Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers

  • Published:
NETNOMICS: Economic Research and Electronic Networking Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We consider the relationship of Internet service providers (ISP) and content service providers (CP) in the Internet ecosystem. Currently, the position of ISPs is challenged by the emergence of powerful content service providers, especially with the spreading of bandwidth-demanding video services. The further investment in the network capacity may be hindered by prevailing business models that largely exclude the ISPs from sharing in the major cash flows resulting from content provision. We develop modeling tools for evaluation of business models of ISPs and present results of an analysis of two models with the potential for the generation of additional cash flows for ISP: paid content peering and service differentiation. Firstly, we show that under certain conditions on the cost structure and the level of demand elasticity and uncertainty, it can be profitable for a powerful content provider to resort to paid content peering, thus transferring to the ISP a part of his content provision revenue. The resulting business model may provide substantial benefits to all major participants in this ecosystem: network providers, content and service providers and end users. After this we consider competition in the Internet provision sector and show that - also in this case - the paid content peering can help ISPs to expand the network capacity and at the same time increase profits of content providers. The end users benefit from the lower prices for content services. Finally, we consider the situation when an ISP differentiates the service offer by engaging in content provision, thus entering in direct competition with content providers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Altman, E., Legout, A., & Xu, Y. (2011). Network non-neutrality debate an economic analysis. In NETWORKING 2011 (pp. 68–81). Springer.

  2. Badasyan, N., & Chakrabarti, S. (2008). A simple game-theoretic analysis of peering and transit contracting among internet service providers. Telecommunications Policy, 32, 4–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bourreau, M., Kourandi, F., & Valletti, T. (2015). Net neutrality with competing Internet platforms. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 63(1), 30–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bureau, U. C. (2011). Current population survey 2011 annual social and economic supplement.

  5. Cheng, H. K., Bandyopadhyay, S., & Guo, H. (2011). The debate on net neutrality: a policy perspective. Information Systems Research, 22(1), 60–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Choi, J. P., & Kim, B.-C. (2010). Net neutrality and investment incentives. The RAND Journal of Economics, 41(3), 446–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Clark, D. (2010). Characterizing cyberspace: past, present and future. MIT CSAIL Version, 1, 2016–2028.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Courcoubetis, C., Gyarmati, L., Laoutaris, N., Rodriguez, P., & Sdrolias, K. (2016). Negotiating premium peering prices a quantitative model with applications. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT), 16(2), 14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Courcoubetis, C., Sdrolias, K., & Weber, R. (2016). Paid peering: pricing and adoption incentives. Journal of Communications and Networks, 18(6), 975–988.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cullen International (2017). Bits seminar on Internet & IP peering, February 2, 2017 http://www.cullen-international.com/events/training--conferences/conferences/2017/bits-seminar-on-internet--ip-peering/ http://www.cullen-international.com/events/training--conferences/conferences/2017/bits-seminar-on-internet--ip-peering/.

  11. D’Annunzio, A., & Reverberi, P. (2016). Co-investment in ultra-fast broadband access networks: Is there a role for content providers? Telecommunications Policy, 40 (4), 353–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. den Poel, D.V., & Lariviere, B. (2004). Customer attrition analysis for financial services using proportional hazard models. European Journal of Operational Research 157, 1, 196–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dhamdhere, A., Cherukuru, H., Dovrolis, C., & Claffy, K. (2012). Measuring the evolution of internet peering agreements. In International conference on research in networking (pp. 136–148). Springer.

  14. Dhamdhere, A., Dovrolis, C., & Francois, P. (2010). A value-based framework for internet peering agreements. In 2010 22nd International Teletraffic Congress (ITC) (pp. 1–8). IEEE.

  15. Doukidis, G. I., Pramatari, K., & Lekakos, G. (2008). The management of electronic services. European Journal of Operational Research 187, 3, 1296–1309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Economides, N., & Hermalin, B. E. (2012). The economics of network neutrality. The RAND Journal of Economics, 43(4), 602–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Economides, N., & Tåg, J. (2012). Network neutrality on the Internet: A two-sided market analysis. Information Economics and Policy, 24(2), 91–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Evans, D. S., & Schmalensee, R. (2016). Matchmakers the new economics of multisided platforms. Harvard Business Review Press.

  19. Faratin, P., Clark, D. D., Bauer, S., Lehr, W., Gilmore, P. W., & Berger, A. (2008). The growing complexity of internet interconnection. Communications & Strategies, 72, 51–71.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Feamster, N.G. (2005). Proactive techniques for correct and predictable internet routing. Phd thesis Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

  21. Gaivoronski, A. A., Nesse, P.-J., ØSterbo, O.-N., & lønsethagen, H. (2016). Risk-balanced dimensioning and pricing of end-to-end differentiated services. European Journal of Operational Research, 254, 644–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Goel, R. K., Hsieh, E. T., Nelson, M. A., & Ram, R. (2006). Demand elasticities for internet services. Applied Economics, 975–980.

  23. Hallingby, H.K., Hartviksen, G., Elaluf-Calderwood, S., & Sørensen, C. (2015). Convergence in action: A case study of the norwegian Internet. Telematics and Informatics. in press.

  24. Houidi, Z. B., & Pouyllau, H. (2012). The price of tussles: bankrupt in cyberspace? ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 40(2), 34–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Iimi, A. (2005). Estimating demand for cellular phone services in Japan. Telecommunications Policy, 29, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jahn, E., & Prüfer, J. (2008). Interconnection and competition among asymmetric networks in the internet backbone market. Information Economics and Policy, 20 (3), 243–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Krämer, J., & Wiewiorra, L. (2012). Network neutrality and congestion sensitive content providers: Implications for content variety, broadband investment, and regulation. Information Systems Research, 23(4), 1303–1321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Krämer, J., Wiewiorra, L., & Weinhardt, C. (2013). Net neutrality: a progress report. Telecommunications Policy, 37, 794–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Krogfoss, B., Sofman, L., & Weldon, M. (2012). Internet architecture evolution and the complex economies of content peering. Bell Labs Technical Journal, 17(1), 163–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Labovitz, C., Iekel-Johnson, S., McPherson, D., Oberheide, J., & Jahanian, F. (2010). Internet inter-domain traffic, SIGCOMM’10 (New Delhi India) (pp. 75–86).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lanning, S. G., Mitra, D., Wang, Q., & Wright, M. H. (2000). Optimal planning for optical transport networks. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A, 358(1773), 2183–2196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Liebenau, J., Elaluf-Calderwood, S., & Karrberg, P. (2012). Strategic challenges for the European telecom sector: the consequences of imbalances in Internet traffic. Journal of Information Policy, 2, 248–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lippert, S., & Spagnolo, G. (2008). Internet peering as a network of relations. Telecommunications Policy, 32(1), 33–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ma, R. T., Wang, J., & Chiu, D.M. (2017). Paid prioritization and its impact on net neutrality. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 35 (2), 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Maille, P., & Tuffin, B. (2014). Telecommunication network economics: from theory to applications. Cambridge University Press.

  36. Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., & Green, J. R. (1995). Microeconomic theory. New York: Oxford university press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mawad, M., & Rahn, C. (2014). Orange agrees to distribute Netflix video service in France. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-10-02/orange-agrees-to-distribute-netflix-video-service-in-france https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-10-02/orange-agrees-to-distribute-netflix-video-service-in-france.

  38. Mitra, D., Ramakrishnan, K. G., & Wang, Q. (2001). Combined economic modeling and traffic engineering: Joint optimization of pricing and routing in multi-service networks. In Proceedings of 17th International Teletraffic Congress, Salvador, Brasil, Amsterdam. Elsevier.

  39. Musacchio, J., Schwartz, G., & Walrand, J. (2009). A two-sided market analysis of provider investment incentives with an application to the net-neutrality issue. Review of Network Economics, 8(1), 22–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Nakataa, Y., & Shin’ichi Arakawaa, M. M. (2015). Analyzing the evolution and the future of the internet topology focusing on flow hierarchy. Submitted to Journal of Computer Networks and Communications, 2015, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Nielsen (2012). May 2012 Top U.S Web brands and news websites http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2012/may-2012-top-u-s-web-brands-and-news-websites.html.

  42. Nilsen, J.E. (2012). Netflix burde gi Telenor-rabatt. Teknisk Ukeblad. https://www.tek.no/artikler/netflix-burde-gi-telenor-rabatt/115401.

  43. Njoroge, P., Ozdaglar, A., Stier-Moses, N. E., & Weintraub, G. Y. (2013). Investment in two-sided markets and the net neutrality debate. Review of Network Economics, 12(4), 355–402.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Norton, W. B. (2011). The Internet peering playbook: connecting to the core of the Internet. DrPeering Press.

  45. O’Brien, K.J. (2013). Limiting data use in Germany. The new york times.

  46. Prüfer, J., & Jahn, E. (2007). Dark clouds over the internet? Telecommunications Policy, 31(3), 144–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Reardon, M. (2014). Comcast vs. Netflix: Is this really about Net neutrality? C ∣net. https://www.cnet.com/news/comcast-vs-netflix-is-this-really-about-net-neutrality/.

  48. Reggiani, C., & Valletti, T. (2016). Net neutrality and innovation at the core and at the edge. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 45, 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Shrimali, G., & Kumar, S. (2006). Paid peering among internet service providers. In Proceeding from the 2006 workshop on game theory for communications and networks (p. 11). ACM.

  50. Stackelberg, H. V. (1952). The theory of market economy. London: Oxford university press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Taylor, P., & Thomas, D. (2012). Content providers and operators at peace. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/8a70f350-69dd-11e1-a26e-00144feabdc0.

  52. Telenor Group. Telenor Group and Netflix sign strategic partnership targeting global customer footprint. https://www.telenor.com/media/articles/2017/telenor-group-and-netflix-sign-strategic-partnership-targeting-global-customer-footprint/.

  53. Verbeke, W., Dejaeger, K., Martens, D., Hur, J., & Baesens, B. (2012). New insights into churn prediction in the telecommunication sector: A profit driven data mining approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 218(1), 211–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Wang, J. M., Dai, X., & Bensaou, B. (2014). Content peering in content centric networks. In 2014 IEEE 39th Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN) (pp. 10–18). IEEE.

  55. Weiss, M. B., & Shin, S. J. (2004). Internet interconnection economic model and its analysis: Peering and settlement. Netnomics, 6(1), 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Wyatt, E., & Cohen, N. (2014). Comcast and Netflix reach deal on service. The New York Times.

  57. Zarchy, D., Dhamdhere, A., Dovrolis, C., & Schapira, M. (2016). Nash-peering: A new techno-economic framework for internet interconnections. arXiv:1610.01314.

  58. Zhou, W., Pu, Y., Dai, H., & Jin, Q. (2017). Cooperative interconnection settlement among isps through nap. European Journal of Operational Research, 256 (3), 991–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    Alexei A. Gaivoronski & Per Jonny Nesse

  2. Telenor Group, Telenor Research, Bærum, Norway

    Per Jonny Nesse & Olai Bendik Erdal

Authors
  1. Alexei A. Gaivoronski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Per Jonny Nesse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Olai Bendik Erdal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexei A. Gaivoronski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gaivoronski, A.A., Nesse, P.J. & Erdal, O.B. Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers. Netnomics 18, 43–79 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11066-017-9114-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11066-017-9114-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation