[mschuster91]

> the hyperscalers say they have to charge egress fees to pay for the costs in building their networks, but for some reason doesn't apply to ingress (which they're silent on)

because ingress traffic volume is a fraction (in my experience, in website hosting of a well known household brand, barely 1%!) of egress traffic volume, and most peering connections are 1:1 in ingress/egress bandwidth so the egress bandwidth cost sets the price.

[NBJack]

This also holds true on thebflip side for most consumer internet speeds (at least in the US).

Many people have a x00 Mbps or even x Gbps downstream, but most have no more than x0 Mbps upstream. Literally their ability to pull traffic from websites is 50X in some cases than to push information out. Going beyond that (greater uploads) often costs significantly more.

Whether or not these two are actually related isn't clear to me, but it is interesting.

[womod]

That's due to the DOCSIS standard for cable modems. They specced out more channels for downstream than upstream because of the limited bandwidth of copper and consumer priorities. With fiber there's an order of magnitude more bandwidth available, so the uneven split is much less (if at all?) common with the big backhaul lines between datacenters. For consumer fiber you'll usually get symmetric but for the most part it doesn't make sense as the vast majority of consumers just don't make use of their upstream bandwidth.