nanog mailing list archives
RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial
From: <michael.dillon () bt com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 23:35:52 -0000
There are symmetric versions for all of those. But ever since the dialup days (e.g. 56Kbps modems had slower reverse direction) consumers have shown a preference for a bigger number on the box, even if it meant giving up bandwidth in the one direction. For example, how many people want SDSL at 1.5Mbps symmetric versus ADSL at 6Mbps/768Kbps. The advertisment with the bigger number wins the consumer.
Seems to me that Internet SERVICE Providers have all turned into telecom companies and the only thing that matters now is providing IP circuits. If P2P is such a problem for providers who supply IP circuits over wireless and cable, why don't they try going up a level and provide Internet SERVICE instead? For instance, every customer could get a virtual server that they can access via VNC with some popular P2P packages preinstalled. The P2P software could recognize when it's talking over "preferred" circuits such as local virtual servers or over peering connections that aren't too expensive, and prefer those. If the virtual servers are implemented on Linux, there is a technology called FUSE that could be used to greatly increase the capacity of the disk farm by not storing multiple copies of the same file. Rather than moaning about the problems of being a telecom provider, people could apply some creative technology to get out of the telecom ghetto. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial, (continued)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Frank Bulk - iNAME (Jan 19)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Simon Leinen (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Simon Leinen (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Matthew Moyle-Croft (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Taran Rampersad (Jan 20)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Alex Rubenstein (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Matthew Palmer (Jan 20)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Alex Rubenstein (Jan 20)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Frank Bulk (Jan 21)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Sean Donelan (Jan 21)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial michael.dillon (Jan 21)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Frank Bulk (Jan 21)
- Message not available
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Frank Bulk (Jan 22)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Scott McGrath (Jan 22)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Frank Bulk (Jan 21)
- Message not available
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Rod Beck (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Marshall Eubanks (Jan 20)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Rod Beck (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Joe Greco (Jan 20)
- RE: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial michael.dillon (Jan 20)
- Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial Steve Gibbard (Jan 18)