Capacity/transit costs vs growth

Jean-Francois Mezei jfmezei_nanog at
Wed May 27 23:54:57 UTC 2015

On 15-05-27 19:20, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

> The above hypothesis why imply that the 20% linear increase is not fair, vs directly making the case that the base rate, set in some point in the past is not fair/appropriate anymore ?  

These rates cover aggregation between an end user's CO and a central CO
where an ISP connects. For instance, a Toronto based ISP can serve all
of Bell Canada's DSL footprint by connecting to the Adelaide Street CO
in Toronto.  BUT, Bell charges $1016 per 100mbps to carry traffic
between that point and the CO serving an end user. (for Cable, I am not
100% sure if it include the fibre to the node, or just aggregation to
the CMTS).

there is a separate fixed fee for the "last mile" infrastructure.

The point i am trying to make that that during the period where usage
increase, the cost per gbps decreases, so it shgould not be a 1:1
relationship over time.  Currently, the CRTC sets 1:1 relationship over
10 years.

So having *rough* idea of decreases in per gbps of capacity over the
years would help me make the point that the current rate structure is
flawed.  (I don't need precise at this point, just rough ideas).

Different slant to question:

when you move from 1gbps to 10gbps to 40gbps links, what sort of
price/gnps reduction do you get ? 20% ? 30% ?

More information about the NANOG mailing list