[167250] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Warren Bailey)
Thu Dec 5 12:37:02 2013
From: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
To: cb.list6 <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 17:36:42 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAD6AjGTezrejQgrjf9XLSvkY+ydPLmKORfYMa-iP10UGNgyxog@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I've been talking to their executive officer after doing that exact thing. =
15 years ago roaming was very expensive.. But when you are selling somethin=
g using terminology like "free" or "unlimited", I believe you should be ext=
remely careful. I don't know how or who implemented this policy.. But they =
have been claiming to rock AT&T with this "actual nationwide" and this "unc=
arrier" talk. If you claim to be unlike your competitors.. At least make an=
attempt to be.. NOT like your competition. I was floored seeing the Nanog =
tribe reply with "it was a business decision over cost".. It's 2013 and nea=
rly 14...get your lives together. Make these people who give you a paycheck=
accountable.
Sent from my Mobile Device.
-------- Original message --------
From: "cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: 12/05/2013 5:33 AM (GMT-09:00)
To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Cc: Henry Yen <henry@aegisinfosys.com>,Joshua Goldbard <j@2600hz.com>,nanog=
@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..
On Dec 4, 2013 11:31 PM, "Warren Bailey" <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegrou=
p.com<mailto:wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>> wrote:
>
> Blanket reply.. :)
>
> So at what point does unlimited mean unlimited? Roaming agreements have a=
lways been two sided. In my case.. I roam on to AT&T's network, the same as=
AT&T folk roam into tmo when they do not have coverage. At the end of the =
month the two are reconciled and someone gets paid. If you are selling a se=
rvice that is making generalized assurances in connectivity (nationwide 4g =
let netwokr) , you should make a best effort to honor that. It wasn't even =
a fair amount of bandwidth.. I could deal with a 2gb a month cap or somethi=
ng.. But I am now able to use my unlimited data in 100 countries without in=
curring additional charges.. Are we going to start saying that internationa=
l roaming costs are lower than domestic on a regularly used network?
>
> I literally feel like I'm taking crazy pills here. Tmo and Att are far fr=
om small fish.. And a 50mb per month cap is absolute bullshit. Figure it in=
to your business line.. Or do the honest thing and don't offer the service.=
How you guys are justifying this is BEYOND me. You can buy a ds1 for sever=
al hundred dollars per month.. And unlimited customers get 50 megs a month =
for data.. You can't even check email over the month on that. I'm not an ab=
usive user.. I don't download or use my cellular data connection for hacked=
hotspot use.. Not to mention the hotspot I do have with them has 10gb a mo=
nth nationwide.. So I can use my puck for 10gb..but my phone (on the SAME T=
OWER) is different?
>
> That is like saying sms costs network providers money.. (don't bring up r=
an gear or smsc costs.. It's not related)
>
If you have a beef with tmo, here is the complaint department https://mobil=
e.twitter.com/JohnLegere or you can email him at john.legere@t-mobile.com<m=
ailto:john.legere@t-mobile.com>
You can probably just forward this thread
Given that tmo now has free (rate limited) intl data roaming, it is a bumme=
r to see domestic roaming is now less well served. I think in belt tighten=
ing years limiting domestic roaming saved substantial cost ... since it can=
be expensive having some users living on roamed networks
CB
>
> Sent from my Mobile Device.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Joshua Goldbard <j@2600hz.com<mailto:j@2600hz.com>>
> Date: 12/04/2013 4:10 PM (GMT-09:00)
> To: Henry Yen <henry@AegisInfoSys.com>
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>
> Subject: Re: Question related to Cellular Data and restrictions..
>
>
> Ting is an MVNO (just like my company 2600hz) and while it would violate =
the terms of my NDA to confirm the 10x number I can say that we found it to=
be prohibitively expensive.
>
> One should be aware that, just like in the IP transit world, the small pl=
ayers have different rules than the big kids. It might be prohibitively exp=
ensive for us, but it's a different order of magnitude for a carrier like S=
print proper.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Cheers,
> Joshua
>
> P.S. shameless plug: we provide white-label cellular service to operators=
including full provisioning and call control plus it can be tied back into=
corporate phone systems (and it's open source!!).
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 4, 2013, at 2:59 PM, "Henry Yen" <henry@AegisInfoSys.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 22:18:12PM +0000, Joshua Goldbard wrote:
> >> ... When you send your data
> >> over a partners network it raises your wireless company's cost of
> >> delivering service, in some cases so much so that you become
> >> unprofitable.
> >
> > Some folks over at Ting(.com) suggest that the cost for data roaming is=
as
> > high as ten times that for voice/SMS roaming, which is why they don't c=
harge
> > extra for the latter, and do not at all provide the former.
> >
> > --
> > Henry Yen <Henry.Yen@Aegis00.com> Aegis Information Syste=
ms, Inc.
> > Senior Systems Programmer Hicksville, New York
> > (800) AEGIS-00 x949 1-800-AEGIS-00 (800-234=
-4700)
> >
> >
>
