[38120] in North American Network Operators' Group
More BW, Less Taxes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Tue May 29 11:31:58 2001
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Message-Id: <200105291537.PAA07915@vacation.karoshi.com>
To: ILazar@tbg.com (Irwin Lazar)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:37:27 +0000 (UCT)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <0C875DC28791D21192CD00104B95BFE70146DC5E@BGSLC02> from "Irwin Lazar" at May 29, 2001 08:51:16 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > FWIW, I recently heard someone ask the question - "how do you go to your
> > investors and tell them you need more money for more bandwidth because you
> > don't want to efficiently manage your existing capacity?"
> >
> > This is the business case for QoS, IMHO.
> >
> > Irwin
>
> Which costs more, wholesale, raw bitpipes or qualified
> engineering talent to create/police the policies needed
> to maintain QoS?
>
> --bill
>
> That's the $64k question. :-)
>
> >From what I've seen, there isn't a simple answer. In places where bandwidth
> is exorbantantly expensive (such as outside the United States), simply over
> provisioning isn't an acceptable answer.
Why does BW cost so much?
--bill
