LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for NORDNOG Archives


NORDNOG Archives

NORDNOG Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave NORDNOG
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject: Re: IP-tel
From: Ragnar Lonn <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:Network management discussion for Nordic region <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:15:56 +0100
Content-Type:TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (77 lines)


I have wished for usage-based billing for years but so far, the few
alternatives I've seen have seemed pretty expensive. Eunet did have a
leased-line service where you paid for usage and they differentiated
domestic and foreign traffic also, but the price was a bit high.

Telia also tried usage-based billing but with a too high price,
I think, charging 0.50 SEK per MB transferred. 0.50 SEK per MB is
roughly the (telephony) cost when you download things with a 56k analog
modem so that may have been the basis of their pricing. It should be
possible to do a lot better than that. Today, the people who are
constantly downloading movies etc. using their 768kbit/s UPC
connections pay 350 SEK per month flat-fee charge which for them
translates into about 0.0015 SEK per MB, or about 1/300th of the
price Telia wanted for usage-based Internet access.

There must be room for usage-based billing at substantially lower costs
than what we have seen so far, while at the same time providing operators
with better margins and probably also making traffic planning easier.

  /Ragnar


On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Patrik Fältström wrote:

> On torsdag, jan 23, 2003, at 23:17 Europe/Stockholm, Jonas Stenling
> wrote:
>
> > It will take years to convince the current customers using the
> > Internet to
> > pay based on their usage of the network, but I believe that is the
> > single
> > most important thing in order to get VoIP and other stuff going.
> >
> > Bits are not transfered free of charge.
>
> Convince and convince, I would like to see the first ISP which dare to
> really look at the fact, that (I think) 1% of the customers use 98% of
> the bandwidth.
>
> Say an ISP have 10Mbps to households.
>
> A "normal" household possibly use average 250kbps during the 6 hours
> per day someone is using the connection.
>
> This gives 20GByte/month (if I have not calculated wrong).
>
> Max transfer (5Mbps) gives 1642GByte/Month, about 80 times more.
>
> Now, say one ISP start having a charging scheme where the total amount
> of bytes is counted per month, as follows:
>
>    0 - 30GByte     -10%
>   30 - 100GByte    +10%
> 100 - 500GByte    +50%
>      > 500GByte   +200%
>
> Or something. A charging scheme where the majority of the users get
> _lower_ price, while the users which use too much pay more. If the ISP
> loose these few customers because they want fixed price...tough luck.
> The ISP gain more by not having to transfer the bits for those users.
>
> Now, the customer very seldom can change the behavior so fast, so the
> charging should be as follows:
>
> Month     Actual xfer    Charging class
>    1          10G          0 - 30G
>    2         200G          0 - 30G (With Warning)
>    3          20G          0 - 30G
>    4         250G          0 - 30G (With Warning)
>    5         260G        100 - 500G
>
> I.e. move the customer between the charging classes with one month
> delay. That way the customer have time changing whatever needed, and
> will not be surprised like with electricity bills in Sweden.
>
>       paf
>

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main NORDNOG Page

Permalink



LISTSRV.NORDU.NET

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager