Your experience regarding Netflix streaming (quality)...

[I_Bleed_B&G]

Article on front page of CNN

 

Netflix speeds lag for Verizon users amid dispute

 

Streaming speeds for Verizon FiOS customers dropped by 14% between December and January, according to Netflix. Meanwhile, Netflix speeds on most other Internet service providers held steady during that time period.

The slowdown comes amid a stand-off reported this week by The Wall Street Journalover whether broadband providers like Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500) and AT&T (T,Fortune 500) will charge Netflix to carry its videos.

Netflix (NFLX) relies heavily on third parties -- primarily Cogent Communications(CCOI) -- to deliver content from its servers to Internet service providers. Traditionally, broadband companies and bandwidth providers like Cogent haven't charged one another, on the assumption that traffic that flows back and forth over their networks will even out over time.

But recently, broadband companies have begun demanding payment when they feel they're being overburdened in the exchange.

 

Read the rest here:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/21/technology/verizon-netflix/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[The 12th Commandment]

It's just lovely when companies who we support with our patronage use us as bludgeons to beat on one another.  

[ixcuincle]

Excellent but I have FIOS

[Springfield]

Excellent but I have FIOS

As do I.

[twa]

As do I.

perhaps location matters?

[Springfield]

perhaps location matters?

I would certainly suppose it does.

I also wonder if my device matters as well. My TV is awful, as is my laptop (Windows). My iPhone and my PS4 seem to be slightly better. I was actually streaming through a Chromecast with great success but I had to leave the house yesterday and couldn't really properly test it.

I suppose that it is possible that Panasonic's Viera software is just junk.

Thinking of getting an Apple TV if it wasn't a $100 gamble. I like that Apple TV also supports HBO Go.

[SoulSkin]

Been watching this thread for a while. Just a thought...if you think location matters, you might want to try a VPN software service and see if there is any difference. I thought about posting this since you started posting back in this thread because I had been reading about people around the world getting blocked content using VPN services. Just saw the article in the link below this AM. UnblockUs has a free one week trial. Might be worth it to check it out to see if there's any difference.  

 

FWIW, we are having no issues with NetFlix on Comcast in Richmond.

 

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/articles/21985/20140221/netflix-streaming-problems-fix-issues-vpn-services.htm

 

http://www.unblock-us.com/

[TTViper]

I would certainly suppose it does.

I also wonder if my device matters as well. My TV is awful, as is my laptop (Windows). My iPhone and my PS4 seem to be slightly better. I was actually streaming through a Chromecast with great success but I had to leave the house yesterday and couldn't really properly test it.

I suppose that it is possible that Panasonic's Viera software is just junk.

Thinking of getting an Apple TV if it wasn't a $100 gamble. I like that Apple TV also supports HBO Go.

My slow streaming for Netflix and HBO go is through my Apple TV. Same thing at my parents house.

The Apple TV has been brilliant during my ownership, but it's been no different than other devices the past month or so.

[twa]

I suppose that it is possible that Panasonic's Viera software is just junk.

 

 

 

Have you tried updating the firmware/software?...or checked if a update was installed around the time the issue started?

from searching, panasonic updates have created netflix issues

 

but you said it did the same on the laptop,so maybe not

 

add

 after more looking they might be restricting to different  hardware....a VPN as soulskin suggested seems to help(despite slowing down speeds)

[Springfield]

I have updated my Viera software.

Been watching this thread for a while. Just a thought...if you think location matters, you might want to try a VPN software service and see if there is any difference. I thought about posting this since you started posting back in this thread because I had been reading about people around the world getting blocked content using VPN services. Just saw the article in the link below this AM. UnblockUs has a free one week trial. Might be worth it to check it out to see if there's any difference.

FWIW, we are having no issues with NetFlix on Comcast in Richmond.

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/articles/21985/20140221/netflix-streaming-problems-fix-issues-vpn-services.htm

http://www.unblock-us.com/

Now, I don't know much about VPN's. Would it be possible to use a non-Windows/Mac/Linux machine with a VPN? My main question is how do you set up VPN's? Is it something I download and use as a program on my laptop or does it create a network that I can put the IP address, DNS, etc into my Panasonic TV and use like normal?

[twa]

you can connect any device, but it seems FIOS is a bit different

http://www.pccaredirect.com/TechZone/ComputerTips/tabid/82/EntryId/35/Create-VPN-Endpoint-behind-Verizon-FIOS-Router.aspx

unblockus might be better to try first

[SoulSkin]

I have updated my Viera software.

Now, I don't know much about VPN's. Would it be possible to use a non-Windows/Mac/Linux machine with a VPN? My main question is how do you set up VPN's? Is it something I download and use as a program on my laptop or does it create a network that I can put the IP address, DNS, etc into my Panasonic TV and use like normal?

 

I'm not experienced with using VPN services like UnblockUs or StrongVPN, etc. I've set up VPN connections to workplaces, but I do that based on tunneling over the internet using static IP addresses and DNS records for domains. I couldn't provide you with much guidance on the specific setup of whichever VPN software. I do think you may have some issues on your home network though. Myself, I would use my own router as a DHCP server and just use the Verizon modem for the internet connection. 

 

This link looks like it could answer some of your questions. Looks a little like it's a point and click way with instructions to set up individual devices, depending on what you have. There's also a way to set up just your router. I clicked that and it seems like this service may just be based on alternate DNS servers, which is not really a VPN. I just thought you might give it a try and see if you noticed a difference since it a free trial.

 

http://www.unblock-us.com/how-to-set-up/

[twa]

after scanning unblock-us forums it does not look like it will help

[Springfield]

I am watching House of Cards season 1 on PS 4 with perfect streaming at 5:06 AM on a Sunday. Let's hope this lasts.

[twa]

Netflix has agreed to pay Comcast for peer streaming ....not that that helps you

 

http://gigaom.com/2014/02/23/confirmed-comcast-and-netflix-have-signed-a-peering-agreement/

[TTViper]

[Springfield]

I've seen something like that last picture before. Completely abysmal.

I haven't logged into my Netflix since I had good results the other morning. My wife was watching it yesterday (through the TV, not the PS4) and it looked like crap.

[Popeman38]

So Cogent is sending Verizon, Comcast, & TimeWarner ~30% of their internet traffic. Verizon, Comcast, & TimeWarner are sending Cogent ~1% of their internet traffic (basically, Cogent receives your request to stream a show from NetFlix (very small sessions, packets, and bytes and Cogent responds by trying to send . See a problem? Normally, you don't pay peers because the traffic you send back an forth equals out (google peering relationships). But when one peer is bombarding another with the traffic they send while accepting very little in return, settlements will often be required. Cogent refuses to pay a settlement, instead wanting to be treated as a peering partner. So NetFlix is paying a minimal amount to Cogent to serve their content delivery system. Cogent is then delivery large amounts of data to the other ISPs for free, while taking very little in return. As long as that is Cogent's philosophy, why woud an ISP spend the money to dedicate more peering bandwidth to a bandwidth hog? That bandwidth then becomes free. Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner aren't charging the consumer to cover the backbone costs, but for the "last mile" to the premise.

[Springfield]

So Popeman, what you are saying is that I should just switch to a less popular streaming service like Hulu or Amazon because they don't take up as much bandwidth on the whole.

I'm sorry, but that's a lame way for companies like Verizon and Comcast to do business. If I am going to stream video content, what is the difference between me streaming from Netflix or from Hulu? If I stream 2 gigs of content per night, why should it matter where the content comes from?

[Popeman38]

So Popeman, what you are saying is that I should just switch to a less popular streaming service like Hulu or Amazon because they don't take up as much bandwidth on the whole.

I'm sorry, but that's a lame way for companies like Verizon and Comcast to do business. If I am going to stream video content, what is the difference between me streaming from Netflix or from Hulu? If I stream 2 gigs of content per night, why should it matter where the content comes from?

It shouldn't, for you. But NetFlix is abusing the "settlement free peering" normally offered between providers who exchange data destined for the end user. NetFlix has contracted Cogent to their content provider and are dumping huge amounts of data from Cogent to the large providers.

 

Comcast and Verizon are peers. They don't charge one another to pass data back an forth because it is a mutually beneficial arrangement. In this instance, it is exclusively beneficial to Cogent. They get to pass a boatload of data to the large ISPs for free without receiving much in return. Meanwhile the large ISPs are providing free transport to a massive bandwidth hog. If Cogent would agree to a settlement peering relationship, this all goes away.  It seems a bit ludicrous to allow NetFlix to offload transport costs onto the large ISPs. In effect, NetFlix has arranged free content delivery....

 

EDIT: Cogent has a history of this:

"Free peering, also referred to as settlement-free peering, is a contractual relationship under which two companies exchange Internet traffic without charging each other. In order for free peering to be fair to both parties, the cost and benefit that parties contribute and receive should be roughly the same. The previous arrangement with Cogent was a contractual agreement that, when entered into, met that criteria.

 

"Over the last six months, our operating subsidiary has assessed all of our relationships to determine whether or not settlement-free peering is still appropriate. We determined that the agreement that we had with Cogent was not equitable to Level 3. There are a number of factors that determine whether a peering relationship is mutually beneficial. For example, Cogent was sending far more traffic to the Level 3 network than Level 3 was sending to Cogent's network. It is important to keep in mind that traffic received by Level 3 in a peering relationship must be moved across Level 3's network at considerable expense. Simply put, this means that, without paying, Cogent was using far more of Level 3's network, far more of the time, than the reverse. Following our review, we decided that it was unfair for us to be subsidizing Cogent's business."

 

"In 2006, Sprint and Cogent entered into a commercial trial agreement. Cogent failed to satisfy Sprint's peering criteria and refused to pay Sprint to stay connected to our network. Sprint notified Cogent well in advance that it would disconnect Cogent unless it paid, and Cogent refused." So Sprint pulled the plug. Cogent, on the other hand, wasted no time and sent out a press release offering free 100Mbps hookups to affected Sprint customers and stating that Sprint is "in violation of a contractual obligation to exchange Internet traffic with Cogent on a settlement free peering basis."

 

There was also a dispute with AOL in 2002.

[Popeman38]

Of note, Netflix and Comcast reached a settlement peering contract:

 

Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) and Netflix, Inc. (Nasdaq: NFLX) today announced a mutually beneficial interconnection agreement that will provide Comcast’s U.S. broadband customers with a high-quality Netflix video experience for years to come. Working collaboratively over many months, the companies have established a more direct connection between Netflix and Comcast, similar to other networks, that’s already delivering an even better user experience to consumers, while also allowing for future growth in Netflix traffic. Netflix receives no preferential network treatment under the multi-year agreement, terms of which are not being disclosed.

 

It is only natural they will also sign with Verizon in short order. 

 

EDIT:

Verizon Communications CEO Lowell McAdam told CNBC on Monday that he expects to reach an agreement with Netflix that would require the online video service to pay for bandwidth loads from streaming content.

[Springfield]

I hope that there is an agreement with Verizon reached soon.

I just wonder why Google, Cox an other ISP's didn't degrade Netflix's service if it were really such a burden. Also, if it weren't Netflix then wouldn't it be Amazon or Hulu supposedly abusing these peering procedures?

I understand that Netflix is trying to get its content out as cheaply as possible so they are probably a bit to blame but companies like Verizon and Comcast need to uphold their end of bandwidth agreements. If I am a customer paying for 50 Mbps download speeds then I should recieve that speed (if needed) from any site of my choosing. If I am not, then I view that as breach of contract.

I don't care if Netflix is pinching Verizon with bandwidth. As a provider, Verizon is responsible for providing what they state that they actually do. It's their job to make the shady back room deals that ensure their customers won't recieve poor service.

[Popeman38]

I hope that there is an agreement with Verizon reached soon.

I just wonder why Google, Cox an other ISP's didn't degrade Netflix's service if it were really such a burden. Also, if it weren't Netflix then wouldn't it be Amazon or Hulu supposedly abusing these peering procedures?

I understand that Netflix is trying to get its content out as cheaply as possible so they are probably a bit to blame but companies like Verizon and Comcast need to uphold their end of bandwidth agreements. If I am a customer paying for 50 Mbps download speeds then I should recieve that speed (if needed) from any site of my choosing. If I am not, then I view that as breach of contract.

I don't care if Netflix is pinching Verizon with bandwidth. As a provider, Verizon is responsible for providing what they state that they actually do. It's their job to make the shady back room deals that ensure their customers won't receive poor service.

Replying to the bolded portion. Your download speed isn't guaranteed. Verizon and Comcast made a business decision to limit the peering connections to Cogent based on the one-sided relationship. In doing so, Verizon has not limited your download speed, but what it has done is made it more difficult for a bandwidth hog to "steal" Verizon's capacity. What you are paying for in your monthly bill is the "last mile" from the POP to your house. The different carriers/providers "settle" the exchange of data across peering connection on their backbones. Cogent has refused to pay for the massive data they are sending (the internet has always worked on the "sender pays" principle -- between carriers you pay by swapping an approximately equal volume of traffic). So Verizon and Comcast decided to only peer with Cogent enough to handle the volume of traffic Verizon and Comcast are sending Cogent. This has resulted in a lack of bandwidth coming from Cogent. NetFlix knows this, which is why they are now bellying up to the bar.

 

No matter how you feel, Verizon has no obligation to provide unlimited bandwidth to NetFlix without an impact to the consumer. In fact, NetFlix promised this last year in an effort to force Verizon and Comcast to use OpenConnect. When they refused, NetFlix stated they would piss off the consumer to cause consumer to revolt against Verizon and Comcast. It appears that strategy has failed, as NetFlix agreed to pay Comcast and will soon be paying Verizon to use the massive bandwidth they are using. And you aren't receiving "poor service" because the bandwidth allocated to Cogent is limited. You are receiving a stream of NetFlix proportional to Cogent is receiving from Verizon. Poor service would be not connecting to NetFlix.

 

I still can't believe some people think that NetFlix should be able to use 30% of the bandwidth and not have to pay anything.

[Destino]

I like how this thread evolved from an individual complaint to a national story concerning a standoff betwee massive ISPs and netflix. It's the reverse of the typical situation where a story breaks and then everyone shares their personal exoeriences that verify the news.

It's also yet another instance that shows Cox is fantastic. They didn't sign on with the anti piracy stuff either. Everyone love Cox. (It had to be said)

[Springfield]

Replying to the bolded portion. Your download speed isn't guaranteed. Verizon and Comcast made a business decision to limit the peering connections to Cogent based on the one-sided relationship. In doing so, Verizon has not limited your download speed, but what it has done is made it more difficult for a bandwidth hog to "steal" Verizon's capacity. What you are paying for in your monthly bill is the "last mile" from the POP to your house. The different carriers/providers "settle" the exchange of data across peering connection on their backbones. Cogent has refused to pay for the massive data they are sending (the internet has always worked on the "sender pays" principle -- between carriers you pay by swapping an approximately equal volume of traffic). So Verizon and Comcast decided to only peer with Cogent enough to handle the volume of traffic Verizon and Comcast are sending Cogent. This has resulted in a lack of bandwidth coming from Cogent. NetFlix knows this, which is why they are now bellying up to the bar.

No matter how you feel, Verizon has no obligation to provide unlimited bandwidth to NetFlix without an impact to the consumer. In fact, NetFlix promised this last year in an effort to force Verizon and Comcast to use OpenConnect. When they refused, NetFlix stated they would piss off the consumer to cause consumer to revolt against Verizon and Comcast. It appears that strategy has failed, as NetFlix agreed to pay Comcast and will soon be paying Verizon to use the massive bandwidth they are using. And you aren't receiving "poor service" because the bandwidth allocated to Cogent is limited. You are receiving a stream of NetFlix proportional to Cogent is receiving from Verizon. Poor service would be not connecting to NetFlix.

I still can't believe some people think that NetFlix should be able to use 30% of the bandwidth and not have to pay anything.

I follow what you are saying and although I've done some research about it, it certainly seems like you know your stuff better than I do.

I'm sure that there are good reasons, but I don't see why Netflix should have to pay anything. Yes, they are hogging 30% of the bandwidth. Or really, they account for 30% of the traffic. I highly doubt that 30% of the total bandwidth belongs to Netflix. That would mean that 100% of the bandwidth is used 100% of the time (indicating piss poor infrastructure). Just semantics anyhow...

If another site garnered the same popularity as Netflix then would they be asked to pay for the bandwidth that they are hogging?

To me, it's like long distance for a telephone company. You pay long distance and you can call whoever you want. The person who your calling doesn't have to pony up, even if lots of other people are calling this same person.

I'm sure it's not the same, not even close. It's just the way I think it should be.