[arin-ppml] Rationale for /22

[Kevin Kargel]

> 
> It could work and it would be legal.  The problem is that
> it wouldn't last.  Remember, DSL/cable customers are least-cost
> customers. (Hey, I have DSL at my house!)  All that would happen is the
> customer would set this up, then observe both of their connections
> for a year to 6 months.  After doing this they would decide which
> ISP was more reliable and just cut service with the other ISP
> to save money.

I disagree.  I think you may be falling into the trap of urban thinking.  In
rural environments a whole different set of challenges come in to play.
Long transmission lines, increased weather exposure and smaller provider
scale all come in to play to affect DSL reliability.  DSL reliability is
getting better all the time, and five 9's is a nice target, but I don't
think it is yet the norm for DSL.  

Quite often all that is available to these customers are the services of
micro-ISP's.  These micro-ISP's may have technical or reliability issues of
their own, or the customer may greatly desire the immunity of not being
addicted to the provider.

We have to remember that a pretty accurate axiom is "You get what you pay
for"..  a DSL without an SLA is never going to be as reliable as a DS3 with
an SLA.  Multi-homing to different providers is one method of mitigating the
lower reliability of a DSL connection.  The customer may well be happy long
term with two or three $39.95 DSL's .

> 
> So you can imagine what would happen if, say, ISP A and ISP B
> join forces to do this, then ISP A markets this solution to
> their userbase, and then finds 6 months later that a user
> which they had spent sales and marketing dollars to get on
> to their own network, then spent more sales and marketing
> dollars to pitch this multihomed solution to, just up and
> disconnects from them and makes ISP B their only ISP.
> 
> This is why you don't see Pepsi Co running the "Pepsi Challenge"
> advertising campaign much anymore.  They found out that
> longtime Pepsi drinkers were taking the challenge and some
> of them were preferring Coke, then switching to it.
> 
> There's big risks to advertising for your competition.
> 
> Ted
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3224 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20090803/261c7456/attachment.bin>