I’ve heard this before

Wireless operators are moving away from that model. Recognizing consumer disgust with 50-page bills, wireless operators are moving, grudgingly, toward flat-rate billing models. Why would broadband operators move in the opposite direction?

So, given the twin imperatives facing broadband operators, network congestion and the need to increase revenue, what is to be done? The recent FCC Order instructing Comcast to cease and desist from egregious traffic management practices (strident language meant to appease net socialists aside) reveals a path forward. Commissioner Martin specifically states that “We do not tell providers how to manage their networks. They might choose, for instance, to prioritize voice-over-IP calls.”

The Order clearly opens the door for service providers to promote certain traffic classes in order to obtain the service quality necessary to satisfy consumer expectations. As a result, many broadband service providers are experimenting with service models wherein subscribers may optionally purchase QOS-specific “channels” that operate over basic broadband internet access. Channels could be tailored to applications such as video, VOIP, gaming, or corporate VPNs. Channels shouldn’t be thought of as merely prioritization, rather they are specific allocations of bandwidth.

In some ways QOS-specific channels are actually a form of usage-based billing but the metric is expressed in such a way that subscribers can more readily understand what they’re getting. It is also a compelling improvement in the service and therefore more palatable to consumers.

This model has the potential to please all parties. Net socialists get a basic broadband service in which all packets are treated the same. Broadband operators get better engineered networks and new revenue opportunities. Consumers can purchase service bundles that best reflect their needs. And, best of all, regulators have blessed this approach.

Kevin Walsh is vice president of marketing at Zeugma Systems