how-to block ads
|
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to jtorre69
Re: Thanks Comcast!
said by jtorre69  :It's not that at&t does not care about the state of their network, it's just that with at&t you don't share your network connection with your neighbors. It doesn't matter if your neighbor downloads countless data .That's what makes dsl a better product than cable modem. That's why at&t doesn't have to resort to this. Not totally true. You eventually share the bandwidth with them somewhere. Instead of at the node, it's at the CO. So now you're sharing with the whole town instead of just your neighbors. | |
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| said by Jodokast96 :said by jtorre69 :It's not that at&t does not care about the state of their network, it's just that with at&t you don't share your network connection with your neighbors. It doesn't matter if your neighbor downloads countless data .That's what makes dsl a better product than cable modem. That's why at&t doesn't have to resort to this. Not totally true. You eventually share the bandwidth with them somewhere. Instead of at the node, it's at the CO. So now you're sharing with the whole town instead of just your neighbors. This is true but you need to look at the whole picture. With Cable you are sharing your available "last mile" bandwidth with your neighbors and thus a hog as a neighbor affects you. With DSL, you have 24/7 dedicated last mile bandwidth (you to the CO). At the CO, your traffic is commingled with all of the other users of that CO and since there is, hopefully, enough bandwidth to support the CO's user's average needs there is less impact from the hogs (you have more people and thus there are more "less than average" users in the mix). | |
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by RARPSL :This is true but you need to look at the whole picture. With Cable you are sharing your available "last mile" bandwidth with your neighbors and thus a hog as a neighbor affects you. With DSL, you have 24/7 dedicated last mile bandwidth (you to the CO). At the CO, your traffic is commingled with all of the other users of that CO and since there is, hopefully, enough bandwidth to support the CO's user's average needs there is less impact from the hogs (you have more people and thus there are more "less than average" users in the mix). It doesn't really matter. Either way there should be enough bandwidth to whatever point the sharing is occurs. For example, at the node level, you're saying 1 person can affect the whole thing. Ok just to use arbitrary numbers, let's say there are 100 people on every node. That's one person affecting another 99. Say there are 100 nodes in a given town, and that each node sees this problem. Each node receives 1% of X amount of bandwidth.
Now if you base it on a DSL model using the same numbers and bandwidth (X), but without the nodes, you've now got 100 people pulling the same amount of data from the same amount of bandwidth and affecting the other 9,900 just the same, except now it's spread out over a larger area. Either way it's not enough bandwidth to handle the demand. DSL may give you a fast sync speed over that last mile, but the use of it still ends up being the same. Slow.
One method is really no better than the other. It all depends on the makeup and usage of individuals in a given area. In a node system, if all 100 of the hogs are off of one node, then the rest of the nodes won't be affected, because they are all fighting over 1% of X. But in a DSL system, it doesn't matter if they are all in a single area or not, because they now have direct access to X, so the other 9,900 are affected. | |
|
