Chiyo
Save Me Konata-Chan
Premium
join:2003-02-20
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| only if you live next door to the CO?
So I remember when the 7mbps came out but I couldn't get it because I was too far. The best I could get was 1.5 at the time and I recentlly checked and still can only get 1.5.
Do you need to pitch a tent right outside the CO to get the 40megs?
--
That was the wild boar.... Moo!
My podcast: The Banzai Beat »www.banzaibeat.com |
|
robl27
Premium
join:2008-07-16
Mary Esther, FL | if this is fiber, it should be ok. similar to cable. watch it will take forever for the rest of us to see speeds + pricing like this!
-Rob |
|
kilometers
join:2007-01-24
Sacramento, CA
 ·SureWest Internet
 ·AT&T U-Verse
1 edit | 40/20 on VDSL2?
That would be pretty awesome. If Qwest really does offer this at some point this year then I'll be even more disappointed in U-verse, which can only offer me 1.5mbps upload MAX.
Even though they don't compete with eachother I hope this could show what VDSL2 could do and what might be possible with AT&T U-verse in the future. ;_; |
|
delusion ftl
@algx.net | PPOA
Unless things change dont forget to subract 10-20% of advertised speed to help offset the overhead of their PPOA protocol.
In reality the comcasts 16/2 is generally as fast or faster than Qwests 20/.8 |
|
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | Beware
Some of the info in that thread isn't exactly accurate. Grain of salt and all that.
And no, I'm not going to expand on it.
Let's just say the rollout (edit: if it happens) is much more involved than installing a new card in an existing DSLAM, and that it's going to take some time before widespread availability.
A positive step in any case though. |
|
jdjbuffalo
join:2004-01-17
Denver, CO
| Finally
It's nice to see Qwest joining us in this decade...
If they want to be competitive then I think they will need to rollout lower pricing by a few dollars to $39.99 and drop the $10 "you don't have the $30+ phone service with us" fee. If they don't want to drop the fee then it should be integrated into the price. So on for their lowest tier it should be around $45.
In Denver, Comcast will soon be deploying their DOCSIS 3 upgrades with the lowest tier being 12/2 and Qwest could compete with their 12/5. However they can only do this if it is $55 but not if it is $62.99 + $15 in taxes. |
|
Metatron2008
join:2008-09-02
Stockbridge, GA | Tonight...
Craig Moffet is screaming like a little girl... |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to Chiyo
Re: only if you live next door to the CO?
VDSL2+ should be able to give you ~40Mbps up to a decent distance (~3000'). I'm assuming that Qwest is deploying RT's near the each breakout box. |
|
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| reply to delusion ftl
Re: PPOA
PPPoA has nowhere near 10-20% overhead. In any case, they'd almost certainly be using PPPoE exclusively as they do with their current FTTN offerings.
The lion's share of overhead comes from DSL itself, thanks to it being based around ATM which has high overhead. Generally 12% is about the minimum in terms of overall overhead, with the average in the neighborhood of 15%. |
|
longstreet
join:2004-11-14
Plano, TX | 53 bytes is alot of overhead. |
|
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| said by longstreet  :53 bytes is alot of overhead. And PPPoA itself doesn't have 53 bytes overhead. I suspect that you're adding in TCP/IP and ATM (AAL5) overhead on top of that from PPPoA, which is comparatively small. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to delusion ftl
Actually, the post says no PPPoE/A so no 15% speed cut. Though even with the cut Qwest,s pricing is reasonably competitive. I'll take 40/30 over 50/10 any day especially when 50/10 is capped. |
|
longstreet
join:2004-11-14
Plano, TX | reply to dynodb
Just the ATM header. |
|
Smith6612
Premium
join:2008-02-01
united state
 ·Dish Network
·Verizon Online DSL
·FrontierNet Intern..
| reply to Chiyo
Re: only if you live next door to the CO?
Next to the CO if I know the specs of VDSL2 correctly will give you over 100Mbps of possible sync rate at least on the download side 
--
It's all fun and games in a Team Fortress 2 battle until your sentry gun is sapped by the Spycrab! |
|
blackriders
join:2005-01-16
Bronx, NY
| Prices and Speed?
Damn, with those prices and speed makes me glad I live in the Bronx. I can choose ool boost/ultra or verzion Fios.
Well once fios gets to my building. Rest of my block is wired alreeady  |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
·Qwest.net
 ·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to longstreet
Re: PPOA
Per frame, yes it is. BPON uses ATM while GPON doesn't...one big selling point for GPON (other than speed of course) since it makes network topology flatter and kills that pesky overhead.
Apologies for my post five minutes prior insinuating that PPPoX is the cause of most of the inefficiency; it's not. Heck, PPPoA is actually MORE efficient than PPPoE by a small margin, but there's that darned ATM overhead to deal with as a matter of course. |
|
dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
| reply to longstreet
said by longstreet :Just the ATM header. That's separate from PPPoA.
An entire ATM cell is only 53 bytes, 5 of which is AAL-5 overhead and 48 of which is user data. |
|
jinjimbob
Troy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
| reply to Chiyo
Re: only if you live next door to the CO?
said by Chiyo :Do you need to pitch a tent right outside the CO to get the 40megs? No that is just plain silly. They are actually going allow people to live in their COs.
People would get a big speed jump if they just connected the RTs with fibre from the COs. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to longstreet
Re: PPOA
said by longstreet :Just the ATM header. To clarify this, here is a FAQ entry I wrote about six years ago. It references ADSL but the numbers hold for VDSL:
quote:
The quoted "speed" is the sync rate between your modem and the DSLAM or RT port. This reflects the raw bitrate upon which everything else flows. Your data is encapsulated into Ethernet frames which are then encapsulated into TCP/IP packets which are then encapsulated into ATM cells which then are transmitted down the wire.
Actually the majority of the overhead isn't because of TCP/IP, its because of ATM (53 octet cells - 48 octet payload, 5 octet header). The PPPoE overhead is 8 octets per MTU (normally 1500 - this size of 1 Ethernet frame) The IP overhead is only 20 octets per MTU - PPPoE (normally 1492) and the TCP overhead is only 24 octets per MSS (normally 1452)
So thus:
PPPoE overhead is 0.53 %
IP overhead is 1.30 %
TCP overhead is 1.65 %
ATM overhead, on the other hand is, 9.4 %
For total DSL delivery overhead of about 12.9 %, or 87.1% efficient.
Then there is the Ethernet overhead:
Ethernet overhead bytes:
12 gap + 8 preamble + 14 header + 4 trailer = 38 bytes/packet w/o 802.1q
12 gap + 8 preamble + 18 header + 4 trailer = 42 bytes/packet with 802.1q
Ethernet Payload data rates are thus:
1500/(38+1500) = 97.5293 % w/o 802.1q tags
1500/(42+1500) = 97.2763 % with 802.1q tags
Best case we're out another 2.5 percent just for using Ethernet...or 97.5% of 87.1%, for a final "efficiency" of 84.9%.
So therefore on a "perfect" 1536/384 line the max payload "speed" would be a tad over 1,300/326 kbps. A 3008/512 (sync) line delivers about 2554/435 (payload) and a 6016/768 (sync) line 5108/652 (payload).
Furthermore, ATM has services on top of it like IP does with TCP and UDP, introducing more overhead, for example, bridging Ethernet over ATM. Also, many of the data protocols within IP/TCP/UDP have even MORE overhead, depending on the protocol.
Every DSL provider does it the same way, the only way for a real improvement is to drop ATM, which isn't going to happen, as it is far too useful to drop, even with that kind of overhead
|
|
sludgehound
join:2007-03-12
New York, NY | RR slower than this
Heck on Roadrunner Midtown west side Man'h I'm only gotten
15-18 down & 495 up. So much for cable. But I did get them to lower the package price for a year. Connection finally became more stable.
|
|
