NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information

 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: Canada goes crazy



On 7 May 2010, at 19:59, Peter Sahlstrom wrote:

One reasonable model for this type of scaled billing is that used by
the natural gas utility here in Atlanta.  Each user's bill lists a
"Base Rate" fee, which includes a "Peaking Service" charge, which is
calculated annually based on how much gas a customer used during times
of peak demand.  This allows the gas company to insure that enough
capacity is available at those peak demand times, and forces the users
most responsible for necessitating upgrades to pay for the costs of
those upgrades.  A similar billing model for internet connectivity
would allow service providers to penalize users who cause the most
disruption to the network without imposing limits on how much data can
be transferred, or with whom, or in what way.

I'd appreciate hearing thoughts anyone might have about this approach.
Does this seem fair?  Is it practical?  Has it already been
implemented anywhere?

The LINX - London Internet IX moved to a charging model for traffic with a base membership fee a few years ago, before that it was a port based fee, ie the more and bigger the ports the more you pay.


In the large IXP world you have small members who have minimal or flat growth and other players who are driving the "Arms Race" of keeping all the Level2 switches running across the multiple sites etc. Moving to a traffic charging model allows the exchange to grow without penalising the smaller members which a basic port fee charging model did not allow. As a member organisation the bill payers approved the change in billing methodology.

	f