Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions

From: Sean Donelan (no email)
Date: Thu Nov 03 2005 - 09:18:11 EST

  • Next message: Christian Kuhtz: "Re: Equal access to content"

    > if i am a paying sbc or other foopoloy voice customer, and i
    > place a voice call to aunt tillie, does aunt tillie pay sbc
    > to hold up her end of the conversation?

    Historically, aunt tillie's residential telephone line was
    subsidized by charging more for business lines. When you called
    aunt tillie, a portion of what you paid for the call passed through
    settlement charges and access fees to compensated both your service
    provider and aunt tillie's service provider for the call.

    These were usually implemented for social policy reasons, and its
    been a slow process to re-allocate the various billing practices to
    eliminate them. Aunt tillie saw it mostly as her local phone bill
    increased as she lost the benefit of the subsidy.

    > if i am a paying sbc or other foopoloy dsl customer and i go
    > to <http://content.provider>, why should content.provider pay
    > to give the sbc paying customer what they're already charged
    > for?

    When aunt tillie watches a home shopping channel, the channel
    usually gives a percentage of everything aunt tillie buys from
    the channel to the local cable operator. When aunt tillie watches
    basic cable channels, usually the channel gives the local cable
    operator several minutes of advertising time every hour, even though
    aunt tillie already paid for her cable. When aunt tillie calls
    a toll-free (1-800) number, the business answering the call pays
    for the call including the settlement and access charges for
    aunt tillie's service provider in addition to the business' service
    provider. Google pays compensation to some web sites to include
    "sponsored" links on their web pages.

    Why do businesses do this? Some believe it benefits advertisers to
    subsidize consumers basic cable, toll-free phone access and web sites
    so more consumers have access to their content, and in turn gives
    businesses a bigger market to sell too.

    Why would you want to prevent businesses from paying for part of
    aunt tillie's Internet access? If a business wants to pay for "better
    than best effort" access for users coming to its web site or using
    some other service such as VOIP, shouldn't it have that option?


  • Next message: Christian Kuhtz: "Re: Equal access to content"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD