AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO

Mikael Abrahamsson swmike at swm.pp.se
Wed Dec 4 21:43:10 UTC 2013


On Wed, 4 Dec 2013, Owen DeLong wrote:

> Nope... I look at the consumer side pricing and the fact that cellular 
> providers by and large are NOT losing money. I assume that means that 
> the rest of the math behind the scenes must work somehow.

Cost != price.

Also, wireless providers are not delivering the same service as wireline 
providers. How many gigabytes per month do you usually get for the same 
money on wireline compared to wireless?

> Yeah, I'm sure there are all kinds of ways that wireline could be made 
> cheaper, etc. However, I'm talking about comparing consumer pricing, not 
> behind the scenes costs as the former is relatively easy to compare on 
> even footing while the later is far to obfuscated by far too many 
> parties to ever have a rational debate.

Consumer pricing often have nothing to do with cost in a dysfunctional 
market. It a functional market, cost and price are more closely related.

> I said nothing about what was possible... I only comment on what is 
> actually happening. If you know how to achieve a functioning market in 
> the US, I'm all ears. In the mean time, dysfunction is all I have 
> available to work with.

Well, there would have to be a huge amount of changes, and most likely 
only a portion of them would be implemented and then the changes would be 
deemed a failure.

Make it administratively fairly easy to put fiber in the ground. Make 
municipalities/utilities put in fiber along other infrastructure and make 
them rent it out at pricepoints that are related to cost.

If it's possible to rent dark fiber, then you can all of a sudden get 
competition instead of having a few huge companies dominate the market.

Access to possibility of renting or installing L1 infrastructure to the 
block/cabinet is the key.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se



More information about the NANOG mailing list