IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cwl/cwldpp/2245.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Public Option for the Core

Author

Listed:
  • Yotam Harchol

    (EPFL)

  • Dirk Bergemann

    (Cowles Foundation, Yale University)

  • Nick Feamster

    (University of Chicago)

  • Eric Friedman

    (ICSI and UC Berkeley)

  • Arvind Krishnamurthy

    (University of Washington)

  • Aurojit Panda

    (New York University)

  • Sylvia Ratnasamy

    (UC Berkeley)

  • Michael Schapira

    (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

  • Scott Shenker

    (UC Berkeley)

Abstract

This paper is focused not on the Internet architecture – as defined by layering, the narrow waist of IP, and other core design principles – but on the Internet infrastructure, as embodied in the technologies and organizations that provide Internet service. In this paper we discuss both the challenges and the opportunities that make this an auspicious time to revisit how we might best structure the Internet's infrastructure. Currently, the tasks of transit-between-domains and last-mile-delivery are jointly handled by a set of ISPs who interconnect through BGP. In this paper we propose cleanly separating these two tasks. For transit, we propose the creation of a "public option" for the Internet's core backbone. This public option core, which complements rather than replaces the backbones used by large-scale ISPs, would (i) run an open market for backbone bandwidth so it could leverage links offered by third-parties, and (ii) structure its terms-of-service to enforce network neutrality so as to encourage competition and reduce the advantage of large incumbents.

Suggested Citation

  • Yotam Harchol & Dirk Bergemann & Nick Feamster & Eric Friedman & Arvind Krishnamurthy & Aurojit Panda & Sylvia Ratnasamy & Michael Schapira & Scott Shenker, 2020. "A Public Option for the Core," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2245, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  • Handle: RePEc:cwl:cwldpp:2245
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cowles.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/pub/d22/d2245.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Peyman FARATIN & David CLARK & Steven BAUER & William LEHR & Patrick GILMORE & Arthur BERGER, 2008. "The Growing Complexity of Internet Interconnection," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(72), pages 51-72, 4th quart.
    3. Kate Ho & Robin S. Lee, 2017. "Insurer Competition in Health Care Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 379-417, March.
    4. Allan Collard-Wexler & Gautam Gowrisankaran & Robin S. Lee, 2019. ""Nash-in-Nash" Bargaining: A Microfoundation for Applied Work," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 163-195.
    5. Gregory S. Crawford & Robin S. Lee & Michael D. Whinston & Ali Yurukoglu, 2018. "The Welfare Effects of Vertical Integration in Multichannel Television Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(3), pages 891-954, May.
    6. Krämer, Jan & Wiewiorra, Lukas & Weinhardt, Christof, 2013. "Net neutrality: A progress report," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 794-813.
    7. Marc Bourreau & Frago Kourandi & Tommaso Valletti, 2015. "Net Neutrality with Competing Internet Platforms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 30-73, March.
    8. Economides, Nicholas & Tåg, Joacim, 2012. "Network neutrality on the Internet: A two-sided market analysis," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 91-104.
    9. Ali Hortaçsu & Jakub Kastl & Allen Zhang, 2018. "Bid Shading and Bidder Surplus in the US Treasury Auction System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(1), pages 147-169, January.
    10. van Schewick, Barbara, 2012. "Internet Architecture and Innovation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026251804x, April.
    11. Nicholas Economides & Benjamin E. Hermalin, 2012. "The economics of network neutrality," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(4), pages 602-629, December.
    12. Joseph J. Spengler, 1950. "Vertical Integration and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(4), pages 347-347.
    13. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    14. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    15. Shane Greenstein & Martin Peitz & Tommaso Valletti, 2016. "Net Neutrality: A Fast Lane to Understanding the Trade-Offs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 127-150, Spring.
    16. Peter Cramton, 2017. "Electricity market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 589-612.
    17. Robin S. Lee & Tim Wu, 2009. "Subsidizing Creativity through Network Design: Zero-Pricing and Net Neutrality," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 61-76, Summer.
    18. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    19. repec:reg:rpubli:65 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    21. Hahn Robert W. & Wallsten Scott, 2006. "The Economics of Net Neutrality," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 3(6), pages 1-7, June.
    22. Gary S. Becker & Dennis W. Carlton & Hal S. Sider, 2010. "Net Neutrality And Consumer Welfare," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 497-519.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Reggiani, Carlo & Valletti, Tommaso, 2016. "Net neutrality and innovation at the core and at the edge," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 16-27.
    2. D'Annunzio, Anna & Russo, Antonio, 2015. "Net Neutrality and internet fragmentation: The role of online advertising," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 30-47.
    3. Alexei A. Gaivoronski & Per Jonny Nesse & Olai Bendik Erdal, 2017. "Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 43-79, May.
    4. Briglauer, Wolfgang & Stocker, Volker & Stockhammer, Paul, 2019. "Ist Netzneutralität tatsächlich gut? Eine Neubewertung vor dem Hintergrund der Regulierung in den USA und in der EU sowie aktueller Forschungsergebnisse," Policy Notes 38, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Matthew Backus & Thomas Blakee & Brad Larsen & Steven Tadelis, 2020. "Sequential Bargaining in the Field: Evidence from Millions of Online Bargaining Interactions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1319-1361.
    6. Broos, Sébastien & Gautier, Axel, 2017. "The exclusion of competing one-way essential complements: Implications for net neutrality," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 358-392.
    7. Marc Bourreau & Romain Lestage, 2019. "Net neutrality and asymmetric platform competition," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 140-171, April.
    8. Lorenzon, Emmanuel, 2022. "Zero-rating, content quality, and network capacity," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    9. Gautier, Axel & Somogyi, Robert, 2020. "Prioritization vs zero-rating: Discrimination on the internet," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    10. Vogelsang Ingo, 2013. "The Endgame of Telecommunications Policy? A Survey," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 64(3), pages 193-270, December.
    11. Calzada, Joan & Tselekounis, Markos, 2018. "Net Neutrality in a hyperlinked Internet economy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 190-221.
    12. Carlton, Dennis W., 2020. "Transaction costs and competition policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Bauer, Johannes M. & Knieps, Günter, 2018. "Complementary innovation and network neutrality," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 172-183.
    14. Emmanuel LORENZON, 2020. "Zero Rating, Content Quality and Network Capacity," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2020-21, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    15. Joshua Gans, 2015. "Weak versus strong net neutrality," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 183-200, April.
    16. Anna D'Annunzio & Antonio Russo, 2013. "Network Neutrality, Access to Content and Online Advertising," DIAG Technical Reports 2013-09, Department of Computer, Control and Management Engineering, Universita' degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza".
    17. Ezzat Elokda & Saverio Bolognani & Andrea Censi & Florian Dorfler & Emilio Frazzoli, 2022. "A self-contained karma economy for the dynamic allocation of common resources," Papers 2207.00495, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    18. Briglauer, Wolfgang & Cambini, Carlo & Gugler, Klaus & Stocker, Volker, 2021. "Net Neutrality and High Speed Broadband Networks: Evidence from OECD Countries," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238012, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    19. Michelle Connolly & Clement Lee & Renhao Tan, 2017. "The Digital Divide and Other Economic Considerations for Network Neutrality," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 50(4), pages 537-554, June.
    20. Simon Loertscher & Leslie M. Marx, 2022. "Incomplete Information Bargaining with Applications to Mergers, Investment, and Vertical Integration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(2), pages 616-649, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Internet transit; Network neutrality; Internet infrastructure;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cwl:cwldpp:2245. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Brittany Ladd (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cowleus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.