[LINK] 'true' cost of bandwidth?

[Leah Manta]

At 12:31 03/05/2009, Tom Koltai wrote:
>So Scott, unfortunately your argument is only partly true. Yes, the
>bandwidth does not increase.
>But the administration management of peering requests, transit/peering
>renegotiation costs, QOS tunneling, help desk for QOS issues,
>replacement power supplies, replacement cards, disk management (for
>cache/squid) etc is a hell of a lot higher under a full 100 Mb than an
>empty one.
>Bandwidth is a very small part of the cost of running an ISP.

Except this isn't about the cost of running an ISP, cause no one 
mentioned users paying for staff and gigarouters.

The topic is BANDWIDTH and in most cases that, in the consumer world, 
means "how much data can I send and receive before I hit my cap or 
get charged megabuckies"

Pretty much everything else is calculable at a "max" amount 
safely.  Pipes are pipes are pipes.  The same copper that run 12/75 
in the 1980's today runs 50Mbps DSL - they said it was impossible.

So should we be paying 12/75 rates for that same service?

A pipe can be upgraded as new technology is deployed.  ISPs do NOT 
have to upgrade technology if their customers don't demand it.  Some 
might upgrade simply because it doubles capacity and halves capital 
costs, move that leased gear on and get some 'free' new gear at the same price.