Jim Dixon writes...
[...]
to step forward at this point -- more Web traffic flows from the UK
to the US. That is, there is a small net flow of _benefit_ to the US
and a very large net imbalance in _costs_ to the UK.
Obviously the costs are different, but how exactly are you measuring
"benefit"? What if there are just more net-savvy folks the UK that
want to run Web sites, resulting in a higher ratio of servers to
browsers than in the US? Don't those people that put up Web servers
then want people in the US to see them?
To my way of thinking, content providers are net producers of 'benefit'
and say dial-up users are consumers. We adjust our prices to reflect
this: if you buy a leased line from us to run a Web server, we charge
you less; if you are a dial-up provider, we charge you more.
Most end users would agree with this model. They pay their 10 quid /
15 bucks a month so that they can surf the Web. They don't expect the
Net to pay them 
To my way of thinking, content providers are net producers of 'benefit'
and say dial-up users are consumers. We adjust our prices to reflect
this: if you buy a leased line from us to run a Web server, we charge
you less; if you are a dial-up provider, we charge you more.
Most end users would agree with this model. They pay their 10 quid /
15 bucks a month so that they can surf the Web. They don't expect the
Net to pay them
So basically what you're saying here is that your ISP should be paying
you to connect to your web servers, and they will pass the charges on
downstream to their customers?
---Rob
That's not far off from what I am saying, except that you have the
roles confused.
I am saying that
* we (a backbone ISP)
* charge customer ISPs whose primary business is dialup
* (net consumers of benefit)
* more than those whose business is selling Web space
or
who operate a Web server
* (net producers of benefit)
We don't do dial-up ourselves; many of our customers do.
That is an interesting justification for additional "reseller" charges. I
am not convinced it is valid, though. Most of the sites that provide half
way decent content these days either charge directly for it, or charge
indirectly by making you wade through advertisements. In this manner the
sites are being compensated in a much more efficient manner, determined by
the market.
Do you really think it is our job as network providers to decide who is
a net consumer and who is a net producer? I think not, I think it is our
job to deliver bits. Let the net consumers and the net producers
themselves negotiate the terms of their transaction.
Should a bookstore have to pay less in taxes because it provides a
service people want? No, the bookstore should incorporate the taxes into
its prices, just as a web site should incorporate the costs of
connectivity into its prices.
-BD
> * we (a backbone ISP)
> * charge customer ISPs whose primary business is dialup
> * (net consumers of benefit)
> * more than those whose business is selling Web space
> or
> who operate a Web server
> * (net producers of benefit)
That is an interesting justification for additional "reseller" charges. I
am not convinced it is valid, though. Most of the sites that provide half
way decent content these days either charge directly for it, or charge
indirectly by making you wade through advertisements. In this manner the
sites are being compensated in a much more efficient manner, determined by
the market.
This is not a moral argument, it's simply a description of our policy.
And this is just a price differential; you could equally well see it as
a discount to those who are net sources of content.
Do you really think it is our job as network providers to decide who is
a net consumer and who is a net producer? I think not, I think it is our
job to deliver bits. Let the net consumers and the net producers
themselves negotiate the terms of their transaction.
You seem to be saying that we should not ourselves negotiate.
We look at our pipes and notice that they are relatively full in one
direction and relatively empty in the other. We adjust our prices so
that usage is more uniform. That's just good business practice.