View Single Post
tso's Avatar
Posts: 4,783 | Thanked: 1,253 times | Joined on Aug 2007 @ norway
#217
Originally Posted by allnameswereout View Post
This is also one of the reasons paying per MB should not be accepted by a customer. The 3G network is just connected to a backbone here and there (owned or rented by the ISP) which is then connected to a PoP probably at a IXP. If the 3G provider is also a DSL or cable provider they probably use this very network to transfer the data. No, what they are doing is getting back their high investment costs for 3G (ROI) which in essence is a logical and fair thing (early adopters get **** service, beta test, and pay twice ) but the way they do it is not fair. However, because other 3G providers have the very same problem, and the licensed spectrum only has X licensors there is not much competition. Asking customer to pay for an IP range (even /32) is another example or bullocks, and RIPE has declared this illegal, yet European ISPs continue to abuse a shady loop-hole!!
i suspect that the reasoning for the pay pr traffic is that while your transfering data, your taking up (a) channel(s) capacity on the local cell/antenna.

remember, wireless networking have more in common with a hub then a switch...

much like how old school long distance calls would take up one of a limited number of long distance wires, and therefor the telcos would want you to keep the call short so that the wired got freed up for other callers. quick solution, make the caller pay by the talk time.

with current fibreoptics and packet switched networks however...