Hi, I’m going to side step that entirely - I think it’s always interesting to look at other models, but at the moment we’ve got what we’ve got.
I did have some interesting responses - I think it’s pretty clear though that a p95 product for CVC would be popular and unlock a lot of options for ISPs. It may mean a bit of a drop of revenue for NBN but not too much, but it’d definitely overcome a lot of the issues with congestion where ISPs can’t always keep up and/or predict some spikes. MMC > On 29 Jul 2017, at 4:19 pm, Mark Delany <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Is buying the CVC in fixed amounts the right model? > > I've always wonder why it's been a speed-based system. It strikes me > that speed has always been a poor proxy for resources consumed and now > that model is just getting in the way. > > Would it be better and simpler to set the local-loop (LL) line speed > to the maximum the tech allows and charge on bits delivered to/from > POI to LL along with a flat rate for LL upkeep? > > Just like other utilities such as electricity and water. > > It's been shown that most people don't generally consume unlimited > amounts of data - they consume what they need. And, now that people > are well and truly comfortable with quotas on their service, moving to > a true resources-based system is hardly much of a mindset change like > it once might have been. > > > The advantages of this approach are: > > a) RSP scaling costs match revenue much better than a menagerie of speed > proxies > > b) Consumers aren't penalized with slow speeds just because they are > light users > > c) All consumers get the best speed experience possible and are thus > likely to grow their usage which means quicker revenue growth > > d) No "chilling effect" on the development of high speed applications > > e) RSPs have no incentive to throttle consumers > > f) It makes pricing transparent to the consumer > > g) It takes NBNCo out of the performance discussion > > h) It lets NBNCo focus on continuously improving the LL > > > All that needs to be done is: > > a) Replace CVC with a quota/resource system to maintain an appropriate > ROI on POIs. Basically $X per MB delivered. > > b) Replace AVC with a fixed LL upkeep/ROI fee > > > The main down-side is that given the MTM - it will expose the lower > speed services for what they are: vastly inferior to the higher speed > services. That might not be politically palatable under the current > regime. > > It will also more directly expose RSPs who under-provision rather than > what we have today which is to smear the blame between NBNCo and > RSPs. But that's a good thing, right? > > Of course the resources-consumed pricing could still be set absurdly > high to suit the politics of making the NBN "profitable" for a future > sale but that is obscured now with the complex pricing. It will be > much more transparent with a simpler resources system. Also a good > thing. > > > Mark. > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog _______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
