 
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | 1.2.3.... NSA post should appear...
 | |
|
 | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: 1.2.3.... Actually, I'll wait for the whining about UVerse only offering 6/1 internet access and the, "other countries already have 100 Gbps backbones, why is AT&T deploying outdated infrastructure" comments. | |
|
| | 
beerbum
Premium
join:2000-05-06
Reading, PA
 ·Comcast
| Re: 1.2.3.... no it should be "other countries already have deployed 100 Gbps to the home.."
I laugh when people complain about not being fast enough.. I remember a time my company was paying $45,000.00 a month for 6 mbps service .. heck a T1 ran about $3500.00 a month with telco/data charges -- now it's $42.95 a month and the performance is about the same  | |
|
| | 
XBL2009
------
join:2001-01-03
Chicago, IL
1 edit | Remember they promised everyone 100 megabits by 2009. I wouldn't hold your breath for it though. | |
|
| bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Wow... you nailed it. | |
|
| 
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI
| Actually, the subject should read 3 2 1, no?
And I don't know why this is front page material. I think T's "new" equipment was probably salvaged from a dumpster at one of Comcast's headends. 
--
Meet Bill and Karolyn at www.theslowskys.com | |
|
| | bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: 1.2.3.... What's the speed of Comcast's backbone? Since you're so well informed. | |
|
| | |
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI
| Re: 1.2.3.... said by bogey780  :What's the speed of Comcast's backbone? Since you're so well informed. Don't know a thing about Comcast's infrastructure but I CAN tell you that my own internet connection runs from 12000 to 20000 down and 1000 to 3000 up....which is clearly twice as fast as uverse. Of course, since I live in one of T's redlined broadband dialup ghettos, I guess you could say that Comcast is virtually infinitely faster.
--
Meet Bill and Karolyn at www.theslowskys.com | |
|
| | | | bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: 1.2.3.... So you really have no legitimate comparison or experience with the service you're griping about as "slow". Nor are you familiar with AT&Ts architecture vs Comcast. Ok. | |
|
| | | | |
ib50MbSoon
Formerly TwoKDialup
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Coloma, MI
| Re: 1.2.3.... said by bogey780 :So you really have no legitimate comparison or experience with the service you're griping about as "slow". Could you get U-verse installed at my address so I can test it? I didn't think so.
--
Meet Bill and Karolyn at www.theslowskys.com | |
|
| | | |
| | 
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Coalinga, CA
 ·AT&T Yahoo
| You do realize that Comcast doesn't actually own ANY of the internet backbone?
Comcast gets their connectivity from companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Level 3, just like everyone else.
--
Hate your enemies. Save your friends. Find your place. Speak the truth. | |
|
| | | |
| | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: 1.2.3.... said by toadlife :You do realize that Comcast doesn't actually own ANY of the internet backbone? "C-Bone"? "I-Bone"? "T-Bone"? I've seen evidence that Comcast is building out their own national backbone.
Granted, they won't be selling transit to other services, and they aren't likely to be joining the nine "Settlement Free" Tier 1 networks.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | | 
CCIE aswell
@charter.com
| said by toadlife :You do realize that Comcast doesn't actually own ANY of the internet backbone? Comcast gets their connectivity from companies like AT&T, Verizon, and Level 3, just like everyone else. Actually, Comcast has their own national backbone. | |
|
| | | |
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Coalinga, CA | Re: 1.2.3.... Where is it? I've viewed various backbone maps over the years, and never seen *any* Cable company represented. | |
|
| | | | | NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Re: 1.2.3.... Did any of those maps show the old SBCIS backbone?
You are aware that there is a Tier 1, "Settlement free" group of transit providers running backbones? And there are networks who buy transit from Tier 1 networks, but have other peering arrangements, which are called "Tier 2" networks? And everybody else buys transit from some other transit provider.
No cable company is a Tier 1 network; they don't trade packets ("Settlement free peering"), nor do they sell transit to other providers. They do have their own, internal backbones. It is entirely possible for a Comcast user to run on the Comcast network from coast to coast without traversing a Tier 1 "backbone" provider's network.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Coalinga, CA | Re: 1.2.3.... Thanks. | |
|
|
|
| smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| Re: Not entirely true Exactly, I have worked for companies that have been using MPLS and the precursor to MPLS, tag-switching, since 1998.
So they must be using the "new-generation" part of their statement to justify this.
As I believe AT&T is the biggest Cisco CRS-1 customer so far. | |
|
| | 
mikeeo
Premium
join:2000-03-12
Newark, DE
1 edit | Re: Not entirely true said by smcallah :Exactly, I have worked for companies that have been using MPLS and the precursor to MPLS, tag-switching, since 1998. So they must be using the "new-generation" part of their statement to justify this. As I believe AT&T is the biggest Cisco CRS-1 customer so far. Its taking about new OC-768 technology NOT MPLS, and AT&T is NOT the biggest Cisco CRS-1 customer. | |
|
| | | |
| ossito16
join:2004-07-31
Whiting, IN
·RCN CABLE
| I think they mean this is the clever technology they are using. I have not kept up with internet technology but doin this w/o multiplexing is hot, eliminating log jams at the switches. .......The new-generation backbone network carries data at 40 Gbps without the need for multiplexing (combining multiple digital signals into a single optical channel)......... | |
|
| |
factchecker
@cox.net | Re: Not entirely true Level3, Qwest, the Internet2 guys and others have been doing 40Gbps without multiplexing for awhile now...
This is really a non-news item. | |
|
NightHawke
join:2002-02-28
Rockport, TX
| MPLS = Old Hat For years verizon has been peddling it, only to be shunned due to the fact that the equipment set up for it that was affordable was flaky, or worse.
Juniper finally broke through and delivered on their J2300's, in which we have at our offices, that run decently enough.
No, MPLS has been around since the late 90's before the bubble burst. | |
|
mikeeo
Premium
join:2000-03-12
Newark, DE
| Nothing to do with MPLS Would you kids go back to playing Xbox, this has nothing to do with MPLS and had everything to do with carrier level speeds. Most carriers run OC-192's (10gig)interfaces, this allows AT&T carry more customers on a single fiber than before. Sure you can combine multiple OC-192's to achieve 40g speeds but over 4 different fibers.
Some of you need to read alittle more before running off at the mouth.
-Mike
CCIE #17982 | |
|
| 
SimbaTLK1
Rawrrr
join:2001-09-07
Bethel Park, PA
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Nothing to do with MPLS said by mikeeo :Would you kids go back to playing Xbox, ...Some of you need to read alittle more before running off at the mouth. -Mike CCIE #17982 Is it really necessary to be such a trolling jackass to everyone that posts something?
--Matt | |
|
| |
mikeeo
Premium
join:2000-03-12
Newark, DE
| Re: Nothing to do with MPLS said by SimbaTLK1 :said by mikeeo :Would you kids go back to playing Xbox, ...Some of you need to read alittle more before running off at the mouth. -Mike CCIE #17982 Is it really necessary to be such a trolling jackass to everyone that posts something? --Matt It is...:) | |
|
| 
bsc
Premium
join:2003-03-11
Lexington, KY | I know you think you are better than everyone because you have those letters and numbers after your name.. but last I checked CCIE does not certify you to be a HUGE DICK. | |
|
| | 
kyler13
Is your fiber grounded?
join:2006-12-12
Arnold, MD | Re: Nothing to do with MPLS Doesn't change the fact that he's correct. | |
|
| | | 
charter_hsd
VIP
join:2001-08-07
Calera, AL
| Re: Nothing to do with MPLS said by kyler13 :Doesn't change the fact that he's correct. But, he's not correct. | |
|
| |
mikeeo
Premium
join:2000-03-12
Newark, DE | Let me know when you get your number. | |
|
|
charter_hsd
VIP
join:2001-08-07
Calera, AL
1 edit | Last time I checked the Cisco 454 ROADM platform can multiplex 32 10Gig wavelengths over a single fiber pair.
Infinera can handle as many 80 10Gig wavelengths across a single fiber pair.
Regards. | |
|
| |
See 11 replies to this post |
|
|
factchecker
@cox.net
| said by mikeeo :Would you kids go back to playing Xbox, this has nothing to do with MPLS and had everything to do with carrier level speeds. Most carriers run OC-192's (10gig)interfaces, this allows AT&T carry more customers on a single fiber than before. Sure you can combine multiple OC-192's to achieve 40g speeds but over 4 different fibers. Your point ? ATT is not the first to do this... | |
|
mikenolan7
Premium
join:2005-06-07
Torrance, CA
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| 3 2 1 Ignition, We Have Liftoff Of course, this would also save the NSA the cost of having de-multiplexers, instead passing the cost of the non-multiplexed technology on to consumers. Also help out AT&T in the hunt for copyrighted material. You can't search content on multiplexed pipes. | |
|
nsa lver
@comcast.net | yup.. ATT cant sniff 100Gbits/s | |
|
|
Big Brother 6
@rr.com
| Re: yup.. said by nsa lver :
ATT cant sniff 100Gbits/s
More likely its not ATT sniffing its the NSA.
For years they have been sniffing phone calls key words or sentence structure would tip them off using telephone monitoring equipment courtesy of ATT allowing them to tap into these large hubs ATT had to route calls.
Nothing new here. | |
|
bone135
join:2004-03-26
Waukesha, WI
| Uverse should eat this up nicely. Maybe this will help with the fact they are bogging down there network with more Uverse crap. Yes I sound like a broken record, but I will say it again, for about a year my DSL pings have been getting worse and worse. This roughly corresponds to uverse deployment in my area. I would guess that most of the bandwidth is local to the VRAD to your house, but you still need to get all the channels to the VRAD at the same time, and I would guess they use there internet backbone for this? Because I don't see satellites by the VRAD boxes.
Warning, a lot of this is purely my opinion and based on no facts what so ever, it is based on my own experience and I have no technical knowledge on how uverse is actually distributed. | |
|
| bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: Uverse should eat this up nicely. More than likely it's not the TV portion. They don't need to pipe all the channels to the VRAD. And then they only need to pipe one for all the viewers watching a channel out of a VRAD. | |
|
| | lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL
| Re: Uverse should eat this up nicely. Bone 135 You really don’t have a clue do you? This article is about the long haul network backbone that carries internet traffic. Uverse is fed down Via satellite links to video hubs placed strategically around the US. Those local hubs use the short haul network to get the satellite feeds to local viewers. at which point the other poster is correct - only like 4 channel feed is sent down the line to the TV viewer. 1 to view - 3 to PVR. | |
|
| | | bone135
join:2004-03-26
Waukesha, WI
| Re: Uverse should eat this up nicely. So these satelitle farms that ATT has, which the last time I check they have 2. One primary and one backup site. The data magically gets from the satelite farm to the VRAD? Is that what you are telling me?
I would guess they use their, as you called it, "long haul" network for this. | |
|
| | | | bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | Re: Uverse should eat this up nicely. If you don't think a couple dedicated gigs is enough to serve a couple hundred channels...wel then...that's on you. But the VRAD only requests the active channels being sent. It's like SDV in that regard. Bandwidth use is minimal. | |
|
jimbo48
join:2000-11-17
Hayward, CA
·AT&T DSL Service
·EarthLink
| AT&T and Beefy Core Networks All this doesn't mean a thing unless this capacity/speed improvement can be delivered efficently, reliably and affordable to residences.
The "last mile" for many is the weakest link in the chain. I happen to live in an area of the SF bay area that hasn't seen any meaningful improvements in the infrastrucure in 15 years when Comcast's predecessor strung cable on PG and E poles and bamboozled city gov't into granting a monopoly resulting in continual rate hikes, deteriorating service and support the norm ever since. Why upgrade the infeastructure when you can charge premium rates using the same antiquated copper? I'll be more optimistic when I can get even (pipedream) 6000/sec downloads and 1000/sec uploads reliably. | |
|
|
|
|
AT&T Beefs Up Core Network
NSA?
·