dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
258
share rss forum feed


OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH

Hey AT&T bashers, there is a reason

It's cap'ed to FTTN speeds, beyond the consistent experience reason, the backhaul to the Central Office is still copper in some of these locations.



batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

said by OSUGoose:

It's cap'ed to FTTN speeds, beyond the consistent experience reason, the backhaul to the Central Office is still copper in some of these locations.

Really? Glass to the node is not expensive, ask any CATV provider. Then they can say they have a "fiber rich" network. Why build it when the great unwashed doesn't have clue, even CATV employees don't have a clue they were lying when they said they had FTTP, well until the FTC told them to stop the false advertising.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to OSUGoose

Yes, that's called AT&T epic fail. As usual.



DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to OSUGoose

said by OSUGoose:

It's cap'ed to FTTN speeds, beyond the consistent experience reason, the backhaul to the Central Office is still copper in some of these locations.

No, the only Uverse with copper to the CO is ADSL2+ non TV customers. ( which are at the moment capped to 18 mbit/s ).


OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
reply to batterup

Well that's how the only greenfield deployment here is setup, from what I 've been told.



OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
reply to DataRiker

The development I'm speaking about is West Albany in New Albany, OH. I've heard this from several sources that the FTTP aggregates then rides copper back.



DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

4 edits

1 recommendation

This simply makes no sense.

Do you have some type of citation or link to this? I am almost certain who ever told you this was mistaken.



Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
reply to OSUGoose

said by OSUGoose:

I've heard this from several sources that the FTTP aggregates then rides copper back.

Then the NE's should be shot.. or be put in the mental ward.

Why on earth would you go Copper -> Fiber -> Copper. It's like recording in analog, mixing it in digital, then finalizing it back to analog (ADA). Ewww.


OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH

Actually its (House)fiber-> (Backhaul to CO)copper -> (backbone)fiber



Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

said by OSUGoose:

Actually its (House)fiber-> (Backhaul to CO)copper -> (backbone)fiber

That's even worse (DAD).

Here.. Let me record this CD onto a Cassette, then put it back onto a CD for you.


OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH

I know, was simply clarifying



Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
Reviews:
·PlusNet
reply to OSUGoose

Those sources are wrong and that's absurd. It is way cheaper to run fibre to nodes then copper to homes than to run fibre to homes then copper to CO, either on a fresh greenfield build or a brownfield overbuild.

Fibre to nodes is a few strands down well known ducting or poles, fibre to homes from nodes is many strands from multiple splitters across poles and ducts of often dubious quality, then there's the costs of delivering a fibre drop into each property.

I am not aware of any deployment anywhere in the world that delivers services in this manner, and no equipment developed with this type of deployment in mind.

I find it far more likely AT&T don't have enough nodes deployed and a number of premises are so far away that VDSL 2 struggles to reach them. They don't want to advertise an 'up to' speed so run with a lowest common denominator.

EDIT: The ILEC in the UK has nearly completed delivering FTTN to 24 million premises for less than $4 billion. The cost of delivering fibre to those premises would be at least 4 times that. Doing it the way you describe they'd have spent the best part of $12 billion to deliver ADSL2+ speeds. We're not talking delivering minimal amounts of fibre to each node, they've delivered enough fibre to be able to migrate to FTTP with the fibre they're deploying to the cabinets and will sell FTTP to those willing to pay an install charge, bypassing the node entirely to do so.



OSUGoose

join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH

AT&T was too cheap to run fiber all the way out, so they just tied into the existing copper.



Ignite
Premium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK
Reviews:
·PlusNet

So they get all the expense of installing fibre, alongside all the costs of having to maintain a ton of copper loops running EFM to backhaul it?

How many copper loops do you think would be required to deliver broadcast TV to the VRAD alongside all the unicast stuff, and are you aware of any equipment that allows that many loops to be bonded?

The TV would, by a mile, be the most bandwidth intensive thing running on the VRAD.

Any reason why AT&T would be the only telco in the world that did this? Surely if it saved cash many operators would have used the existing copper to backhaul VRADs / MSANs, they aren't in business for their health?



batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
reply to OSUGoose

said by OSUGoose:

AT&T was too cheap to run fiber all the way out, so they just tied into the existing copper.

It would cost more to upgrade copper than to run new glass. A 1.5/1.5 T-1 requires two pairs and powered repeaters every mile or so depending on the gauge of the copper. It would be a very unusual situation.

CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2

Actually, the current T1s here in NYC uses HDSL equipment that works on one pair up to 12k feet or two pairs up to 21k feet (depending on gauge). Repeaters are about every 3 miles. I think people would be surprised how much data is still on copper.



batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ

said by CXM_Splicer:

Actually, the current T1s here in NYC uses HDSL equipment that works on one pair up to 12k feet or two pairs up to 21k feet (depending on gauge). Repeaters are about every 3 miles. I think people would be surprised how much data is still on copper.

I knew I was approximate, as a sewer tech you should know.
at&t has showed how much they can get out of copper, last mile copper. Still even with the latest newest copper technology do you know of any fiber fed by copper?

DSL was invented by Bell Labs, who else, so it was placed in the public domain. The Bell operating companies wanted to sell big bucks T-1s or a second "Pots" line and did nothing with DSL. It took CATV offering broadband for the Bells to deploy DSL. They would have deployed fiber to the premise but back then the leeches would have below wholesale access to it so that wasn't deployed ether.

Not deploying DSL was a short sighted business decision; not deploying fiber, under copper rules, was a brilliant decision. NJ has deregulated natural gas and electric, the utility has to deliver it but anyone can supply it. I get calls from hustlers, I'm on the do not call list BTW, trying to hustle their gas and electric. If they don't follow the law does anyone really want to have anything to do with them? Typical slimy leech tactics of spoofing caller ID so I can't pour salt on them.