how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| reply to Lazlow
Re: 5GB is TOO LOW said by Lazlow:You are forgetting that the 95th percentile is a double edged sword. IF I limit my speed to 5Mbps but maintain it constantly for the entire month, I can download a lot of data (1500GB+) but still keep the costs down(5Mbps rate) (and yes there is a lot of software out there that will allow one to limit ones speed). Just as a side note 5Mbps here on Charter is $60(for stand alone, off any specials). You're not buying 5mbps of 95th percentile for $60 though. In actuality it would work out to something like 640-768kbps @95th is what the broadband ISPs are budgeting for, and that's the top end.
said by Lazlow:You have to remember that at the exact same time people are using more bandwidth, the technology is getting drastically cheaper. One of the US cable executives just stated that converting over to Docsis 3 (in the US) was under $100 per home passed(which included the modem change). That pricing isn't correct -- the modems themselves are $75-100. It's somewhere in the $200-$500 range per sub, give or take.
If you think building that out is cheap, you clearly haven't priced an expansion for a Cisco CRS-1 chassis. Yes, you get a boatload of bandwidth for your dollar, but we're talking upgrade prices starting at $250k just for a single interface add with the current MSC and SIP/SPA combinations.
170Gbps is being developed, but it's still a long way out. Currently 40/100G Ethernet is still pre-cert, with the final standard not expected until Q2/Q3 of 2010. The principle issue they are still working out is interop within 64-lambda DWDM frequency spacing, since a vast many carriers have a significant amount of capital investment in existing DWDM systems.
For interop today, the limits are growth by 10GigE interfaces. The pre-cert 40/100G solutions are still being tweaked, and cross-vendor compatibility is still not worked out. If a single entity like Comcast or Verizon wanted to build a 40/100G span within the confines of their network, then the pre-standard interfaces can be a solution; if they need to interconnect, then all bets are off unless they are running the exact same hardware at both companies. Sure, there is an OC768 standard for 40G, but with its rigid timing requirements due to it being a channelized interface (ie, you can mux OC192, OC48s, etc into the circuit) the costs are a vast amount more than "fire and forget" Ethernet.
said by Lazlow:If you need further proof just look around the world. Many countries have 100/100Mbps service for under $50/month. Sure, with Japan being one of those countries.
I love these slides because it illustrates the point beautifully:
»www.caida.org/workshops/wide/080···ffic.pdf
When your average utilization on 100/100 FTTH broadband is less than 26GB/mo, it's cost effective to offer the service for $50. | | |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
3 edits | You are right that I was a little off on the D3 upgrade costs:
"The deployment should cost Cablevision between $70 and $120 per customer"
From: »Cablevision Begins Beta Testing 100Mbps?
As far as the utilization; you are forgetting that US cable companies are claiming the less than 5% are using more than 2GB per month (figures are ball park off the top of my head).
Edit: "Currently, the median monthly data usage by our residential customers is approximately 2 - 3 GB."
From: »www.comcast.net/terms/network/amendment/
EditII: If you take a look at the Japanese data you will also see that they allow well over a TB of download on a significant number of systems. Your PDF page 11. | |
| I've heard from more than two sources now that both India and Japan have 1 TBPS internet speeds available. Needless to say, the price in India is amazingly low, but it would be interesting to know how much it costs in Japan.
In the meantime, I'm paying ATT for 5 mbps, and actually getting only 2.6 for downloads and less than .5 for uploads.
What a deal. On TOP of that, ATT didn't like me running Windows Server 2008 and made me shut it down under the threat of cancelling my service completely. The land of the free, home of the brave. | |
|
