MFS WorldCom/WilTel/LDDS

Tue Sep 3 04:18:41 UTC 1996

>From:  Sean Donelan[SMTP:SEAN at SDG.DRA.COM]
>Sent:  Monday, September 02, 1996 3:22 PM

>A current problem Internet is line capacity only comes in a few different
>sizes; small (DS0), medium (T1), large(T3), and extra-large (OC3c).
>One reason ISDN is extremely popular is its just a bit bigger than
>a DS0, and a lot less than a T1.  Because the next step is so large,
>customers tend to stay with their current size long after it stops
>fitting their needs.

It's possible to provision ATM circuits at pretty much any capacity a 
customer wants, from 1Mbps to 155Mbps, without having to swap-out hardware 
in order to bump up the speed.  Of course this also makes new services 
available which would otherwise be impossible to manage (single event 
bandwidth increases, anyone?)

>So-called "usage-based" pricing is just a klunky work around to the too
>big a step between sizes problem.  Customers  want something just a bit
>bigger than a T1, but don't want something 28 times bigger.  Usage-based
>pricing lets customers use something just a bit bigger even though the
>provider uses a massive pipe to deliver it.

This is frequently true, although there are specific situations where usage 
based pricing is attractive for its own sake, for instance as backup for a 
fixed price circuit.

>I suspect when Cisco's 11.2 traffic-shaping hits the streets, you
>will be able to buy more "fixed-rate" Internet connections at the
>in-between line-speeds providers previously only offered on
>usage-based pricing plans.  Sure, some providers may resist initially.
>But someone will break ranks, and the others will eventually follow.

Those ranks have already broken, at least in territories we serve, and 
there was no need to wait for new software...	;-)
--
Jim Browning <jfbb at atmnet.net>

P.S.	Will it help avoid the IP <==> ATM religious battle I may have just 
started if I lie and say I am unsubscribing for the next week or so?