Rubbish,

New Zealand has had National/International/Local traffic differentiations
for the past 10-12 years (at least), this has been a necessity since the
International links were so expensive (anyone recall the $12/meg
international charges back in the days where NZ hung off a 14k4 modem ? :-) )

When telecom brought out the DSL product it was pointed out to them that
they needed to differentiate between national and international, telecom
however knew best and decided instead to bill off octets in/out. I recall
at least one ISP even offering to help them get differentiation between
national and international traffic working, they refused. ISP's also wanted
to wholesale the DSL product and manage their own charging, again, telecom
refused, infact, they also managed to squeeze a smaller player out of the
market who was starting down the DSL road at that time as well (the name
currently escapes me), when the word "monopoly" was used telecom pointed
out that because paradise offered cable broadband services this was not the
case, and the other player left the market.

the 128k offering was not welcomed by ISP's, but they were cornered into
offering it or loosing out on market share. Most (if not all) ISP's
recognised that this was going to be a product offered at a loss, but
unless they wanted to see Xtra/Telecom control the entire residential DSL
userspace they had to offer it and hope that the pricing to themselves
would get better. (it has to some extent due to international bandwidth
price drops yet is still impractical today due to circuit costs and users
leeching)

Back in '98 telecom were given options, to ignore them and continue on a
pricing pattern that had never been used in NZ _was_ a design flaw, and to
argue that dialup was the only other option is a farce, back then there was
DDS, ISDN, Frame Relay, Radio, Fibre (Dark Fibre too till telecom squashed
that one) and a host of other connection options.

So how much revenue do they want to collect before they decide to rebuild
their network and offer wholesale DSL to ISP's so that prices can be set by
the people actually providing the connectivity to the rest of the world ?
the answer ? "all of it", Telecom have no incentive to rebuild anything..

-- 
Steve.
At 09:40 26/08/2002, peterjet@xtra.co.nz wrote:
>You also have to consider what is an anomaly.
>
>When JetStream was introduced it was designed as a high
>speed replacement for dialup, including the ISP selection
>option. At that stage all bandwidth was managed by the ISP
>but subsidised by Telecom (who collected usage).
>
>Paradise introduced national/international charging
>(probably the second company in the world to do this after
>finland). This was very unusual but a service differentiator.
>
>JetStream Starter was introduced both to increase user
>numbers for Telecom, but also under pressure from ISPS who
>wanted to manage usage. The reason that usage restrictions
>have come into place on JetStream Starter is that ISPs
>realised how impractical flat rate was (Paradise understood
>from day one). Most still work on the principle that the
>high-users are subsidised by the low-users.
>
>As JetStream billing is done by PPP session it is impossible
>for Telecom to differentiate national vs international. They
>need to rebuild their network to do this. You may argue this
>is a design flaw but in 1998 (when JetStream was designed)
>the only model was dialup and nat/internat was unknown.
>
>They are unlikely to rebuild their network without
>increasing their revenue (and most people want nat/internat
>to get cheaper service!) so this probably fits into the
>'get over it' bucket for now.
>
>regards,
>
>Peter
> >
> > From: Sascha Beaumont <sascha@squiggle.gen.nz>
> > Date: 2002/08/10 Sat PM 05:36:10 GMT+12:00
> > To: adsl@lists.unixathome.org
> > Subject: Re: JetStream pricing for national versus international traffic
> >
> > > So how can we
> > > bring pressure to bear on Telecom to correct this glaring anomaly and
> > > differentiate between national and international traffic in their pricing
> > > model for full rate JetStream customers?
> >
> > We cant. And we wont. Unfortunately.
> >
> > I dont even know if telecoms network would sustain the load that would
> > be put on it by such a change. The other problem when people have such
> > low download limits of 1Gb if they hit on a .nz site to download
> > something and that .nz site is hosted overseas, they will complain to
> > telecom yet it is entirely their fault.
> >
> > I can't even imagine the skyrockting usage of p2p.net.nz if you could
> > have affordable/cheap/'free' full rate transfers around new zealand.
> >
> > Compared to the other options available for 2Mbit+ connections in NZ
> > Jetstream is very reasonably priced. Telstra Clear offer broadband
> > connections, 2Mbit (256k up) cable access or Tempest 2Mbit burstable
> > connection.(delivered via wireless, dsl, whatever depending on your
> > exact needs.) TelstraClear with paradise are the only one of the low
> > cost providers that differentiate between national and international
> > traffic... and by capping upstream to 256k they limit the possible
> > damage to their network by bandwidth hogging users and their peer to
> > peer filesharing.
> >
> > JetStream Home1000 - $89
> > Paradise Broadband Max 2mbps - $93 + $17 modem rental = $110
> > Tempest1000 - $199 + $50 router rental = $250
> >
> > There is no incentive for Telecom to change their pricing model. We only
> > saw datacaps introduced to the 128k Jetstream Starter connection by ISPs
> > after the problems introduced by p2p filesharing.. a gigabyte a day in
> > the extreme curcumstances... imagine if that were to become a gigabyte
> > an hour because you could get unmetered full rate local data transfers.
> >
> > Bandwidth in NZ is expensive, Jetstream provides affordable connections
> > to home users and business who want to download that 5Mb email
> > attachment now, who dont want to wait for that webpage to load. If the
> > system is open to abuse, that abuse will happen. Anyone disagree?
> >
> > Sascha
> >
> > --
> > This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
> > see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
> > and various documents.
> > To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org
> > with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
> >
> >
>
>--
>This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list.
>see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ,
>and various documents.
>To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org
>with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message
>
-- 
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list. 
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ, 
and various documents. 
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org 
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message