Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kitz]

Also, if an ISP is using WBMC Shared, doesn't that mean they won't have to pay for things like 20CN centrals separately, they only have to pay for the WBMC host links, but have to pay for WBC and IPSC bandwidth separately (and separately at each host link).

WBMC (WBC) Total Best Efforts Contracted Bandwidth charge: £48.55 per Mbit/s per month
WBMC (IPsC) Best Efforts Contracted Bandwidth charge (Market B): £131.20 per Mbit/s per month
WBMC (IPsC) Best Efforts Contracted Bandwidth charge (Market A): £63.56 per Mbit/s per month

If you have a host link of say 500Mbps at one location,  then no you dont also pay for a central for customers coming in via that link.

Just out of interest I was trying to check the costs for a 20CN central v a 21CN host link, but I couldn't find the costs for hosts links and I need to get to bed.

He should be using IPsC for the 20CN and the annual rental cost for a 622Mbps central pipe is £1,028,920.00..  which is actually cheaper than  £1,496,760 for an old 622Mbps Central that he will previously had to pay for many years.

By that I didnt mean you had to pay for both central and host link from the same location.   I was just trying to use it as a guide for bandwidth costs.

[kitz]

That raises a question, your diagram shows a single physical connection reaching 20CN, 21CN and FTTC, which would appear to contradict the point about separate costs for 20CN.   Is the 20CN stuff carried on a separate VLAN/VP/VRF or something, so logically a separate connection (with a separate price) even though it's on the same physical link?

Do you mean the IPSC diagram?  The mention of FTTC threw me.

If so, it's aim is to show the possible pathways and that the links can connect to a single ISP gateway.    Same as with WBMC shared, the ISP can have multiple host links if they wish.  Gateway kit such as Junipers are able to merge various links or centrals.  Plusnet used to connect different centrals to a single ERX.

---

Below is a BTw diagram showing routing over WBMC shared (the bottom cloud) for 21CN and IPSC also converging at one point.   Don't ask me what the numbers mean I haven't a clue.   What I did was clean it up,  and then made a list below it to explain what all the abbreviations meant on this page

PS.
When it shows 4 links to 'CP' it means the 4 methods of purchasing bandwidth 1) BT centrals, 2) WBC 3) WBMC Dedicated 4) WBMC Shared.
IPSC joins traffic at the EEA.

[Chrysalis]

kitz dont want us two to go on forever,  i accept due to lower economy of scale bt transit/backhaul may not be able to price match but not to the point of what they been charging

[ejs]

Apologies, my mistake and me seeing the lower cost for Market A from their pricing list and getting them mixed up, knowing that its supposedly unregulated that are cheaper.
I think BT may also be getting them mixed up too on their latest price list and transposed the figures... What the heck has happened to their pricing?

This is from the WBC Tarriff dated 1st Jan 2016

Code: [Select]

AP national coverage (combined with IPsC CP Handover option) - Market A 12 Months 01/07/2014 Month £20,968.00
AP national coverage (combined with IPsC CP Handover option) - Market B 12 Months 01/07/2014 Month £6,532.00

Yet this is the latest WBC Tarriff dated 14th of April 2016

Code: [Select]

AP national coverage (combined with IPsC CP Handover option) - Market A 12 Months 01/07/2014 Month £6,532.00
AP national coverage (combined with IPsC CP Handover option) - Market B 12 Months 01/07/2014 Month £20,968.00


Have they messed with the Market A & B figures big time, or have they got them the wrong way round on the latest price guide.

I think they initially got those Market A and B figures the wrong way round, and recently fixed them in the latest price lists.

I pointed this out when discussing Plusnet non low-cost area pricing, in the older price lists, with Market 1,2,3, it was indeed Market 3 that was more expensive - that's probably because WBC coverage for Market B covers far more exchanges and end-users than Market A. Yes I still think Plusnet non low-cost pricing for FTTC and WBC is a total con trick.

IPSC does look much more expensive in Market B than Market A. But there's probably very little or no IPSC used in Market B anyway, most or all has WBC available, WBC is cheaper and doesn't have different per Mb per month bandwidth costs for Market A/B. A&A presumably could use TalkTalk wholesale in Market B instead of BTWholesale.