dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
474
mdfb42
join:2015-01-24
Hamel, IL

mdfb42

Member

ISP technology question

I live in an area in which Medicom sold the lines to a local exchange provider, Madison Communications, and they have made no improvements to the decade old infrastructure since purchase. I currently Pay $80 for 10/1 DSL or $90 for 20/1 DSL service in which the 20/1 is the max service offered.

Here is where my confusion begins. They provide digital cable through cable lines in my area (including my residence), however they choose to provide internet service through DSL which forces us to pay for a phone line. My knowledge of the infrastructure is limited at best so I wanted to see if my thoughts are accurate by asking others with more knowledge.

It is of my understanding that the existing cable lines can be utilized with minimal infrastructure changes in order to provide internet service up to possibly 100/10 similar to Charter and Comcast that offer 30 and 60 meg down speeds as their standard. From the information I have found, the only thing stopping them from upgrading our DSL service to much faster cost-efficient cable service is a change in their back end equipment and no changes to the line infrastructure would be needed.

Could someone confirm or rebuke my thoughts as far as that our ISP just simply wither does not want to make any minor upgrades to their infrastructure and/or they are currently enjoying their profit making machine by having minimal infrastructure expenses and charging an extremely high price to keep high profit margins?

Thanks in advance

DataDoc
My avatar looks like me, if I was 2D.
Premium Member
join:2000-05-14
Hedgesville, WV
·StarLink
·HughesNet

1 recommendation

DataDoc

Premium Member

said by mdfb42:

they are currently enjoying their profit making machine by having minimal infrastructure expenses and charging an extremely high price to keep high profit margins

This.
mdfb42
join:2015-01-24
Hamel, IL

1 recommendation

mdfb42

Member

said by DataDoc:

This.

Well I was suspecting that haha. I am mainly wondering if my thoughts of it being a simple back end equipment upgrade that would provide good cable speeds over DSL service is accurate.

The main reason I am asking is because many residents in my town are very frustrated with our ISP service and a town about 15 miles away just installed a FTTH infrastructure. Therefore if it is a simple upgrade, I can apply pressure on them through the community to make the change. Otherwise, I am willing to go the route of getting a committee together to come up with a FTTH plan for our town using the municipality and cutting them out all together. I would obviously prefer the later but it requires YEARS of work to complete.
harald
join:2010-10-22
Columbus, OH

1 recommendation

harald

Member

It is by no means a simple upgrade. All the components in the system need to be bidirectional, there must be free channels available, the cable plant needs to be maintained at a level consistent with DOCSIS, and a headend must be provided. That means a CMTS, a server to update the modems, the modems, and a bunch of little stuff. Oh, and qualified technicians.

Maybe $300,000 for a town of 816. Don't think that will fly.
Expand your moderator at work
mdfb42
join:2015-01-24
Hamel, IL

1 recommendation

mdfb42 to harald

Member

to harald

Re: ISP technology question

said by harald:

It is by no means a simple upgrade. All the components in the system need to be bidirectional, there must be free channels available, the cable plant needs to be maintained at a level consistent with DOCSIS, and a headend must be provided. That means a CMTS, a server to update the modems, the modems, and a bunch of little stuff. Oh, and qualified technicians.

Maybe $300,000 for a town of 816. Don't think that will fly.

Thanks for the response. I apologize as I believe I haven't provided the full context. My ISP provides service to approx. 10 towns/municipalities. Half are provided cable internet service and the other half (the half I live in) is offered only DSL service. Therefore my lack of knowledge of infrastructure is where I am struggling to follow their logic and was wondering how/why they wouldn't offer cable internet in their entire service area or if there is a large expense I am not realizing.

Additionally, what further confuses me is they have the capabilities of fiber as they brought fiber service to the schools in their area as well as a hospital. The areas by the schools and hospital are dense population areas although smaller towns. Therefore I am also struggling why they refuse to expand their fiber offerings to FTTH because they already got the fiber lines into the heart of most towns they serve.

With the low maintenance costs of fiber, it only makes sense to me that you do FTTH with its great capabilities and lock in high profit margin services for the next few decades while also offering the best possible service to your customers instead of trying to hang in with this outdated service offering.
harald
join:2010-10-22
Columbus, OH

1 recommendation

harald

Member

said by mdfb42:

With the low maintenance costs of fiber, it only makes sense to me that you do FTTH with its great capabilities and lock in high profit margin services for the next few decades while also offering the best possible service to your customers instead of trying to hang in with this outdated service offering.

Agreed. Still not cheap.

If they offer cable internet in some locations that eliminates some of the issues of adding other towns, but your cable still has to connect to a headend with internet capabilities, and expansion slots in the CMTS to serve you.
mdfb42
join:2015-01-24
Hamel, IL

1 recommendation

mdfb42

Member

Ahh. So the headend and/or capacity of the CMTS may be the issue.

Thanks!
harald
join:2010-10-22
Columbus, OH

1 recommendation

harald

Member

Yes, as in no CMTS, perhaps. Maybe the hubs for your deprived towns have hubs separate from those that do. If your service is overhead, you can follow the coax back to the node, and the fiber back to the hub.
mdfb42
join:2015-01-24
Hamel, IL

mdfb42

Member

said by harald:

Yes, as in no CMTS, perhaps. Maybe the hubs for your deprived towns have hubs separate from those that do. If your service is overhead, you can follow the coax back to the node, and the fiber back to the hub.

Found this article this morning. Provide any help? To me it appears they are simply holding out on us and have the capabilities.

»www.fiercecable.com/stor ··· 11-08-08
harald
join:2010-10-22
Columbus, OH

harald

Member

Well, the article is basically bragging by Arris, but it does look like they are equipped.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop to DataDoc

Member

to DataDoc
Source?
PariahInIowa
join:2011-07-14

PariahInIowa to harald

Member

to harald
said by harald:

Maybe $300,000 for a town of 816. Don't think that will fly.

Depending on how many of those 816 folks are subscribers, $300k sounds downright cheap to me for a 6-fold speed increase. If half the town is signed up, that's 400+ people paying $1,000+ a year - probably for many, many years. Besides, technicians and maintenance are going to be required whether they upgrade or not.
wth
Premium Member
join:2002-02-20
Iowa City,IA

1 recommendation

wth to mdfb42

Premium Member

to mdfb42
Another issue may be the original cable that was hung all over town before Mediacom bought the system may not have had the capacity to carry all the channels and the 12 channels you would need for internet (8 on the forward path and 4 on the return path) for anything above 50/5. Some cable in some towns may not even be able to handle anything above 700mhz. Iowa City can handle about 890mhz. When Mediacom came to Iowa, they consolidated a couple hundred headends down to 7 (I think) They did this by connecting all the small towns with fiber. Mediacom may have thought the expense of running fiber to your town to expensive vs. number of customers.