From: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger) Subject: Re: ATM Utility To: boone@prep.net (Jon 'Iain' Boone) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 15:41:52 -0600 (CST) Cc: avg@sprint.net, tjs@msc.edu, nanog@merit.edu, nap@hq.si.net [...] [A long time ago, I wrote:]
cost-effective in a number of applications today. In particular, the cost of wide-area DS-3 ATM services can be very attractive when compared to a number of point-to-point DS-3s. [...] But, if you don't need the full 45 Mb/s, you can find a more cost-effective solution in the wide-area Fast-packet services. In the case of the MCI Hyperstream offerings, you don't have to pay for the full amount of a circuit from point A to point B -- you simply pay a monthly subscription fee and then a usage charge per Megabyte of data.
So, you can build a multi-megabit/s backbone that is (say) 10 Mb/s and not end up having to purchase the entirety of the DS3 circuits needed to provision it.
Tell you what -- go run the numbers for any reasonable-sized IP provider, and tell me whether or not they are better off on "metered" service of this type, or with full-time dedicated circuits.
Metered service will *always* be more expensive at reasonable to high loads, because the metering and billing costs money to do!
Right answer, maybe, but wrong question. Most ATM pricing I have seen has a "committed information rate" component, which assures a minimum available bandwidth. This is not the "metered" pricing to which you are responding. -tjs
In message <9411080848.AA16753@uh.msc.edu>, Tim Salo writes:
Most ATM pricing I have seen has a "committed information rate" component, which assures a minimum available bandwidth. This is not the "metered" pricing to which you are responding.
-tjs
Tim, None of us has tried to hook up a small business or our PeeCee at home to an ATM netwpork and see if setting up and SVC to ftp.*.* at some low rate is proportional to the cost of asking for a PVC at 10s of Mb/s, for obvious reasons (no one offers it - in case anyone can't see the obvious reasons). It might end up being orders of magnitude cheaper to get some other type of connection to an IP provider below some bandwidth threshhold than an ATM connection and paying per SVC. For example, it is quite easy to exceed $1,000/mo using IP over POTs or IP over ISDN with usage sensitive billing (within the same city), while a leased circuit would be far cheaper. I have existance proof of that (both involve home use). Curtis
Curtis Villamizar writes:
In message <9411080848.AA16753@uh.msc.edu>, Tim Salo writes:
Most ATM pricing I have seen has a "committed information rate" component, which assures a minimum available bandwidth. This is not the "metered" pricing to which you are responding.
-tjs
Tim,
None of us has tried to hook up a small business or our PeeCee at home to an ATM netwpork and see if setting up and SVC to ftp.*.* at some low rate is proportional to the cost of asking for a PVC at 10s of Mb/s, for obvious reasons (no one offers it - in case anyone can't see the obvious reasons). It might end up being orders of magnitude cheaper to get some other type of connection to an IP provider below some bandwidth threshhold than an ATM connection and paying per SVC. For example, it is quite easy to exceed $1,000/mo using IP over POTs or IP over ISDN with usage sensitive billing (within the same city), while a leased circuit would be far cheaper. I have existance proof of that (both involve home use).
Curtis
There is a distinction to be made here between 1. IP vs ATM and 2. IP over ATM. I think you are talking about 1, and I agree. But Vadim and Tim were talking about 2. Yes, PPP over SONET will give you better utilization of the link, but building a 3-4 node mesh network is going to be cheaper with fast packet services ( ATM/SMDS/Frame Relay ) than with point to point links. We have implemented quite a few of these meshes. The only place point to point links will be more cost effective are when you absolutely need the entire bandwidth of each point to point link. As to metered vs unmetered service, it will always be cheaper to go unmetered beyond a certain threshold of usage. Some fast packet service vendors I know of cap their metered usage within a few % ( ~20 ) of what they would charged if you would have opted for flat rate unmetered service. At the IP service level, some ISPs ( CERFnet, for example ) will offer both a metered and flat rate version of the same switched access service. --pushpendra Pushpendra Mohta pushp@cerf.net +1 619 455 3908 Director of Engineering +1 800 876 2373 CERFNet
participants (3)
-
Curtis Villamizar -
Pushpendra Mohta -
tjs＠msc.edu