[45354] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SlashDot: "Comcast Gunning for NAT Users"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen Griffin)
Thu Jan 31 15:12:00 2002
Message-Id: <200201312008.PAA28618@elektra.ultra.net>
In-Reply-To: <NHEFLBCNBEKGPCFNBKHJMEBKDJAA.greg@band-x.com> from Greg Pendergrass at "Jan 31, 2002 01:40:16 pm"
To: greg@band-x.com (Greg Pendergrass)
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 15:08:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Griffin <stephen.griffin@rcn.com>
Cc: alan_r1@corp.earthlink.net, nanog@merit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
In the referenced message, Greg Pendergrass said:
>
> It doesn't make sense that an ISP should complain that customers use 100% of
> what they pay for. So if 1% of your customers use %50+ of your bandwidth,
> your 1% is getting their money's worth. If you don't want the customer to
> use it, don't sell it to them.
The point is that customers don't pay for 100% of the available bandwidth.
Customers couldn't afford to pay for guaranteed 100% BW to all desinations
all the time. Hence, companies determine how much BW a typical user
is likely to use, build to that, and charge the customers based on how
much it cost to provide it. When folks use the service atypically, they are
using resources they didn't pay for.
If you think otherwise, build a company that doesn't aggregate flows, and
gives every customer (simultaneous) guaranteed MAX BW 24x7 to every destination
within their network and at least the first-hop into non-customer networks.
