dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-01-21 12:16:37: A new FCC initiative promises to accelerate the delivery of 1 Gbps connections to all fifty states by 2015, though the plan upon closer inspection appears to be another hollow agency puppet show. ..


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Sounds like the same old crap.

So the real plan is to funnel more money to the ILECs who will use the money to invest in other things and continue to work to run CLECs out of business?
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.

tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:9
Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

Agree. I have to assume some locations in each of the fifty states already access to a Gig connection if they want it and can afford it.

Super high speed for the few is not the problem. Reasonable speed for everyone at an affordable price is.

/tom
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

1 recommendation

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by tschmidt:

Super high speed for the few is not the problem. Reasonable speed for everyone at an affordable price is.

I'd rather see 100Mbps - 200Mbps for 80%+ of the population instead of 1Gb for 10% and at good pricing and without caps. What is available now all too often is overpriced and increasingly is capped making it useless.
decifal

join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN
kudos:1

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by 34764170:

said by tschmidt:

Super high speed for the few is not the problem. Reasonable speed for everyone at an affordable price is.

I'd rather see 100Mbps - 200Mbps for 80%+ of the population instead of 1Gb for 10% and at good pricing and without caps. What is available now all too often is overpriced and increasingly is capped making it useless.

/\--- I nominate you as head of the FCC I completely agree with your statement

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1 recommendation

the thing is once you run the fiber the costs for 1Gbps over 100Mbps are trivial
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by elios:

the thing is once you run the fiber the costs for 1Gbps over 100Mbps are trivial

Who said anything about fibre? You don't need fibre to get 100Mbps - 200Mbps service to most people. Having fibre everywhere is the most ideal situation but it isn't going to happen.

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1 recommendation

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

to get 100/100 or 200/200 you bet your ass you need fiber
sure as hell not going to doing over the copper on the poles now ask AT&T how thats working out
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by elios:

to get 100/100 or 200/200 you bet your ass you need fiber
sure as hell not going to doing over the copper on the poles now ask AT&T how thats working out

wrong.

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1 recommendation

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

really theres a Nobel prize in it for you if you can figure out to put 200/200 down 100 year old telco copper
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

They already do 100/100 with VDSL. 200/200 has been done in the lab, although I don't know of any deployments yet.

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

in a LAB a lab is not the real world and even in the lab the distance was VERY short

MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

Yea for real world speeds like that you need fiber, cable can do it downstream now and has to potential with upstream channel bonding to do it up as well.

But old pots lines aren't going to do it, at least not unless the vdsl box is on the customers property , at the distances needed for that kind of speed, your better off doing fiber into the house.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by MovieLover76:

Yea for real world speeds like that you need fiber, cable can do it downstream now and has to potential with upstream channel bonding to do it up as well.

Cable is unlikely to ever see symmetrical speeds or anything close to it. In theory you could do a lot better but the existing legacy services already in use to deliver TV services get in the way. Way down the road when cable providers finally migrate to an IPTV based platform and get rid of digital cable they could do things properly. But that is so far out.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
Perhaps. But A single pair for VDSL can push 100/100 in real deployments in countries like Finland. If you were to bond that, you could increase both the distance and the speed.

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

how far was the loop bet it was under 1500feet

tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:9
Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting

1 edit

1 recommendation

said by elios:

really theres a Nobel prize in it for you if you can figure out to put 200/200 down 100 year old telco copper

Just to clarify, it is not speed per sa that is the problem. It is delivering high speed over thousands of feet of copper.

ADSL and VDSL do a fantastic job moving bits over voice grade twisted pair. VDSL2 is capable of 100/100 Mbps but is limited to only 1,000 feet. Not very practical in the real world. The fact there has not been a new ADSL/VDSL standard in years indicates copper has run out of gas, even with clever modulation/recovery techniques.

80% of US customers are 15,000 feet or less from the central office. Statistics for rural customers is much worse, Less then 50% are within 15,000 feet. I'd love to see some clever engineering that utilizes existing copper infrastructure but I'm not holding my breath.

Fiber is the only solution for wired broadband. Once installed is is actually cheaper then copper because maintenance costs are much lower. The down side is high up front capital investment that no quarterly profits driven CEO is willing to make.

/tom
fixed typos

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

1 recommendation

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

thats kinda what i was getting at and better said
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
said by tschmidt:

ADSL and VDSL do a fantastic job moving bits over voice grade twisted pair. VDSL2 is capable of 100/100 Mbps but is limited to only 1,000 feet. Not very practical in the real world. The fact there has not been a new ADSL/VDSL standard in years indicates copper has run out of gas, even with clever modulation/recovery techniques.

The lack of a new standard doesn't mean anything. There isn't a requirement for a new standard. The existing VDSL2 standard can have a variety of speed profiles and there is definitely on-going work by the major vendors to improve VDSL2. One such major improvement that is being rolled out by carriers around the world over the next 2 years is Vectoring which will allow existing connections able to attain 25Mbps service to now be able to attain 75/100 Mbps service. Using VDSL2 Bonding which utilizes 2 pair that can be raised to 150/200Mbps. Alcatel-Lucent is working on Phantom Mode which when used in conjunction with Bonding can further raise that upwards of 300Mbps.

said by tschmidt:

80% of US customers are 15,000 feet or less from the central office. Statistics for rural customers is much worse, Less then 50% are within 15,000 feet. I'd love to see some clever engineering that utilizes existing copper infrastructure but I'm not holding my breath.

You don't feed VDSL2 directly from the CO. That's why you build VRADs close to the customer.

said by tschmidt:

Fiber is the only solution for wired broadband. Once installed is is actually cheaper then copper because maintenance costs are much lower. The down side is high up front capital investment that no quarterly profits driven CEO is willing to make.

I don't agree and if you're hanging on to the dream of fibre everywhere it'll be just that.. a dream.

Even in the countries where people go on about fibre out the ying yang a significant portion of the users if not almost 50% are still receiving Internet via VDSL2. Fibre makes up a very small percentage of the over all broadband market around the world.

Trust me I'd love to see fibre everywhere but it is not realistic. Even Verizon with their FiOS did a pretty poor job at it.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

Well I guess while they are busy moving those VRADs closer to the customer at about 1000ft they might as well finish it up and give real speeds huh?

Keep preaching the silly VDSL. It isnt going anywhere fast and hasnt for years.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

4 edits

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by Skippy25:

Well I guess while they are busy moving those VRADs closer to the customer at about 1000ft they might as well finish it up and give real speeds huh?

Keep preaching the silly VDSL. It isnt going anywhere fast and hasnt for years.

Which is what I said is coming.

I am not preaching anything. I'm living in the real world unlike some of you guys deluded thinking these companies are going to roll out fibre everywhere. It isn't going to happen. I am not saying that if they all of a sudden did roll out fibre I would be against it. But these companies are not going to spend the hundreds of billions it would cost to tear out all of their existing DSL/cable networks and replace it with fibre. If it is rolled out I want to see it pretty much everywhere, not some swiss cheese coverage where it's available to houses down one side of a street and not the other side of the street like Verizon or that they're only covering a portion of the city. That's a bloody joke.

tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:9
Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting

2 edits
said by 34764170:

One such major improvement that is being rolled out by carriers around the world over the next 2 years is Vectoring which will allow existing connections able to attain 25Mbps service to now be able to attain 75/100 Mbps service.

I agree vectoring is interesting what you neglected to mention is that all vectored DLSAMs need to be under the same management so it does not work well when ILECs and CLECS serve out of the same CO. In my case my phone and ADSL is supplied by a CLEC. There are two CLECs that collocate out of our Central Office. That being said even when DSLAM are managed by multiple entities vectoring should still help – but it is not the magic bullet to higher speed.

»www2.alcatel-lucent.com/techzine···fiction/

Can you provide a link to a 3X vectoring improvement you cite, that is much greater then I though possible?

said by 34764170:

Using VDSL2 Bonding which utilizes 2 pair that can be raised to 150/200Mbps. Alcatel-Lucent is working on Phantom Mode which when used in conjunction with Bonding can further raise that upwards of 300Mbps.

Bonding is actually pretty interesting for carriers that are not “loop poor.” There was a big build out during the heyday of dialup so many carriers have excess loop capacity. In our case at one time we had three phone lines and a SDSL connection. Today we are down to a single voice/ADSL connection. However loop bonding is relatively expensive (multiple loops, DSLAM, modems) but is better than nothing.

As long as we are navel gazing getting rid of ATM would yield a quick 11 % increase in effective ADSL speed.

said by 34764170:

You don't feed VDSL2 directly from the CO. That's why you build VRADs close to the customer.

The problem is 1) VRADs are expensive, 2) you need a lot of them, 3) they need backup power, 4)suburban NIMBY complaints, 5) you are still limited by copper.

said by 34764170:

Trust me I'd love to see fibre everywhere but it is not realistic. Even Verizon with their FiOS did a pretty poor job at it.

That is the real question – how long will we live with a band-aid approach to broadband and when will we migrate to a purpose built high-speed network?

/tom
bdray222

join:2004-12-21
Littleton, CO

1 recommendation

TY, well said....my additional 2cents...they need to be killing 2 birds with one stone as far as I'm concerned and laying cable vaults across the country for easy access and upgrades to facilitate a minimum of fiber and a new underground power grid (that's a whole nother topic ...Fiber is simply the only solution for data needs and growth...100 Terrabits per sec recently on fiber? Copper people? Really? You really think we won't be pushing that kind of data relatively soon? lol ...I've amassed a Terrabyte of music, would have been laughed at for even using the term "terra" ten years ago.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

Please provide a source that contradicts him beyond you claiming it is wrong.

And dont even mention VDSL2 or some other crap variance of DSL which is so distance limited to begin with you would have to run fiber quite deep just to offer it.
Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX
said by 34764170:

said by elios:

the thing is once you run the fiber the costs for 1Gbps over 100Mbps are trivial

Who said anything about fibre? You don't need fibre to get 100Mbps - 200Mbps service to most people. Having fibre everywhere is the most ideal situation but it isn't going to happen.

but in the long run we will hit another brick wall with copper.. delaying upgrades will cost more in the long run but agree 100mbps - 200mbps should be a standard for us in the USA no exception.. with out countrys blowin past us at 1gbps this shouldn't be to hard for the cable co's to deal with
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by Cobra11M:

but in the long run we will hit another brick wall with copper.. delaying upgrades will cost more in the long run but agree 100mbps - 200mbps should be a standard for us in the USA no exception.. with out countrys blowin past us at 1gbps this shouldn't be to hard for the cable co's to deal with

I'm not denying that. Anyway, the cable co's have to go fibre too. DOCSIS is just a short term option.

MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1
100 - 200Mbps and the destruction of caps on wire-line broadband. I'm lucky to have escaped it so far with Verizon FiOS. But the trend stifles innovation. their are much more effective congestion based throttling approaches, that are much more effective at battling congestion.

I'm not thrilled about Wireless caps either, but in that arena I can't argue with the current spectrum and technology limitations, wireless internet will always need to be controlled in some way, though I think the caps are artificially low.
34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by MovieLover76:

But the trend stifles innovation. their are much more effective congestion based throttling approaches, that are much more effective at battling congestion.

I'm not thrilled about Wireless caps either, but in that arena I can't argue with the current spectrum and technology limitations, wireless internet will always need to be controlled in some way, though I think the caps are artificially low.

There wouldn't be any congestion if they proactively upgraded the network instead of waiting until the nodes/backhaul are at 99% and then upgrading. The carriers are dragging their feet as much as possible.

The caps are artificially low so it can be a cash cow. Wireless carriers are making a shit load of profit. Wireline is bad enough for the consumer in that regard, wireless is 10x worse.
15444104
Premium
join:2012-06-11

What about the REST of US,

said by tschmidt:

Super high speed for the few is not the problem. Reasonable speed for everyone at an affordable price is.


AMEN!

The rich and the poor are very well spoken for....but what about the REST OF US?????

just REASONABLE speeds for a REASONABLE price.

It seems once again that NOBODY with influence gives a rats butt about the folks that make the country work, the middle class.

cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26

Re: Sounds like the same old crap.

said by tschmidt:

Agree. I have to assume some locations in each of the fifty states already access to a Gig connection if they want it and can afford it.

Super high speed for the few is not the problem. Reasonable speed for everyone at an affordable price is.

/tom

That last line speaks volumes!!

Unlike how most people on any kind of a tech forum usually think, not everyone in the worlds needs or even wants a symmetrical 1Gbps connection!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1

Genachowski should open a delicatessen.

Genachowski should open a delicatessen since most of his comments are Bologna. Could keep it supplied for years.

WiseOldBear
De gustibus non est disputandum
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Phoenix, AZ

Pond scum subspecies

All elected politicians are pond scum and their political appointments are a even scummier subset.
--
My perception is REALITY

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS

The entire Administration from top to bottom...

...has been an endless stream of hollow promises. Why would anything think the FCC any different?

Ack ack

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=VepS-IyKOLE
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

1Gbps

Notice it doesn't say the price has to be reasonable. I can already get 1Gbps, but it would cost me thousands monthly. So I guess my state already counts.
brianiscool

join:2000-08-16
Tampa, FL
kudos:1
They better deliver on their promise. I have been doing speed tests for universal broadband ever since 2010.

linicx
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2002-12-03
United State
Reviews:
·TracFone Wireless
·CenturyLink
FCC has been soooo out of touch with America for so long their ignorance should not surprise me. But it still does.

My telco is providing 100 Gbps to Paris and London but it can't mange to give rural America a reliable phone after they killed POTS and replaced it with a digital service.
--
Mac: No windows, No Gates, Apple inside

NotTheMama
What Would Earl Do?

join:2012-12-06

1 recommendation

in all 50 states (even if it is in only 1 city--because that will happen anyway).

How about just getting 1 mbps to everyone in all 50 states? ...for something less than $20/mo? or maybe even "free" like Google's other option (5 mbps, just pay for the install)? (In other words, how about doing something that's actually hard to do*? ...something actually useful to at least someone? you know, like for those who can't get anything but dial-up ...if that?)

*Of course, doing anything at all is harder than simply saying "let's do this" ...which is about the extent of this "plan".
--
"...but ya doesn't hasta call me Johnson!"

•••••
jerseyjoe123

join:2008-04-28
Picton, ON
Bode say that the FCC is making a promise, whereas Genachowski said he was challenging the ISPs to do it. Big difference.

Either way, expect the ISPs to not lift a finger to do anything except continue milking subscribers dry with higher monthy rates and lower caps.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: Challenge, not Promise

I don't know of a lot of ISPs that are not lifting a finger. I see telcos pushing out faster DSL all the time and cable companies pushing up their speeds on a regular basis. I see tons of fiber going in for new construction and being fed to neighborhoods to boost existing speeds. Heck I even see ftth going in on dirt, not gravel, roads.
kem09030

join:2004-11-29
Rushville, IL

Re: Challenge, not Promise

Frontier has gone the other way. The service here was 3mbps but they oversold the service and backed it down the 1mbps. It isn't often that the full 1 mbps is seen. It is more like .25-.5 mbps with pings late at night around 100-500 ms and daytime/evening around 1000-1700 ms. Secure sites are impossible to use most of the time.

IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast
The only people who need 1 Gbps are institutions with servers or a lot of computers on the premises (such as a call center, hospital/medical center, or a high school).

For most residential users like myself, I only need the 50/10 plan through Comcast.

It is split between several computers, tablets, and gaming consoles.

For most residential users, 1 Gbps is overkill (like using a tractor trailer to bring home a week's worth of groceries).

whiteshp

join:2002-03-05
Xenia, OH

Re: Most people don't need 1 Gbps.

You don't need it because you don't have it. Look beyond your feet! If we had 1Gbps service you would see remote cloud, family, or "group" LANs forming. Ie: I would swap hobby nature video files we all take (often around 1+ gig size) with many of my relatives and it would be as if they were connected to my local LAN. Right now my only option is to send them snail mail or compress them to crap quality. Just because monopolies don't allow it to exist doesn't mean people wouldn't find new life transforming ways to benefit from it. I'm sure when the first cars were offered many people said "No one ever NEEDS to go as fast as 20 mph!" "What a huge waste!"
rdmiller

join:2005-09-23
Richmond, VA
We don't need no stinkin' gigabit fiber. If folks are only willing to pay for DSL, why should the govmnt interfere?

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
The best Government money can buy.
floydb1982

join:2004-08-25
Kent, WA
I'll believe it when I see it happen.
tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY
for it to work without full regulatory reform and price controls? that's fantasyland...
Paxio
Premium
join:2011-02-23
Santa Clara, CA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

What's the point of having a gigabit connection if you are faced with the same monopoly which dictates your choice of data, voice, and video?

The real issue isn't just gigabit -- it's a gigabit connection with open access to all service providers at reasonable wholesale rates. That would open up a true marketplace of digital services and has the potential to revolutionize the way services are delivered.

The marketplace really does drive down cost and improve service, we just need a way to make it work for us in the telecom area.
bdray222

join:2004-12-21
Littleton, CO
Fire this Douche! What happened to companies like Earthlink...10 years ago you could get dsl for fractions of the price of any big corp crap company and it typically worked better too! Where did they all go? If the trend had continued, you'd probably be able to get a 10M connection for about 10 bucks right now...I can't even FIND an advertisement of ANY sort on the net for such type companies or deals any more...MY options? Centurylink or Comcast...YEAH...F'em'both!
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

1 recommendation

Re: Where's the Earthlink?!

said by bdray222:

Fire this Douche! What happened to companies like Earthlink...10 years ago you could get dsl for fractions of the price of any big corp crap company and it typically worked better too! Where did they all go? If the trend had continued, you'd probably be able to get a 10M connection for about 10 bucks right now...I can't even FIND an advertisement of ANY sort on the net for such type companies or deals any more...MY options? Centurylink or Comcast...YEAH...F'em'both!

Earthlink is still in business, and they still sell DSL, as well as cable in some franchises. The latter was the result of a merger settlement, the former is just traditional wholesale.

What happened was Earthlink never invested in plant, they're just reselling someone else's network, so they don't have much say in the product beyond their current contract. Meanwhile, the companies that DID pay for the copper lowered their prices, offered faster services, and the cable industry did as well, so firms like EL became increasingly irrelevant - though we still use them occasionally.

We actually had DSL service for under $10/month for two years - but I doubt that price-point was sustainable; copper maintenance requires union guys with bucket trucks - and someone has to replenish the N2 bottles.

tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:9
Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
There are still CLECs (competitive local exchange carriers) out there. I just switched my DSL and phone from the ILEC (incumbent local exchange carrier) FairPoint to an ILEC G4 Communications. Much faster DSL at a significantly lower price.

But as elray See Profile mentioned to be competitive requires companies collocate equipment at the Phone Company Central Office and rent customer copper pair (UNE) unbundled network element. Most alternate DSL provides are simply reselling phone company DSL. As far as I know there is no unbundling of the Cable Network so that is not an option for Cable.

Long term I don't know how this will play out as the ILECs convert from copper to fiber but that is many years down the road.

/Tom

anon name

@rr.com
Karl: Excellant writing

RAZ Black

join:2001-10-04
Mansfield, TX
this isn't going to do jackshit for 99% of americans...

we are already worse off then most western countries when it comes to broadband servicing... it's pathetic.
--
-= ok, who turned out the lights? =-