[115889] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Point to Point Ethernet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Allen Simpson)
Sat Jul 11 04:40:01 2009
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:39:44 -0400
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <4A579AA8.4070102@zcorum.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Brian Raaen wrote:
> Hate to say it, but also some of the cost on the circuits can be blamed
> on uncle Sam. ATM circuits are currently tariffed that same way are
> voice circuits. These tariffs are not charged to Ethernet because it is
> a 'data circuit'. At least that was the case a little while back.
>
Are you sure it's "Uncle Sam"? My experience is that voice tariffs are
always cheaper than data; telco's mantra is still "I Smell Dollars Now".
The telcos were mightily pissed when we redesigned protocols to pass over
voice circuits instead of requiring data circuits.
Usually, non-tariffed lines seem to be much more expensive, as the account
manager says "Oh, that special order will have to be approved by HQ".
