[48328] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Customer oversubscription levels
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (up@3.am)
Tue May 28 23:08:18 2002
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 23:07:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: <up@3.am>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20020528140117.T3024-100000@mail.sonicboom.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
By now, I think it's widely accepted that it really isn't
"oversubscription" or "overselling" until congestion starts becoming an
issue. Up until then it's "statistical multiplexing".
On Tue, 28 May 2002, Brian wrote:
>
> Got to think most customers assume oversubscription. Having been on the
> provider end of this in a previous life, how it often goes is like
> this. The customer will think/feel they are not getting what they are
> paying for. As a result the customer will deliberately try to peg their
> ckt at the bw you say you are selling them, and if they cannot achieve it,
> they call you and complain. You at that point need to fix it or risk
> losing the customer. As you sell higher and higher bandwidth rates, the
> customer's tolerance, presumably because of what they are paying you, goes
> down.
>
> Brian
>
> On Tue, 28 May 2002, Mathew Lodge wrote:
>
> >
> > This might be a dumb question, but I can be sure that I'll be told if
> > that's the case, so here goes:
> >
> > What's a good oversubscription ratio for customer traffic to global
> > Internet bandwidth these days? I.e., if you have, say 90megs of bandwidth
> > to other transit providers, how much bandwidth, in aggregate, are you
> > selling to customers -- 90? 450? 900?
> >
> > Do customers care about this? Or do they assume that if they get a T1 to
> > the Internet from you that they have their own T1's worth of non
> > over-subscribed bandwidth to your transit providers?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mathew
> >
>
>
James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
up@3.am http://3.am
=========================================================================
