[38130] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: More BW, Less Taxes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Tue May 29 12:15:01 2001
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Message-Id: <200105291628.QAA08023@vacation.karoshi.com>
To: albert@waller.net (Albert Meyer)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 16:28:40 +0000 (UCT)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20010529103920.00dad910@mail.waller.net> from "Albert Meyer" at May 29, 2001 10:51:37 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>
> At 03:37 PM 5/29/01 +0000, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
>
> > Why does BW cost so much?
>
> It might make more sense to ask "Why is bandwidth so cheap (and getting
> cheaper so fast) in the US?" The simple answer is: Moore's law, competition
> (leading to a "fiber glut") and economies of scale.
>
> If you're across an ocean from the US, you have to factor in the cost of
> running underwater cable.
>
Actually, this was/is a troll. BW costs outside the US are high
because of two things: ) International tariffs based on voice
traffic profiles. )local tariffs from monopoly carriers that
contribute significant % of a soverigns GDP.
The first is a legacy holdover that should be revised. The second
is a tough nut to crack.
Trans-oceanic capabilities will remain a bottleneck, but they
are not as problematic as in the previous decade. Witness Tyco
or any of the other folk that have cable-laying capability. Last
year they had waiting lines for boats. Now the boats are idle.
Too much capacity in water and no-one taking it up. (see first
point above)
YMMV.
--bill
