[132625] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Warren)
Mon Nov 29 20:21:49 2010
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 20:24:40 -0500
From: William Warren <hescominsoon@emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com>
To: 'NANOG list' <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <02d401cb901f$71682e30$54388a90$@net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 11/29/2010 6:45 PM, Aaron Wendel wrote:
>
>
>
> I think what this really boils down to is an effect of shoddy marketing.
> Access providers want to offer "unlimited" everything and don't want to have
> to go back to their customer base and say, "oh, sorry, we didn't really mean
> unlimited. We didn't think you'd really use that much." So they are looking
> for ways of making up for the increased costs without having to look like
> idiots to their customers.
Unlimited access is already NOT unlimited access. A transfer cap isn't
unlimited..while Comcast has a generous cap..it's still a transfer cap.
>
>
> My problem is, what happens if this becomes the new model? What if Comcast
> comes to me and says, "Oh, we've noticed X Mbits originating from your
> network coming through ours. Here's the bill of $X per bit." What happens
> when I counter with, "Ok, and I see X bits originating from your network.
> Here's my bill, too." Do they agree to an exchange of money for an exchange
> of bits or do I get an "F you. Pay your bill to us and we're not giving you
> crap."
>
