Comment Re:Dark Fibre (Score 1) 226
No, they've paid for it - but now they outright own the backbone bandwidth rather than renting it (cf other high bandwidth users).
Peering ASNs are going to have a lot more difficulty forcing Google into a transit agreement than say Facebook simply because the in/out transfer ratio is closer to zero for Google than Facebook due to Googles backbone capacity.
Obviously, they've "paid for what they've paid for", but by having already spent the money (and doing it when fibre was cheap), they've now got a competitive advantage over those who were unprepared and now have to start paying. It means that Googles books stay the same whereas other high bandwidth users see a hike in variable operating costs.
Peering ASNs are going to have a lot more difficulty forcing Google into a transit agreement than say Facebook simply because the in/out transfer ratio is closer to zero for Google than Facebook due to Googles backbone capacity.
Obviously, they've "paid for what they've paid for", but by having already spent the money (and doing it when fibre was cheap), they've now got a competitive advantage over those who were unprepared and now have to start paying. It means that Googles books stay the same whereas other high bandwidth users see a hike in variable operating costs.
