 |
 |
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Richard Laager <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On 06/16/2016 02:27 PM, Steve Howard wrote: > >> End users of remote switches pay as above. >> > > Can you elaborate on why you want it this way? As opposed to: the remote > switch operator pays for the MICE ports, and it's their business how to > recover that. +1 to Richard. As I see it the port fees are covering the maintenance and augmentations of the main switch. Having the remote operators with varying financial terms is good for the ecosystem. Also, the remotes have agreed to cover the (hopefully non-blocking) transport back to MICE so they should have a way to recover their costs should they choose.