how-to block ads
|
JamesPC
join:2005-10-12
Orange, CA
| Broadband
Yes it will, still a lot of dark fiber. The major ISP's have planned for this and will act accordingly. Not to mention the new types of fiber coming out now(FAST SHIT, dont make me get a link). The report on fiber was on BBR a couple weeks ago. The only real broadband problem in this country, is the last mile (from the CO to your house). Once that is all fixed, the rest will fall in line. | |
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| Agreed. The Cringely article linked to in the main item clearly indicates he's talking about last-mile, local ISP issues, not backbone. The main article link, to "CIO Insight", deals primarily with corporate users.
While I agree with much of the "CIO Insight" which trashes the Deloitte (out-of-)Touche Tohmatsu white paper, I can't agree with their approach that "prioritizing traffic" will be the easy answer for all latency and jitter problems in the residential arena. Additionally, were I to seek out an expert on ISP capacity issues, I'm not sure I'd use one from Earthlink as representative of the entire sector.
Is "CIO Insight"'s support for "prioritization" of traffic just another shot against Net Neutrality?
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
JamesPC
join:2005-10-12
Orange, CA | The funny thing is....I did not even read the article until after I wrote my statement. Looks like we think alike. | |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | reply to calvoiper
Why not Earthlink? I've seen Qwest execs say fundamentally the same thing while admitting p2p use isn't as huge of a crisis as many NOC operators let on.quote:
But even that "last mile" to homes looks reasonably healthy to the people in charge of it. "I don't see anything specific in the way of capacity problems today, and my job is to manage capacity and growth in our network," says Greg Collins, director of network and data center engineering for Earthlink Inc., the third-largest Internet service provider in the U.S.
It also admits, if you note the Cerf reference, that the edges are where congestion will occur.
quote:
And capacity at the core of the Internet continues to increase, says Google Inc. vice president Vint Cerf, a key figure in the development of the Internet. "There is available fiber and more wavelengths per fiber, so I do not see this as a serious threat," he says. It is true that traffic growth is faster than capacity growth—average traffic across the net increased 75 percent last year, while capacity grew 47 percent, according to TeleGeography—so the long-term trend needs to be addressed. But, says Cerf, a near-term capacity problem "will be at the access edges to the net, and not in the core." In other words, the traffic jams would be more likely at the points where people connect to the Internet via their service providers, rather than at the core of the net itself.
And obviously the last mile solution isn't a cryptic one, it's getting fiber closer to the customer, blended with prioritization for providers who aren't in a financial position to do so.
It's a fairly reasonable treatise on capacity I thought, and doesn't seem to be taking a position on neutrality one way or the other. | |
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| Why not Earthlink? Because I don't view them as a facilities-based provider, and I never think resellers/rebundlers/repackagers have as good a clue as to capacity availability as the facility owners. Qwest may well say the same thing, but Qwest remains essentially the runt of the Baby Bells with service quality and availability problems to match. Were I "CIO Insight" seeking ISP comment, I'd probably seek out a major Bell AND a major cable provider.
I said I agreed with most of the "CIO Insight" piece and I agree that it points to edge concerns. I personally don't much like prioritization as it essentially admits the existence of under-capacity--I'd rather see the capacity upped. (I don't like carpool lanes, either.)
And my question about a possible shot at Net Neutrality was a serious question--I wasn't sure if it was a roundabout slap at NN or not. You appear not to think so, Karl, and I respect your read. I also appreciate you highlighting the article in the first place, as it does offer a much-needed counterpoint to the DTT piece.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
