said by freejazz_RdJ:The issue is, if you don't allocate the capacity block to an interface, how will it work? Nobody has been able to demonstrate a setup whereby a fixed quantity of ordered capacity can be dynamically allocated among several links.
There is a simple solution for this: don't.
From the early days of capacity-based billing, most people had the impression that we were headed towards a total-capacity billing arrangement similar to 95th, not a per-interface billing scheme.
The incumbent's costs to bring traffic to (or take it away from) the POI is essentially the same regardless of how it gets distributed between the multiple links between the incumbent and ISP, which is one of very few points on which I agree with "the opposition".
If CBB had been on a per-POI commit basis applied to the lumped MRTG total of all interfaces where ISPs get billed extra for exceeding their commitment (punitive markup on that, lets say 100%), we wouldn't have many of dispute items we have now. Of course, this ends up looking a lot like commit+95th - best rate on the committed peak volume, 95th applied to remainder in excess of commit.