Re: why strict Net neutrality works best: simple beats complex

Who pays the cost? Isn't this one of the most important questions which 
needs to be addressed?

What we have is one revenue source to draw from. The fact is, we are all 
going to pay for this infrastructure, directly or indirectly. The two 
questions we need to examine are: How do we apportion the cost for 
services to allow for the most people to benefit and how many different 
profit centers will we allow to skim money off of the top?

Specifically, a massive business (Google and Facebook being two 
examples) would pay exponentially more than an end user who does light 
surfing and voice. A large, online retailer would pay somewhat less than 
the aforementioned two but still their connectivity costs would be a 
significant portion of their overall business expenses, as it should be. 
This is in line with the costs associated with having a storefront in a 
desirable, well trafficked location.

If we were to look at the net in any given area, what we would see is a 
varying mixture of government, business, and end users who each use a 
different percentage of traffic with each paying a corresponding share.

While it would seem that I am suggesting we should charge by the bit, 
doing so then puts us back into a mode where the cost to apportion 
billing likely exceeds the cost to operate the network.

Another avenue we could explore is to look at the perceive valued of 
each service carried to the end user and assign billing along those 
lines. This would still leave businesses who leverage the net paying a 
healthy proportion of the total cost which is similar to how we bill today.

Drilling down, video (television) is a significant percentage of all 
traffic here even though it is not sensitive to jitter. And while this 
might not hold true universally, this one service generates a lot of 
revenue between subscriber fees, advertising as well as product 
placement. Premium (advertising free) service also contribute to the 
whole. A little lower down the scale is what we consider "Internet 
traffic" which also generates a substantial amount of revenue here. If 
we look at voice, while revenue is generated from this traffic, I see 
this service as eventually moving towards an included for free model as 
the traffic generated is quite low, with the understanding that it does 
need to be low latency/jitter.

Sorry or the length.

Ken DiPietro
Cumberland MD


On 05/19/2015 09:27 AM, Kiritkumar Lathia wrote:
>
> one solution (eg Ruwanda) is all (internet backbone) infrastructures 
> are built by government from local taxes. do you propose this so that 
> all infrastructures are owned by government from public funds and then 
> all service providers including OTT "travel" free?
>
> On May 19, 2015 3:13 PM, "Kiritkumar Lathia" <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     quick reply:
>     a) is a reality in IPv6!
>     b) who is exactly funding infrastructures ? and how do they
>     justify the investment? how do they get ROI?
>

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii