[e2e] Re: crippled Internet

Vernon Schryver vjs at calcite.rhyolite.com
Wed Apr 18 16:05:41 PDT 2001

> From: Bob Braden <braden at ISI.EDU>

>   *> If the world's going to move to usage-based charging, it's going to
>   *> have to implement some kind of widespread authentication model
>   *> first...
>   *> 
>   *> L.
>   *> 
>   *> on a road to hell.
>   *> 
>   *> <L.Wood at surrey.ac.uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>

> Perhaps it is as bad as you say, but my point was that the alternative
> (restricting end users to client access) may be a worse hell.

Why wouldn't we have both hells at once?  Why would useage-based
charging would end the incentives and efforts to restrict end users
to client access to a few big servers?  Usage-based charging and
optional extra-cost (i.e. on average profitable) flat rate pricing
for restricted client-access would fit the telco model and the
ambitions of plenty of new-economy marketers and stockholders.

Given globally unique Ethernet MAC addresses in every set-top/cable
modem, what more widespread authentication is needed for usage-based
charging by cable-modem providers?  I wouldn't be surprised if the cable
modem guys didn't bother to record which customeres got which MAC
addresses, but I can't see why new protocol would be required to fix that.

How can a DSL provider bill customers or debug problems, use DHCP
or static IP addresses, and need still more authentication to
implement usage based charges, with or without contacts inside the
telco that owns the local loops?

No, as RJ Atkinson said, the force that will continue to limit usage
based charging is what has made flat-rate client-access to those same
big servers common.  People and organizations prefer the predictablity
of flat rates even when they pay more compared to usage-based rates.

(que the old claims from providers that any usage above the median is
"theft" and trying to obscure the facts that flat rate pricing means that
most customers pay for more than they get (ignoring accounting costs,
which providers usually claim to ignore) and that the continued existence
of the enterprise shows flat rate pricing is profitable overall, unless
governments get involved and then it's a loss at worst temporarily.)

Vernon Schryver    vjs at rhyolite.com

P.S. How come you ask me to be "mute" on what you say is off-topic for
 this mailing list, and then continue to row for your views?
 I'm not complaining, but pointing out that the economic aspects of
 end-to-end stuff are not entirely off-topic.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list