dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
6316
UK_Dave
join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON

UK_Dave

Member

Re: Changes in Bell AGAS network

Hi TSI David.

Thanks for the update.

Here's the numbers for 10pm (same day as above post).

Ping statistics for 206.248.155.70:
Packets: Sent = 4824, Received = 4814, Lost = 10 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 54ms, Maximum = 3441ms, Average = 643ms

I'll do one more, in an hour or two - just for comparison.

Cheers
Dave
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError to 34764170

Member

to 34764170
said by 34764170:

If Bell offered 10Gb AGAS ports as they should have been 2-3 years ago this wouldn't be an issue.

Without LAG or equivalent, balancing could still be an issue on 10G, just not quite as much of one.

Having 1G links would be a non-issue if Bell's and TSI's equipment could support 16-64 links per LAG and LAG was enabled. They'd have one logical 30+Gbps link with potential for near-perfect balancing.
UK_Dave
join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON

1 edit

UK_Dave

Member

DMT shows my stats to be:

Downstream 7040kbit/s, attenuation 19.0db, SNRM 20.0db txpwr 19.5dBm RCO 63% (11136kbps)

Upstream 800kbit/s, attenuation 10.0db, SNRM 11.0dB, txpwr 11.5dBm RCO 73% (1088kbps).

And says I am on g.992.1 Annex A ADSL interleaved path.

It's all Greek to me, so if anyone wants to throw in an opinion on the interpretation I'd be happy to learn something.

EDIT, thanks for pointing out the typo, DavesNotHere

Cheers
Dave

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere

Premium Member

Typo : Upstream 8000 should be 800
UK_Dave
join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON

UK_Dave

Member

Here we go, 10.30pm.....

Ping statistics for 206.248.155.70:
Packets: Sent = 626, Received = 626, Lost = 0 (0% loss)
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 132ms, Average = 49ms

I know it's not over as many pings, but rest assured it stays like this all night, and all morning, and a little of the early afternoon before it gets to where we were a few posts up the page.

Cheers,
Dave
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to InvalidError

Member

to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:

Without LAG or equivalent, balancing could still be an issue on 10G, just not quite as much of one.

I didn't mean it would resolve the issue all together but it would make it much easier to deal with as opposed to 32+ individual links.
said by InvalidError:

Having 1G links would be a non-issue if Bell's and TSI's equipment could support 16-64 links per LAG and LAG was enabled. They'd have one logical 30+Gbps link with potential for near-perfect balancing.

Some vendors have extended LACP to allow for up to 16 group members, but IMO its still a poor use of equipment and resources.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by 34764170:

Some vendors have extended LACP to allow for up to 16 group members, but IMO its still a poor use of equipment and resources.

If most of the equipment is already there and largely under-utilized anyhow, whether or not it is used efficiently makes little difference since this is still likely cheaper than upgrading it.

Also, with the CBB rates as they are now (or even if they got dropped to ~10k$/Gbps), it will be profitable regardless of how bad efficiency might be so no pressure there - the inefficient setup forces ISPs to buy more capacity than they really need so upgrading could actually cut into profits beyond the upgrade costs themselves.

As Bell discovered for themselves when they disputed the CRTC's dismissal of past network conditioning efforts: the CRTC's costing rules do not reward efficiency.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned)

Member

said by InvalidError:

If most of the equipment is already there and largely under-utilized anyhow, whether or not it is used efficiently makes little difference since this is still likely cheaper than upgrading it.

I'm referring to TSI's perspective.. and it does result in somewhat poor utilization with the current setup. The "upgrading" is them adding some 10Gb line cards into the chassis on Bell's side. Not a big deal.
said by InvalidError:

Also, with the CBB rates as they are now (or even if they got dropped to ~10k$/Gbps), it will be profitable regardless of how bad efficiency might be so no pressure there - the inefficient setup forces ISPs to buy more capacity than they really need so upgrading could actually cut into profits beyond the upgrade costs themselves.

They can add all the capacity they want but it doesn't resolve the poor balancing and poor utilization.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by 34764170:

They can add all the capacity they want but it doesn't resolve the poor balancing and poor utilization.

You were talking from TSI's perspective, I was talking from Bell's perspective. From Bell's perspective, making things more efficient makes them lose revenue because GAS ISPs would not need to over-purchase as many links and as much CBB.

The way costing rules are arranged, they do not reward incumbents trying to be more efficient so Bell naturally tries very hard not to do it.

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere

Premium Member

said by InvalidError:

....The way costing rules are arranged, they do not reward incumbents trying to be more efficient, so Bell naturally tries very hard not to do it.

 
And why do Cats kill Birds ?

Because they are Cats.
UnixMan0
join:2012-10-14

UnixMan0 to TSI Marc

Member

to TSI Marc
I am really sorry for popping this discussing up again but ... just for my curiosity as for a person with 20+ years of experience in S/W development mostly focused on UNIX-like operating systems and TCP/IP networking... can somebody tell me what AGAS stands for?

It seems to me like all kids playing games in Windows and never heard about the Internet details but joint this thread are absolutely familiar with the "AGAS". I'm feeling myself as an idiot because all attempts to find any info by 'google'-ing etc. had no success. Is it a kind of Bell and TekSavvy proprietary term I never heard about?

Thanks!

squircle
join:2009-06-23
OTWAON10

squircle

Member

Aggregated Gateway Access Service. GAS is Bell's wholesale DSL system, see »www.wholesale.bell.ca/pd ··· SDSL.pdf

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

1 edit

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

said by squircle:

Aggregated Gateway Access Service. GAS is Bell's wholesale DSL system, see »www.wholesale.bell.ca/pd ··· SDSL.pdf

Someone should put all these various TPIA terms to the Terminology FAQ's section, for both DSL and Cable lingo, especially the alphabet soup bits for the newcomers then we can just point 'em all there.
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to TSI Marc

Premium Member

to TSI Marc
All this talk about Bhell is giving me a pain in the AGAS

Davesnothere
Change is NOT Necessarily Progress
Premium Member
join:2009-06-15
Canada

Davesnothere

Premium Member

 
It's giving ME A-GAS attack.