Best of the ISP-Lists

The Napster Saga Redux

Wireline ISP admins have already faced the problem of Napster-loving bandwidth hogs. Now the admins of wireless ISPs are dealing with the same issues. Members of the ISP-Wireless list argue about various solutions.

[October 31, 2000]

On the ISP-Wireless list in October, DR inquired,

"What wireless pricing models are working for you? And if you're using flat rate pricing, how do you deal with abuses by Napster types?"

PR advised that bandwidth is the most important thing to control:

"Consider the following: a user wants to download a 10MB file. If you limit access by speed, this user will use the wireless system longer, blocking it for other users. If you don't limit by speed, this user will get the file at blazing speed and will spend less time on your system, hence other users might notice something, but for a shorter time. I first wanted to limit users by speed, but now I'm more and more convincing myself that you can only charge a user based on used bandwidth. Charge your user per 1GB per month, something like $50, then you can make some profit. Everything over the 1GB limit is an additional charge. Make a nice control page where every user can check how much he's used. Bandwidth is expensive and will stay expensive. Charge your users for it by how much they use."

But a number of respondents argued that there's no escaping flat rate pricing:

[RSB contended] "Users won't accept charging by bandwidth. Flat rate pricing came about for dialup because of customer resistance to usage-based pricing."

[JY suggested] "Wireless access should come at a flat rate of $22.50-$32.50 to compete with wired DSL pricing. This is on top of a flat rate Internet access fee of, say, $19.95/month. Wireless solves a lot of the problems DSL and cable face, since they only reach certain areas in fixed locations."

JB added that there are ways to handle bandwidth abusers regardless of the pricing structure:

"Effective bandwidth management software can alleviate any problems with rate limits. When the pipeline isn't congested, your subscribers have full access to the maximum bandwidth under their Service Level Agreement. When the pipeline is congested, the users are throttled back based on rate and priority controls that you set. When your network is congested, the bandwidth abusers might notice a slowing in their download rates, but your average user, who would have been blocked out by the abuser in the past, will notice an improvement in performance." Finally, JH observed that the answer really depends on a number of factors:

"This is really something that your current market will answer for you. Does your area already have cable or DSL available? If not, then you can probably meter the access without experiencing too much resistance. If either cable or DSL are available and un-metered, then you're probably going to have a tougher time and may have to offer a flat rate. But it's still possible to keep it metered if you put the right spin on it."

Related articles
The Napster Saga:
The Napster Saga 1: To Meter or Not to Meter? Must ISPs meter bandwidth to prevent abuse?
Napster Saga 2: Drowning in Success? Can an ISP ban Napster?
Napster Saga 3: A Server Is a Server Is a Server? Does the Napster 'client' software constitute a server? Are ISPs right to ban it on this basis? What are the deeper issues here?

Our first Napster article:
The Napster Nightmare   Patricia Fusco
 [March 13, 2000]  Network admins—especially at universities—are tearing their hair out as this unassuming music-finding tool sucks up bandwidth, bringing networks to their virtual knees.

—End