandwidth, since popular content = high bandwidth usage.
Why should strict www users subsidize p2p traffic?

There may be any number of reasons for ISPs to fine tune their services, or
not to. My point is, they should be *able* to do that, if they chose to do
so. Just like the customer can select *any* ISP (or none, as the case may
be).

Post a reply to this message