The issue of the billing module is almost inevitable when each proposal for a WiFi network real name certification system is discussed with A——Do you want to do a billing? Is the billing function in the certification system or is it deployed separately? There is no standard answer to this question, but the logic behind it is regular.
The relationship between certification and billing, let's talk about it.
Many people discuss this issue and confuse two concepts: authentication is"You know who you are, do you have access to the Internet?"The bill is..."How much you use, what you have to pay for it."These two things can be separated in technical architecture. Some scenes require no fee for certification, such as WiFi within the enterprise; others require both certification and fees, such as WiFi for hotels, commercial complexes; and others require certification but the billing is hidden, such as monthly traffic-bag deductions for school accommodations.
If you come up, take it."Certification + billing"Procurement and deployment as an integral whole, easily caught in over-design——The cost of maintenance is higher when the billing module is purchased, it is not used at all or is not used at all. Conversely, if the first time it was felt that no charge was needed, then the scene changed and the cost of retrofitting was small, and it was based on a WiFi network real name certification system.
Which scenes really need a separate costing module.
The scenes requiring separate costing modules are usually characterized by multiple set or fee criteria, with different user groups charging different rules; third-party payments such as micromail payments and payment of treasures; third, bills to be generated, invoices issued or financial reconciliations made; and fourth, the need for volume statistics to be accurate to the level of a session, not just the daily total.
The typical scenario is the Hotel WiFi. Hotel WiFi often needs support: free use by tenants, pay for visitors, higher bandwidth or longer for members, and payment packages to support micromail scans. These requirements can become more complex if all are embedded in the WiFi network real-name certification system, and costing logic changes (such as adjusting the prices of the package) can affect the stability of the authentication process.
In contrast, the cost requirement for boarding in higher education is often simpler: a system of account activation after students pay fees and speed or network breakdown beyond traffic limits. This logic and certification system depth coupling are reasonable and does not have to be a separate set of fee-splitting services.
Cost of combined deployment
The billing function is integrated into the WiFi network real name certification system, with simple deployments and few maintenance nodes in the short term but several potential problems in the long run.
The first is the question of upgrading. The core function of the certification system is to ensure that users have regular access to the Internet, and this part requires a high degree of stability, which should be as frequent as possible. But the costing module often needs to be adjusted frequently as business changes.——The combination of a charge and certification coupon requires that each calculation logic be re-tested for the entire authentication system, with a limited release window and slow response.
The second is fault segregation. The billing service is in trouble, and the ideal condition is that the authentication function can continue to work, that users can continue online and that the billing data will be reimbursed ex post facto. If the two are coupled, the billing module may have an abnormal effect on the certification process, resulting in a loss of access by the user——The impact is huge.
The third is the data security boundary. The billing data involves user consumption records and sometimes bank cards or payment account information, which are much more secure than a purely network certification log. Integration means that the authentication system will have to assume higher levels of responsibility for data security and increase compliance costs.
Actual threshold for individual deployment
The issue of combined deployment is also addressed by the actual threshold for individual deployments. The most immediate problem is the capacity to carry the personnel. A WiFi network real name certification system plus a separate billing system requires maintaining two systems, two databases, two interface documents and matching problems with the reasons for whether it is authentication or costing. If there are only one or two IT teams on the first side, this maintenance burden is heavy.
Another problem is the stability of interfaces. API interfaces between certification and billing systems often require repeated validations at an early stage. If authentication and billing systems come from different suppliers, the time and communication costs of connectivity are not low. Some projects have been delayed for several months because of cross-linkage among vendors, with the system eventually being online six months later than expected.
A practical judgment framework
In assessing whether the WiFi web-based real name certification system requires separate costing modules, three dimensions can be judged:
First, the complexity of the fee rule. The simpler the rules (e.g., a single set, uniform rates) the more integrated they tend to be; the more complex the rules (multiple packages, dynamic pricing, third-party payment) the more likely they are to be separated.
Second, the expectation of future expansion. If operations are relatively fixed and there is no apparent need for expansion, IPP maintenance costs are lower; if more sites are likely to be accessed in the future and more payment options are available, the costing module will be independent at an early stage and later adaptation costs will be lower.
Third, the capability of a transport team. Separate deployments are more elegant if there is sufficient personnel and technical capacity to do so; maintaining stability in an integrated system is more certain than maintaining two pine coupling systems if human capacity is limited.
There is no one-size-fits-all answer, but only a reasonable choice for the current scenario. When discussing the WiFi web real name certification system, think about these three dimensions first and more valuable than the tangled technology option.