dslreports logo
Comcast Expanding Small Fiber to the Home Deployments

Since 2012 Comcast has offered an ultra-fast speed option that started at 305 Mbps, then was bumped to 505 Mbps in late 2013. The service is technically a coaxial/fiber hybrid offering that isn't available to all users in a Comcast territory -- and it isn't cheap. It will run you $300 a month, and last I checked there's a doozy of an ETF (around $1k), a $250 activation fee and a $250 installation fee for good measure.

The company has been slowly expanding availability of this option for some time, even if (like telco "fiber to the press release" offerings) they primary focus remains on a very limited number of developments and highly-profitable apartment complexes. The Wall Street Journal appears to have just learned about this option this week, though couldn't get Comcast to comment on how many users this ultra-fast option is (or will be made) available to:
quote:
A Comcast spokeswoman confirmed the company has begun laying fiber to homes in new residential areas adjacent to its existing cable systems, noting the costs of building a brand-new, all-fiber network today are "similar" to building a traditional hybrid fiber-coax network. The spokeswoman declined to give details on how many customers will receive all-fiber services.
The steep price certainly is out of touch with offerings from some municipal builds and Google Fiber, neither of which challenge Comcast in the vast majority of their territory. Weak upstream speeds on traditional cable offerings also continue to fall well-short of fiber-based options.
view:
topics flat nest 
neufuse
join:2006-12-06
James Creek, PA

1 recommendation

neufuse

Member

huh?

What do you mean "The service is technically a coaxial/fiber hybrid offering"? This service is pure fiber, they run a dedicated fiber from their MUX to your house to a Ciena handoff box to convert to fiber to Ethernet to your router

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

Cogeco up here has been doing this for almost ten years already.
rfrooney
join:2006-02-26
Antioch, TN

rfrooney to neufuse

Member

to neufuse
Who cares? $500 to install, $300 per month, and $1K ETF. Anyone who pays that is a fool and deserves to be screwed. I'll wait for Google.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

1 recommendation

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

It's a Potemkin product. It exists for no reason other than to say it exists, even though few can get it and of those who can no one will buy it.

michieru
Premium Member
join:2009-07-25
Denver, CO

michieru

Premium Member

Re: huh?

For residential it sure does not make sense but for a business user it's a steal compared to a T1.

anonomeX
@71.207.157.x

anonomeX

Anon

Re: huh?

Yeah, but SLAs are expensive.

passingby
@74.115.237.x

passingby to michieru

Anon

to michieru
Funny thing is.. it has a 600gb cap.. at least that's where it will go once they hook a few fools.

blhahrf
@73.183.68.x

1 recommendation

blhahrf

Anon

Re: huh?

there is no cap on the FTTP product

whfsdude
Premium Member
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC

whfsdude to michieru

Premium Member

to michieru
said by michieru:

For residential it sure does not make sense but for a business user it's a steal compared to a T1.

Except it is residential only. The tier is expensive but if you are a power user it's definitely worth it.

I've done 18TB in one month without a peep from Comcast. Good luck trying to do that on their DOCSIS network.

I have saved some money too. I moved my personal filer from colo to home, my vpn server for road warrior/family members, and my subsonic server (personal google music server).

PlusOne
@69.142.79.x

PlusOne to Gone

Anon

to Gone
said by Gone:

It's a Potemkin product. It exists for no reason other than to say it exists, even though few can get it and of those who can no one will buy it.

Both Comcast FTTH and Google Fiber fit that description.

Jim Kirk
Premium Member
join:2005-12-09
49985

Jim Kirk

Premium Member

Re: huh?

The Google hate is strong in this one (as well as the BS).
AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL

AVonGauss to PlusOne

Premium Member

to PlusOne
Even though I've poked fun at Google Fiber and how they market / choose to deploy it, it definitely does not fit that description. Right now the Comcast FTTH offering is at best a boutique product until (if) they decide to mainstream it.
talz13
join:2006-03-15
Avon, OH

talz13 to PlusOne

Member

to PlusOne
Yes, same thing, because nobody who can get google fiber wants to pay $70 for 1gbps.

catchingup
@135.23.225.x

catchingup

Anon

Re: huh?

said by talz13:

Yes, same thing, because nobody who can get google fiber wants to pay $70 for 1gbps.

No one? Ridiculous black and white statement which is not true.

bigballer
@205.214.216.x

bigballer to Gone

Anon

to Gone
Jesus, for those "competitive" prices I'd rather find dark fiber by my house and buy the cable and bury it myself.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

1 recommendation

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

said by bigballer :

Jesus, for those "competitive" prices I'd rather find dark fiber by my house and buy the cable and bury it myself.

I'm talking merely from a deployment perspective. There is zero reason why anyone should be building out new copper right now.

catchingup
@135.23.225.x

catchingup to bigballer

Anon

to bigballer
said by bigballer :

Jesus, for those "competitive" prices I'd rather find dark fiber by my house and buy the cable and bury it myself.

And you will be paying a whole lot more.
existenz
join:2014-02-12

existenz to rfrooney

Member

to rfrooney
And will be interesting if they design it for near dedicated Gbit to every user as Google does (no matter the load in hood) or if sharing entire hoods on a 2.5Gb GPON as ATT/Centurylink apparently do.
AVonGauss
Premium Member
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL

AVonGauss

Premium Member

Re: huh?

said by existenz:

And will be interesting if they design it for near dedicated Gbit to every user as Google does (no matter the load in hood) or if sharing entire hoods on a 2.5Gb GPON as ATT/Centurylink apparently do.

Google Fiber's last mile deployment has a few slight advantages over Verizon FIOS, but they are essentially both using the same technology at the moment. There is no "dedicated" bandwidth per se, just the overall capacity is higher and the limits less felt by the users. When WDM becomes mainstream, you can then think you have dedicated bandwidth in the last mile but like any other provider, it becomes part of the aggregate at the CO or hut.
existenz
join:2014-02-12

existenz

Member

Re: huh?

Yeah understood. Google is apparently doing some kind of GPON/WDM-PON hybrid and are able to so far 'effectively' manage near Gbit per user even as more users are added - by 'dedicated', I meant essentially managed to that so far. It's supposedly a 1.3GPON connection to fiber jack and enough capacity on back end to sustain near Gbit even if heavily loaded hood. I live in a hirise with 150 units in a fiberhood with many other hirises yet Google is still able to maintain near a Gbit even at prime time.

They have also been improving routing to the coasts so are continuously optimizing the overall performance in addition to the fiberhood/local network...
»Google Fiber improves routing and performance
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH

sonicmerlin

Member

Re: huh?

There is no situation where GPON, which is 2.4 gbps shared among 32 users, wouldn't let you achieve 1 gbps at peak time. That would require the other 31 users all simultaneously using more than 1.4 gbps, which will never happen.

djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

djrobx to rfrooney

Premium Member

to rfrooney
I remember when Verizon (Bell Atlantic at the time)'s 7mbps ADSL product was $189/month (this was in 1999, adjusting for inflation that's around $279 in today's dollars). Sometimes expensive products get cheap when competition forces the market to respond.

That said, I don't think Comcast will need to run FTTH for a really long time. If consumer demand for ultra-high upload speeds goes mainstream, they'll likely figure out a method to increase those speeds over HFC/DOCSIS. Cable's coax is not like ADSL's unshielded twisted pair, where the technology is running out of runway. There's a lot of ways the available spectrum can be used differently.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

said by djrobx:

That said, I don't think Comcast will need to run FTTH for a really long time. If consumer demand for ultra-high upload speeds goes mainstream, they'll likely figure out a method to increase those speeds over HFC/DOCSIS. Cable's coax is not like ADSL's unshielded twisted pair, where the technology is running out of runway. There's a lot of ways the available spectrum can be used differently.

There is a cost benefit to doing full fibre for at least new deployments, even if all you use it for is RFoG. Cable companies up here have been doing it already for around a decade, and quite honestly I'm surprised that any incumbent anywhere would still be deploying copper in any form for new builds.
existenz
join:2014-02-12

1 edit

existenz to neufuse

Member

to neufuse
Google's can also make use of existing coax as an option but it's pure fiber to the home to an ONT/fiber jack, then ethernet to a router/net box but once going past first TV, you can join multiple TV boxes via Cat5e/6 or coax - I did coax for my other TVs since the cabling was already there. It's currently limited to MoCA 1.1 at 200Mbps but a MoCA 2.0 TV box with AC WiFi is coming that can potentially do about a Gbit. Google's TV boxes can also act as WiFi repeater.

BTW, Karl says Google is not challenging any Comcast territory however Comcast is in the E and SE parts of KC metro and Lee's Summit and other Comcast burbs in area have agreement to eventually get Google Fiber. Edit: Comcast also seem to be in Central KCMO where Google already is as I see Xfinity SSID's in my hood, but don't think I can get cable service.
ITGeeks
join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH

ITGeeks

Member

Re: huh?

"eventually" is the key word there. And why does anything to do with another provider's offerings have to do with GF always?
existenz
join:2014-02-12

existenz

Member

Re: huh?

Ask Karl, he bring's Google up as the one to compare to - I agree so post details about how Google Fiber works. And signups for S KC have already finished, rollout to Comcast territory to start later this year but probably won't be in full swing until next year.

telcodad
MVM
join:2011-09-16
Lincroft, NJ

telcodad to neufuse

MVM

to neufuse
said by neufuse:

What do you mean "The service is technically a coaxial/fiber hybrid offering"?

Karl is talking about Comcast's current residential Extreme 505 HSI tier, where only the HSI service is provided via fiber, TV and Phone service is still provided using coaxial cable - therefore a hybrid of coax (which in itself is a HFC FTTN system) and fiber to the home.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

said by telcodad:

Karl is talking about Comcast's current residential Extreme 505 HSI tier, where only the HSI service is provided via fiber, TV and Phone service is still provided using coaxial cable - therefore a hybrid of coax (which in itself is a HFC FTTN system) and fiber to the home.

That is a super retarded way of doing things when you can run RFoG for TV, phone and DOCSIS and GPON for their higher-speed data offerings all on the same fibre using the same customer premises equipment. Seriously. One can only shake their head at the expense of maintaining a copper plant when you've pulled in fibre. The whole idea of a fibre overlay is to save in ongoing infrastructure maintenance costs.
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

yyzlhr

Member

Re: huh?

That's because the fibre service runs off their metro Ethernet network which is operated by their business division and is a completely different network.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

said by yyzlhr:

That's because the fibre service runs off their metro Ethernet network which is operated by their business division and is a completely different network.

My entire point was that there doesn't need to be a completely different network. You can run RFoG for the consumer network and GPON for the business division on the exact same strand of fibre. Duplication is nothing but bureaucratic stupidity and is costing them more money rather than saving them like it should.

telcodad
MVM
join:2011-09-16
Lincroft, NJ

telcodad

MVM

Re: huh?

said by Gone:

said by yyzlhr:

That's because the fibre service runs off their metro Ethernet network which is operated by their business division and is a completely different network.

My entire point was that there doesn't need to be a completely different network. You can run RFoG for the consumer network and GPON for the business division on the exact same strand of fibre. Duplication is nothing but bureaucratic stupidity and is costing them more money rather than saving them like it should.

It's because the Metro-E-based Extreme 505 fiber HSI service has significant limitations on which homes in any market can be serviced.

From: »Extreme 305
quote:
Q: Where and when will you be offering Extreme 305 Internet Service?

A: The Extreme 305 Internet Service will be launched across our Northeast division in major markets, including Boston, Hartford, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Wilmington, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., Richmond, and New Jersey. Currently, we’re launching these offerings in this set of initial markets and will be determining future roll-out plans at a later date.

Eligibility:

* Customer must be Metro-E serviceable. Then, fiber site survey must be completed prior to installation to qualify the home/address.

* The site must meet the following criteria:

* Single Dwelling Unit

* Located less than 1/3 of a mile from Fiber Access Node

* Aerial fiber build only (Aerial or Underground drop)

* Serviced by Metro-E capable Head-end (SUR/1G-E Port Available)

Additional Eligibility Guidelines:

* Dwelling with aerial or underground service access must be within 150 feet of the Comcast infrastructure and:

* Either have no obstructions such as hardscaping, paved or unpaved driveways, sidewalks or retaining walls

- Or -

* If these obstructions exist, intact underground conduit readily available for Comcast use must already be in place

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Re: huh?

I'm surprised it's restricted to single family dwellings. Our duplex is wired pretty much the same as a single family except there are two cable drops to the street. Many landlords would probably sign off on this job.
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON

yyzlhr to Gone

Member

to Gone
said by Gone:

said by yyzlhr:

That's because the fibre service runs off their metro Ethernet network which is operated by their business division and is a completely different network.

My entire point was that there doesn't need to be a completely different network. You can run RFoG for the consumer network and GPON for the business division on the exact same strand of fibre. Duplication is nothing but bureaucratic stupidity and is costing them more money rather than saving them like it should.

While it may be theoretically possible, it's generally not done this way. Even Cogeco, Rogers and Shaw do not run their business grade services on the same fibre network as their residential stuff.

For Comcast I'm sure new construction areas that have fibre pulled right to the premises will operate in the manner you've indicated. But for pre-existing areas, that type of deployment isn't feasible.

•••

whfsdude
Premium Member
join:2003-04-05
Washington, DC

whfsdude to Gone

Premium Member

to Gone
said by Gone:

That is a super retarded way of doing things when you can run RFoG for TV, phone and DOCSIS and GPON for their higher-speed data offerings all on the same fibre using the same customer premises equipment.

When they were installing my 505 service, I asked why they didn't use RFoG. The answer I got was that it was too expensive when they have an existing cable plant.

My guess when Comcast finally deploys fiber only for everyone (not just an expensive tier), they will skip over RFoG, and will turn the X1 into an IPTV box.

Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON

Gone

Premium Member

Re: huh?

said by whfsdude:

My guess when Comcast finally deploys fiber only for everyone (not just an expensive tier), they will skip over RFoG, and will turn the X1 into an IPTV box.

Cogeco had been playing around with IPTV for the last two years and only recently just abandoned it as it ended up being more economical to continue to invest in SDV and RFoG. Not really surprising, as once you move the RF to fibre the bandwidth limitations of physical copper are limited to only what exists within a premises. That is a lot easier to work with, as you could pump that up to 2-3GHz with relatively little work compared to an outside physical plant.
existenz
join:2014-02-12

existenz to neufuse

Member

to neufuse
Others have said up to 64 users per GPON with ATT design.

Zenit_IIfx
The system is the solution
Premium Member
join:2012-05-07
Purcellville, VA
·Comcast XFINITY

Zenit_IIfx

Premium Member

"New Areas"

What Comcast has just realized is that HFC plant is no longer cost effective to build in comparison to FTTH plant which makes more financial sense in the long term. In new large subdivisions, expect FTTH rather than HFC. As others have said, Cogeco and other Canadian cable operators have been doing this in greenfield areas for a long time.

Makes sense, the equipment for it is going down in price, less maintenance, no worrying about signal leakage, much more capacity.

As for overbuilding existing HFC plant, not going to happen much if at all - that Potemkin 505Mbps product may have expanded availability, but its not really affordable for most people outside of business.

DOCSIS3.1 will be the big news.

••••••

cypherstream
MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
·PenTeleData
ARRIS SB8200

cypherstream

MVM

Good for buisnesses

We pay over $2000 a month, same install fees, not sure of the ETF's and we only get 50/50 Mbps. Maybe it's the /27 block of IP's and the SLA's... But $300 a month is more than reasonable for a business.

I imagine the technology is the same as we are terminated into a Cienna 1U device with dual power supplies and GigE handoff.

The backend at our local Comcast headend is a Juniper core switch.

••••