RockyBB
Premium
join:2005-01-31
Longmont, CO
| reply to Cant_drive_55
Re: Physical costs of T1 vs DSL
DSL and cable are shared services. Bandwidth is shared in the neighborhoods, and is often oversold. Thus many customers are paying for a limited resource, and the low retail price is the result. Even the facility into your location is shared: cable shares the TV connection, and DSL rides on an analog voice grade line. T1 is a dedicated service. The circuit is engineered as a digital circuit, special repeaters might be required if you're far from the central office, and you don't share your bandwidth with other subscribers.
If you want to talk about businesses getting boinked, simply talk to any agent of ShopforT1.com or Megapath.com or Speakeasy.com who make a living rescuing frustrated DSL and cable customers with T1 service. Certainly not every DSL and cable customer is disappointed, but there are enough of them to support a thriving industry.
As for your personal situation, dialup too slow while T1 too expensive, have you checked for WISPs and/or with Verizon for ISDN BRI? |
|
Cant_drive_55
@verizon.net
| Yes, but I am really speaking to the cost of the physical plant. Seems to me that if you consider DSL shared (best effort from the CO) you could set up a T1 based network with the same parameters. My situation is about 10 miles from the CO. I have looked and it seems that if you are that distance from the CO, you can get a point to point without additional repeating.
I also though about ISDN but unless there has been a change, it is still only 128K for both channels. |
|
RockyBB
Premium
join:2005-01-31
Longmont, CO
| the cost of the physical plant is irrelevant. only the price to you is relevant. and the price to you for an internet T1 is almost always dependent only on the distance from your central office to a carrier POP -- and almost never dependent on the distance from your location to the local central office.
why not try ISDN BRI? even at 128K it's triple your current speed. and you'll notice the upgrade right away; it's more noticeable than going from 1M to 3M. |
|
Cant_drive_55
@verizon.net
| Good point about the ISDN. I guess a bird in the hand is worth three in the bush.
However, my greater point, and the one that I have been trying to find an answer for several years, is that if the actual physical costs (barring any repeating for long distances) are basically the same as DSL, then if you relax the SLA, why can't T1 circuitry be used to deliver internet where DSL does not go?
We are bouncing signals off of satellites, trying to run IP over high power electric lines and bouncing wireless signals off of multiple towers, when the answer to rural internet coverage may be sitting on a little ckt board in the demarc room.
Thanks for your assistance! |
|
RockyBB
Premium
join:2005-01-31
Longmont, CO
| said by Cant_drive_55 :
my greater point, and the one that I have been trying to find an answer for several years, is that if the actual physical costs (barring any repeating for long distances) are basically the same as DSL, then if you relax the SLA, why can't T1 circuitry be used to deliver internet where DSL does not go?
I covered that in my first post above. "DSL rides on an analog voice grade line. T1 is a dedicated service. The circuit is engineered as a digital circuit, special repeaters might be required if you're far from the central office." Irrespective of SLAs and oversold/dedicated upstream bandwidth, the wires for T1 and DSL are configured differently.
The long term answer to rural internet availability will be with the cellular providers. Have you checked for EVDO (cellular brosdband) availability for your place? |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| said by RockyBB  :I covered that in my first post above. "DSL rides on an analog voice grade line. T1 is a dedicated service. The circuit is engineered as a digital circuit, special repeaters might be required if you're far from the central office." Irrespective of SLAs and oversold/dedicated upstream bandwidth, the wires for T1 and DSL are configured differently. I can't speak for the ILECs costs to themselves when they sell a T1, but any CLEC is going to pay $X for an unconditioned copper pair for DSL, and $Y for a conditioned loop (or loops, depending on how it's delivered). Around here I think the tariff comes to perhaps $15 for a dry loop for DSL and at least $50 for a T1. I am too lazy to go digging for tariffs...
On top of that, DSL gets terminated in a DSLAM which is, compared to traditional TDM "telco" equipment, way, way cheaper. Old school telco gear for terminating T1, T3 and OC circuits is an entirely different world with insane pricing, and one hopes, reliability. This stuff is built to meet certain standards and it's all for 5-9's reliability, which the DSL gear simply is not.
Then there's the install and maintenance, which as Rocky mentioned, involves possibly installing repeaters, picking the appropriate technology (traditional T1, DSL-based solutions - yes many T1s ride "DSL", but not the cheap stuff), circuit planning and possibly new construction, in some cases dropping a fiber mux in the building.
Ongoing you are paying for the reliability of the line and a totally different tier of people to service it.
This is just the circuit itself, I'm not even getting into the handoff to the ISP and any oversubscription issues. Even Frame/ATM services over T1 where you are agreeing to go on a "shared" medium is going to be more than cable or DSL due to the underlying T1 line connecting you to the provider. |
|
