And with working QoS and DSCP tagging flat rate works just fine.
Andrew Odlyzko wrote: > Flat rate schemes have been spreading over the kicking and > screaming bodies of telecom executives (bodies that are > very much alive because of all the feasting on the profits > produced by flat rates). It is truly amazing how telecom > has consistently fought flat rates for over a century > (a couple of centuries, actually, if you include snail > mail as a telecom technology), and has refused to think > rationally about the phenomenon. There actually are > serious arguments in favor of flat rates even in the > conventional economic framework (since they are a form > of bundling). But in addition, they have several big behavioral > economics effect in stimulating usage and in eliciting extra > spending. This is all covered, with plenty of amusing historical > examples, in my paper "Internet pricing and the history of communications," > Computer Networks 36 (2001), pp. 493-517, available at > > http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/history.communications1b.pdf > > Now flat rates are not the answer to all problems, and in > particular are not as appropriate if marginal costs of > providing service are high, or else if you are trying to > limit usage for whatever reason (whether to fend off RIAA > and MPAA, or to limit pollution in cases of car transportation). > But they are not just an artifact of an irrational consumer > preference, as the conventional telecom economics literature > and conventional telco thinking assert. > > Andrew Odlyzko > > > > > > On Thu 25 Oct 2007, Rod Beck wrote: > > > The vast bulk of users have no idea how many bytes they=20 > > consume each month or the bytes generated by different=20 > > applications. The schemes being advocated in this discussion=20 > > require that the end users be Layer 3 engineers. > > "Actually, it sounds a lot like the Electric7 tariffs found in the UK = > for > electricity. These are typically used by low income people who have less > education than the average population. And yet they can understand the > concept of saving money by using more electricity at night. > > I really think that a two-tiered QOS system such as the scavenger > suggestion is workable if the applications can do the marking. Has > anyone done any testing to see if DSCP bits are able to travel unscathed > through the public Internet? > > --Michael Dillon > > P.S. it would be nice to see QoS be recognized as a mechanism for > providing a degraded quality of service instead of all the "first class" > marketing puffery." > > It is not question of whether you approve of the marketing puffery or = > not. By the way, telecom is an industry that has used tiered pricing = > schemes extensively, both in the 'voice era' and in the early dialup = > industry. In the early 90s there were dial up pricing plans that = > rewarded customers for limiting their activity to the evening and = > weekends. MCI, one of the early long distance voice entrants, had all = > sorts of discounts, including weekend and evening promotions.=20 > > Interestingly enough, although those schemes are clearly attractive from = > an efficiency standpoint, the entire industry have shifted towards flat = > rate pricing for both voice and data. To dismiss that move as purely = > driven by marketing strikes me as misguided. That have to be real costs = > involved for such a system to fall apart.=20 > > > >