Akamai wants to be "closer and closer" to the end user inside someone else's network for "free," so whoever gives them the "FREE RIDE," i.e., Comcast facilities that they are in, makes them net neutrality AGNOSTIC. They could care less!
Whatever traffic for whichever "owner" of a given network who uses their services will make them happy!
As they said, they want to get into the MINDS of the END USER-closer and closer- for executing on the "advertising intelligence" solutions, even though they say it is "generic" by IP address, and not specific by "NAME," but an IP address is a NAME you dummies. You want to own the end users' MINDS!!!!!!!!!
The problem for them, however, is most of the advertisers that want those EYE BALLS and corresponding purchasing habits, interests, and decisions, are coming from the LONG HAUL SIDE.
The LONG HAUL must be paid for! The speaker(s) misrepresented an INTERCONNECTION dispute for a PEERING dispute, as well. LVLT would "BUILD" any extensions "DEEPER INTO COMCAST" in order to alleviate their claim. By persisting along this PATH, they've just made "PEERING" more expensive for everyone, which is good for a network owner and long haul provider, like Level 3. IMO