Infrastructure, overheard, maintenance, bandwidth. Should be covered and distributed by the customers' monthly fees and any installation fees. If it's not, how are you still in business and still expanding?
On Dec 16, 2017 4:10 PM, "Jason McKemie" <[email protected]> wrote: > There are other costs besides bandwidth. > > On Saturday, December 16, 2017, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Why shouldn't people expect the bill to be the same? The cost of >> bandwidth has gone down about 10-15x since Netflix streaming launched. >> >> Jared >> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 >> From: "Jason McKemie" <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> I'm not saying that isn't the way it is, but I was selling internet >> service before Netflix was a thing - people use about 10-15x the bandwidth >> now, but expect their internet bill to be the same. >> >> On Saturday, December 16, 2017, Carl Peterson <[email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]]> wrote: >> >> I don't get it. That is what your customers are paying you to deliver to >> them. Why should you be able to charge Netflix as well. What if they say >> no. What if they say screw you your IPs can't get Netflix and block you >> entirely. >> >> On Dec 16, 2017, at 11:34 AM, Jason McKemie < >> [email protected][mailto:[email protected]]> >> wrote: >> >> I'm pretty sure my network would not qualify for that, and while it would >> certainly help, it would not eliminate the cost entirely. >> >> On Saturday, December 16, 2017, Chuck McCown <[email protected][mailto: >> [email protected]]> wrote: >> >> I have had a netflix caching server for several years. It was free. >> Does not add to my backbone cost as it fills itself during the off hours. >> >> >> >> From: Jason McKemie >> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 9:29 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> IMO, the true cost of a service like Netflix is more than the monthly >> rate that they bill their customers. As ISPs, we just have to absorb that >> cost or raise prices to compensate, doesn't help with the big bad ISP >> perception. >> >> On Saturday, December 16, 2017, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It would mirror access charges in the telecom world. There are some >> logical reasons why such a scheme would be fair, but it would really drive >> up the cost of everything. >> >> >> >> From: Mike Hammett >> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 8:18 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> >> A lot of people wanted to do that back in the day. I had no idea why. >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions[http://www.ics-il.com/] >> [https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL][https://plus.google.com/+In >> telligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb][https://www.linkedin.com/ >> company/intelligent-computing-solutions][https://twitter.com/ICSIL >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL%5D%5Bhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb%5D%5Bhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions%5D%5Bhttps://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> ] >> Midwest Internet Exchange[http://www.midwest-ix.com/] >> [https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix][https://www.linkedin. >> com/company/midwest-internet-exchange][https://twitter.com/mdwestix] >> The Brothers WISP[http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/] >> [https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp][https://www.youtu >> be.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg] >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> From: "Ron M." <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 8:00:10 AM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> >> What I'm thinking here... don't charge the end users. Get good IP traffic >> accounting and charge the upstream content providers for carrying THEIR >> sourced traffic. Don't penalize the end users. ;-) >> (My $0.02, can I have my change back now?) >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:21 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> One of our tech support guys asked me yesterday if we're going to start >> charging for access to Facebook, Netflix, etc. I was just like, dude, >> seriously? Yeah, cuz that will surely get us customers. He said, but now we >> can, so why wouldn't we? I said, but did we before NN? And then I realized >> he was just trying to annoy me. Same shit the media is doing. FUD dbag >> tactics. IT'S A TRAP! >> >> On 12/15/2017 2:59 PM, Adam Moffett wrote: >> Exactly. I literally see people suggesting that ISP's will charge for >> access to Facebook or charge for access to Netflix. Not. Going. To. Happen. >> >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> >> To: "af" <[email protected]> >> >> Sent: 12/15/2017 3:57:00 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> >> Yeah, true, there were ways to legally do it before if you really wanted >> to. Bbut more to the point, nobody is going to do something like that >> anyway, because there's no way that it would be worth the customer backlash >> they'd have to deal with. >> Nah, nobody is going to have the sense to feel silly about it... they'll >> just keep whining for awhile, and then forget about it. Or else, they'll >> find something that's completely unrelated that they don't like and blame >> it on the lack of NN. >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> You would have to justify that as "reasonable network management". They >> defined reasonable network management as being driven by technical reasons >> rather than business reasons (paraphrased). Not disagreeing with you, just >> clarifying. >> >> The bigger loophole I saw was that transit providers were excluded from >> all the rules. >> Put an AS in between you and your upstream who just does filtering for >> you. They're a transit provider so they have no NN rules. >> >> It was very frustrating to witness all the crazy theories about what >> would happen. I wonder if anyone will have the sense to feel silly about >> pontificating on Facebook when absolutely nothing changes. >> >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "Dennis Burgess" <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Sent: 12/15/2017 3:43:06 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> >> NN did not disallow you to block facebook, just have to disclose it. J >> So it really did’ent do anything. >> >> Dennis Burgess – Network Solution Engineer – Consultant >> MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant[http://www. >> linktechs.net/productcart/pc/viewcontent.asp?idpage=5] – MTCNA, MTCRE, >> MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE >> >> For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net[http://www.l >> inktechs.net/] >> Radio Frequency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com[http://w >> ww.towercoverage.com/] >> Office: 314-735-0270 <(314)%20735-0270>[tel:314-735-0270 >> <(314)%20735-0270>] >> E-Mail: [email protected] >> >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard >> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 3:24 PM >> To: af <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> >> Awesome! I think I'll go block Facebook, and see how that goes... >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Steve Jones <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/12/15/net_neutr >> ality_s_end_was_mostly_celebrated_by_the_far_right.html[ >> http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/12/15/net_ >> neutrality_s_end_was_mostly_celebrated_by_the_far_right.html] >> >> >> >> Apparently now we ISPs can lawfully block individual sites and will do so >> with impunity. >> >> >> >> These people with these petty ideas I dont think understand how poorly >> granularity scales. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Josh Baird <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I like this as well. I was thinking it would be a good idea to put out a >> statement.. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:45 AM, Paul McCall <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yep, that is concise and effective >> >> >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini >> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 7:57 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [AFMUG] Our NN statment >> >> >> What do you guys think? Lots of customers calling! >> >> >> >> Aeronet Statement on Net Neutrality >> >> >> >> AeroNet, a ISP that provides advanced Internet services to Business and >> individuals in PR, USVI and Miami, applauds any action taken that >> promotes innovation and advancement of connectivity for all consumers. In >> Aeronet’s 17 years of history, our pricing structure has always been >> simple, unlimited and without any toll gates. The placement and removal of >> Net Neutrality rules have not and will not modify our pricing policy. We >> maintain our commitment to provide the fastest and most reliable service to >> our customers, with innovative solutions that fulfill our customers needs. >> >> >> Gino A. Villarini >> >> President >> >> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
