[ppml] [narten at us.ibm.com: PI addressing in IPv6 advances inARIN]

[Peter Sherbin]

> In my home use, I send out about 10 x as much as I bring in. Does  
> this mean that
> I can get a connection from you and you will pay me ?

That is correct. ISP would charge those on their network downloading what you send
out. To do that ISP needs to count data flows by user.
Payout to you from ISP depends on the volume and may take different shapes, e.g.
volume credit towards future downloads.
The bottom line is a downloader pays to an uploader for content. There is also a
flat rate to cover provider costs (same as flat monthly rate for a regular phone
wireline).

Peter

--- Marshall Eubanks <tme at multicasttech.com> wrote:

> Hello;
> 
> On Apr 18, 2006, at 7:06 PM, Peter Sherbin wrote:
> 
> >> So the carriers owe the content providers $M's/month ???
> >
> > In the exact same fashion as cable providers owe studios.
> >
> >> Obviously you haven't head of P2P, or people hosting family oriented
> >> content. Not all traffic is download.
> >
> > Look again at the formula. If (Download - Upload) < 0, then your  
> > bill equals 0.
> > Traffic uploaders (aka content providers) are good for the network  
> > because:
> > Assumption 1. People access the Internet to download content
> > (and such downloaders are supposed to pay for satisfying that need).
> >
> 
> In my home use, I send out about 10 x as much as I bring in. Does  
> this mean that
> I can get a connection from you and you will pay me ? If so, please  
> send me contract details.
> 
> Regards
> Marshall Eubanks
> 
> >> That billing model is not ready for use, and security or lack  
> >> thereof has
> >> nothing to do with it.
> >
> > If security has nothing to do with the Internet then why does the  
> > community spends
> > so much time and effort on it?
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > --- Tony Hain <alh-ietf at tndh.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Peter Sherbin wrote:
> >>> The Internet billing model is simple:
> >>>
> >>> (Download - Upload) * $/bit = Billed Amount
> >>
> >> So the carriers owe the content providers $M's/month ???
> >>
> >>>
> >>> It is based on two assumptions:
> >>> 1. People access the Internet to download content
> >>> 2. Paying party controls their download activity
> >>
> >> Obviously you haven't head of P2P, or people hosting family oriented
> >> content. Not all traffic is download.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> If security becomes a prohibitive concern for the above then the  
> >>> product
> >>> is just not
> >>> ready for use.
> >>
> >> That billing model is not ready for use, and security or lack  
> >> thereof has
> >> nothing to do with it.
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML mailing list
> > PPML at arin.net
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com