The cost of the system is really going to be a rule-based way to divide the limited bandwidth resources, so that they can be quickly and within limits. But before the program is decided, there is a check to figure out who the system is running the money for, which part of the flow.
The billing is not a charge, it's a rule for the band.
The central function of the bill is to set a rule for allocation of limited export bandwidth. The basic rate within the free line, beyond later limits or by measure, is that most people use it daily without being affected and that few severely employed people drag down the entire network. We have seen a secondary school where there are no pre-school boarding blocks and no web pages open until we start working late, and half the amount allocated.
The free amount is fixed where it determines the experience of most people.
The free amount is the most sensitive figure in the package. It's low, and students feel that schools are full of stuff; it's high, with no speed limit, and bandwidth is still available to a few. Our experience is to see real traffic distribution, setting it at 80% of people who cannot use it. Most students actually spend around 30 Gs per month, giving it to 40 Gs, while the rest naturally enter the speed zone. This level is not head-shooting, but must be talked about by using real flow data for a period of time, or it will be either cursed or useless.
School and dormitory areas, the books should have been split.
The two types of areas are completely opposite. School districts are not blocked if they want stability and low delays, teachers' school screens, examination systems are connected; dormitories are for large traffic and long hours online, students watch videos, play games, and information. If the two sets use the same billing strategy, either teaching is crowded or dormitory experience is poor.
Three hidden costs behind a billing system.
School accounts are easily seen only in the software authorization, but there are three sums of money left behind. The first is the integration cost of authentication and billing docked with existing wireless controllers and certified servers; the second is the manpower for follow-up, rules to be adjusted, accounts to be checked and disputes to be processed; the third is the most easy to ignore, accounting compliance and invoice-related interfaces, and financial processes are more difficult than technology if they involve charging students. We have encountered a school budget that has only allocated software fees, resulting in additional amounts being collected and shipped, and projects are six months late.
Don't use billing as an income-generating tool.
Schools use the system as a small vault, with low levels of free fees, which force students to keep up with their numbers, and result in more stressful teacher-student relations and complaints. The essence of the bill is resource management, not business. It is a healthy position to set it in a reasonable position, allowing the vast majority of people to use it for free, and limiting it to a very few heavy uses. We have always advised schools to disclose their fee income separately, using where to explain it so that students and parents can accept it. Once it becomes apparent that they are charging a disguised amount, the positive value of the system is all negated.
The cheap and financial income of the students is not the same thing.
Students are concerned about how much a month is spent, the video cards are not working; financial concerns are about flatness, loopholes and the money that comes in. The two sets of perspectives often fail to match. Technically, it is the recording of each bill that can be reconciled by students, by region, by time, and financial security. We have seen the worst financial situation, which is the end of the month, when we find out that there is a regional strategy that leads to double counting.
The real account is the bandwidth utilization.
The most valuable output of the system, without a word on the collection of money, is that for the first time schools are able to see who actually uses the bandwidth and where it is. When there is no billing, the export is full, nobody can explain why; if you have a bill, you can see whether students use video to take over the head or whether some area of equipment is running out of order. We did an analysis for a college, finding that nearly 40% of the peak flow was infected with several mining programs, and then we got a whole-to-go improvement.
Think about who this system is talking to before you get on the line.
The rules of the billing system are biased. If you prefer to be a student, you pay more money; if you prefer the management order, you strictly exceed it; if you prefer teaching security, you give the school district a privileged route. There is no rule that would satisfy everyone, so we have to make a decision before going online: who is the first client of this system. We suggest that schools write this answer into the demand file, and the rules behind them are justified, not so much as listening to students today complaining about changing it, hearing financial complaints tomorrow and then eventually anyone.
A few actual pits that the schools stepped on.
The first pit is a free line and an overlay of the meal, with students being held in the set and charged, causing a lot of complaints. The second one is a failure to match the billing cycle and school term, closing zeros and opening charges are collided, and the customer’s clothes are squeezed. The third pit is a loss of money, which means that student traffic is too often delayed to be found to have been fast for several days. These pits are not technical problems, but they are uncounted.
Shut up: The billing system is a mirror.
A school wireless system, which is not so technologically advanced, ends with how the schools view resources and how they treat students. Fair and transparent accounting is good for students; vague or business-like accounts are a contradiction. So don't ask which one to buy, sit down and figure out what we're going to use it to do, who to do, and how much to do. Think about it, the selection and implementation will go well.