Verizon 100Mbps & Over-SubscriptionLooking down the FiOS road a few years... ( old news - 09:13AM Monday Dec 10 2007) tags: Fiber · business · bandwidth · Verizon FIOSVerizon themselves have stated that, at least for the time being, talk of FiOS tiers 100Mbps or faster is more marketing than anything else -- acting as a competitive warning shot over the industry bow. The GPON upgrades Verizon is working on will certainly boost network capacity, but substantial 100Mbps+ availability is still some time away. The company tells Light Reading that limited demand means they'll use the over-subscription model: That means Verizon is betting that whenever 100 Mbit/s first becomes a reality, the demand will be minimal. "It's not likely that everyone would want it," says O'Byrne. "It would be a small percentage of people in any neighborhood." Good thing, too. Verizon says that most of its central offices serve about 15,000 to 20,000 homes. Simple math would dictate that to bring 100 Mbit/s to each of those homes would require at least 1.5 Tbit/s of bandwidth going into each central office. The article notes that Verizon is considering upgrading to Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM), or WDM-PON technology, which sends a full wavelength to each home, greatly ramping up the capacity of each fiber line. Even then, 100Mbps won't be certain: But even with network capacity upgrades, oversubscription, and multiplexing, signing up for 100-Mbit/s service won't mean you'll get that bandwidth all the time. "100 Mbit/s isn't guaranteed," O'Byrne says. "If you ran a test on the network, it would read 100 Mbit/s, but if enough people were demanding it, we couldn't guarantee it."
Related:- 50Mbps, 20/20Mbps FiOS Tiers Hit All Markets
- Was FiOS a Good Idea?
- Verizon Has No Plans To Cap, Throttle
- Verizon Laughs Off DOCSIS 3.0
- Cablevision Gets Wrist Slap For Misleading Ads
- Verizon Continues Proud History Of Denial
- Verizon Cooking Up Slightly Faster FiOS Speeds?
- Verizon Announces New FiOS Tiers, Promotions
|
 
P Ness
You'Ve Forgotten 9-11 Already
Premium
join:2001-08-29
Mineola, NY
clubs: 
| Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps just like their "unlimited" features...which are really not unlimited at all
they will sell the 100 and if you even get it once they will call it correct
--
www.stopfcc.comI do not think the government needs to restrict free speech especially on a device that has an off knob. | |
|  | 
MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK
clubs: | Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps this is no different than what cable does now. If everyone in my neighborhood used their 12/1 pipe to full capacity, the network would slow to a crawl.
--
MCSE, ACSA, and a lot more | |
| | | 
EnasYorl
Thieves World
join:2001-12-02
West
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps said by MarkyD  :this is no different than what cable does now. If everyone in my neighborhood used their 12/1 pipe to full capacity, the network would slow to a crawl. There is a huge difference.
G-PON is only 32 homes
HFC plant 300 to 2000 homes. | |
| | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps said by tiger72 :so? At this point, not very many people would actually use it. Having faster downloads (thus speeding up transfers) would also mean that when people actually use those pipes (and on the exceedingly rare occasion that the SERVER can actually send at 100mbps), users will finish their files quickly and be done with their downloading, freeing up bandwidth quicker.
I seriously would like to do this as a real world test.
Would network traffic go down if people got their files faster? | |
| | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps Traffic won't decrease, but the amount of time users spend waiting online will. | |
| | | | | | | | 
rcdailey
Dragoonfly
Premium
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA | That's like asking whether getting a larger hard drive will reduce the amount of stored data, or asking whether getting more RAM will reduce the amount of memory being used. | |
| | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps said by rcdailey :That's like asking whether getting a larger hard drive will reduce the amount of stored data, or asking whether getting more RAM will reduce the amount of memory being used. Not really.
It's like if the streets were wider, could they handle more cars more efficiently than a narrower road. | |
| | | | 
itguy35
@charter.com
| I can say from experience that when users are given more bandwidth, they use more bandwidth. I recently doubled the bandwidth for a 500 PC network in July. Since the users have realized that more bandwith is available at their disposal, average daily incoming traffic has already increased by 30%. No PCs have been added to the network during this time frame. I anticipate that within the next 24 months this network will require 100mbps WAN connectivity to deliver acceptable service to clients. | |
| | 
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| said by P Ness :just like their "unlimited" features...which are really not unlimited at all they will sell the 100 and if you even get it once they will call it correct No different than what is offered in Japan & South Korea. Some high density areas offer 50 mbps to apartments and homes, but their backbones can't deliver that to everyone all the time. They use over-subscription methods there to. What many refuse to accept is that it is financially impossible to offer those speeds if the users use the bandwidth for more than a small % of the time. That is why the non-stop 24x7 P2P model is so detrimental to network management. If a system had to actually deliver 100 mbps to every home 100% of the time, no one could afford to pay for it.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
| | | 
Jerm
join:2000-04-10
Richland, WA
| Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps Verizon's current Fios has 622mbit per 32 users. Next gen is 2.4gbit per 32 (or 64).
Cable with DOCSIS 1-2 is running 38mbit SHARED between all users on that leg of the node (can be between 50-250).
Give me Fios any day, thanks!
Or a better analogy:
Do you build a dedicated lane for each car on freeway? | |
| | | | 
Fubar
join:2001-02-20
Phoenix, AZ | Re: Can't support, But will sell it, Advertise it as 100mbps AS the article pointed out.... What about the CO? | |
| | |
Anon5798
@cox.net
| said by TKJunkMail :said by P Ness :just like their "unlimited" features...which are really not unlimited at all they will sell the 100 and if you even get it once they will call it correct No different than what is offered in Japan & South Korea. Some high density areas offer 50 mbps to apartments and homes, but their backbones can't deliver that to everyone all the time. They use over-subscription methods there to. What many refuse to accept is that it is financially impossible to offer those speeds if the users use the bandwidth for more than a small % of the time. That is why the non-stop 24x7 P2P model is so detrimental to network management. If a system had to actually deliver 100 mbps to every home 100% of the time, no one could afford to pay for it. Actually I would like to point out that in South Korea, some fiber hubs have been, for the time being, "blacked-out" due to massive overbuilding approx. (under-utilization) 5 years ago. Also, i would like to point out that 100+ mbps speeds were offered (~3 years ago) on a major cable provider in Seoul. What people would refer to as the "backbone" of South Korea has never even come close to saturation. | |
| | | | | 
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
·Verizon Online DSL
| The problem is that Verzion is already screwing this up, at least with DSL. Brooklyn and Queens has been a mess almost constantly for almost 9 months now. The good 'ole evening slow down. Nothing wrong with doing it if you can adjust for it properly. | |
| | | | NYC Girl
Premium
join:2007-02-04
Bronx, NY
·Optimum Online
 ·Optimum Voice
| said by priller :Folks, the ENTIRE Internet is shared bandwidth. Not everybody in the world, or in a telco CO, is going to initiate a massive download simultaneously. This reminds me of the erroneous (and hopefully dead) argument that DSL is dedicated and cable is shared bandwidth. It all has to come together at some point. It's all about traffic engineering. Nobody should ever expect that 100% of the customers will get 100% of their provisioned bandwidth 100% of the time. Yep, and how much will THAT cost. They are already charging 179.99 for 30megs/5 megs. Do we really need 100megs of internet speed????? | |
| | |
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
1 edit | Re: Don't all flush the toilet at once! Considering 20/20 is available for $70 $65, probably not much. | |
| | | 
aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by NYC Girl :said by priller :Folks, the ENTIRE Internet is shared bandwidth. Not everybody in the world, or in a telco CO, is going to initiate a massive download simultaneously. This reminds me of the erroneous (and hopefully dead) argument that DSL is dedicated and cable is shared bandwidth. It all has to come together at some point. It's all about traffic engineering. Nobody should ever expect that 100% of the customers will get 100% of their provisioned bandwidth 100% of the time. Yep, and how much will THAT cost. They are already charging 179.99 for 30megs/5 megs. Do we really need 100megs of internet speed????? I pay $55 a month for my 30/5 tier. | |
| | mikenolan7
Premium
join:2005-06-07
Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Exactly why the urinals in football stadiums flush themselves (at least all the ones I have been to). Otherwise water pressure would drop to 0 for the entire surrounding neighborhood at the start of halftime. The slow network analogy would be if some slick salesman convinced someone that if one NFL team makes xxx dollars for the city, then three NFL teams would make 3 times xxx dollars for the city. Then everyone's water pressure would go to 0 for four hours every Sunday.
This is what creates the friction between ISP's and file sharers. The ISP's based their usage estimates on pre-p2p statistics. They built and sold their network based on those estimates. Now, too many users are flushing the urinals all at once, and everyone's service is impaired. Perhaps if the ISP's tried to work with the file sharers, they could come up with a system that makes everyone happy, ala the urinals that flush themselves at certain intervals.
I don't use any p2p apps, I'm too paranoid. But there has to be a better solution than the threats, insults, lawsuits, and lies that are being slung back and forth between these two groups today. As they say "everyone gets wet in a pissing match". | |
| | | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
| Re: Don't all flush the toilet at once! said by mikenolan7 :This is what creates the friction between ISP's and file sharers. The ISP's based their usage estimates on pre-p2p statistics. They built and sold their network based on those estimates. ((...)) Perhaps if the ISP's tried to work with the file sharers, they could come up with a system that makes everyone happy, ((...)) I've been trying out Comcast's VOD recently. The first time I tried VOD was Mediacom in West Des Moines, Iowa, in 2002-2003. The main problems: (1) not enough selection, and (2) poor quality. I was too poor to get TiVO at the time. Quality in Comcast's VOD is tolerable (although definately lacks the best of what p2p has), and selection pretty much sucks but not as bad. For the rest, there's Comcast's DVR, which I tried, temporarily returned, but will be re-renting again. Once again, DVR sucks in a lot of ways (often it fails to receive something due to some bug or lack of feature), but once again, it is tolerable for the most part. The combination of VOD and DVR at Comcast means prettymuch that p2p is less necessary than ever.
The reason p2p came about in the first place was that DVR and VOD weren't available back then -- well, TiVO was around, but it was hard to get: it meant getting an entirely new setup that no one had at that time (a television, a DVR, a cable, etc.). These days, people are finally getting enough buildup in their belongings that they can add TVs and DVRs to their rooms, in addition to the computers they all already had, so the medium available from cable companies suddenly makes more sense. Before the Television set, when everyone just had computers, p2p made the most sense.
I think normal audiovisual viewing habits can be done without much need for p2p in the future of the autumning Television medium, as long as VOD, DVR, SDV, etc.. are properly run.
We can all get into discussions of the old days in which computers were rare and Television was common. Back before then, there was less racism and more jobs, too, but then back before then again there was more natural foods, less processed foods, and people lived longer than they do today. We can all talk about other time periods. They're good comparisons, but don't forget the future unless you're already trying to die off, in which case don't bother us. | |
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| said by mikenolan7 :......................................................... Perhaps if the ISP's tried to work with the file sharers, they could come up with a system that makes everyone happy, ala the urinals that flush themselves at certain intervals. ......................................................... Solution is to upgrade networks to switch the bandwidth problem off the internet and onto people's HARD DRIVES. 100mbit is 1/2 a hard drive. 500mbit or 1 gig should cover the fastest enterprise drive made on earth. | |
| | 
N O Y B
St. John 3.16
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
|
said by priller :Folks, the ENTIRE Internet is shared bandwidth. Not everybody in the world, or in a telco CO, is going to initiate a massive download simultaneously. This reminds me of the erroneous (and hopefully dead) argument that DSL is dedicated and cable is shared bandwidth. It all has to come together at some point. It's all about traffic engineering. Nobody should ever expect that 100% of the customers will get 100% of their provisioned bandwidth 100% of the time.
Bingo!
However the DLS vs. cable does have some merit though as with DSL the bandwidth is not shared until further up the pipe where there is much more to go around. Also since it comes together at the CO rather than throughout the neighborhood it is easier and less costly to scale up a central point to meet demand.
But FiOS kills them both. Bandwidth, distance, reliability, scalability, …
| |
| | 
Richard B
Fur It Up
join:2007-06-22
Portland, OR
·Comcast
1 edit | said by priller :Folks, the ENTIRE Internet is shared bandwidth. Not everybody in the world, or in a telco CO, is going to initiate a massive download simultaneously. This reminds me of the erroneous (and hopefully dead) argument that DSL is dedicated and cable is shared bandwidth. It all has to come together at some point. It's all about traffic engineering. Nobody should ever expect that 100% of the customers will get 100% of their provisioned bandwidth 100% of the time. Bingo
This is issue is not over subscription. The internet is designed as a shared resources. One like on comcast does not purchase 6Megs of bandwidth but access to the same 6Mbit line. The user suppose to get on get a packet the release the line for another user to send and receive a packet. This is why the net is not very good at streaming video of Peer to Peer traffic. | |
| 
DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA
| Don't offer it if you can't support it I just hope Verizon doesn't pull a Comcast by advertising big speeds then traffic shaping everything into the ground.
The current offerings from FiOS are great and already kill cable. Rather than push speed offerings even higher it woudl be nice if they rolled back prices considering in my service area they've already taken a 12% increase in HSI rates.
If the budget DSL plans proved anything, it's that PRICE, not speed is king in getting subscribers.
--
Help keep cable rates low; support "Big Cable" in their fight against the extortionists at the NFL Network! | |
| | JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL
| Re: Don't offer it if you can't support it Price rollback? You must be smoking some really good stuff. NO big player will roll prices back as long as Wall Street exist. You will though continue to see promo prices with most likely some type of long term contract 12-24 months.
--
»www.seabee.navy.mil | |
| | |
DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA
1 edit | Re: Don't offer it if you can't support it Verizon rolled back DSL prices. When I first signed up with DSL from them it was $50, by the end $15-$30 and this is while speed increased 300%. From the price cuts, telcos kills cable in subscriber adds. Lowering prices isn't unheard of. | |
| 
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
| Building for failure Whichever network builds out the fastest, with more capabilitys and capacity will win.
The excuses are thin on not deploying, we have a clear need for more bandwidth in the past 5 years.
We dont need it cause were too busy spending trillions killing arabs. | |
| | 
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| Re: Building for failure said by gaforces :We dont need it cause were too busy spending trillions killing arabs. Yea... if Verizon stops doing that, they could put FIOS everywhere!
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | |
See 18 replies to this post | |
| tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY
| Fine by me.. If Verizon wants to start upgrading the bpons to gpons, that' fine my me.. so what if they only got 3 years network use of them so far. Symmetrical 20/20megabits is something cable companies will be hard pressed to compete against.. provided Verizon can bring the price down a bit more, it will be a cable killer in many markets where they compete (in other words I'm against the symmetrical surcharge idea). Cable will have to respond by upgrading/splitting node infrastructure to let docsis run to it's full specifications per subscriber (which is pretty fast if fully implemented). Cablevision is a prime example of how well docsis 2.0 can do. 30 / 5 is their *boost* tier. They've gotten the message that if they didn't offer lower rates and *competitive* (which is actually better is a matter or opinion) service it's game over in their microcosm footprint.
Time Warner and Comcast (and other smaller cable-cos) will be forced into upgrades where Verizon overlaps too. Cable companies have yet to respond to 20/20, except on price (cablevision). | |
| 
batterup
I Can Not Tell A Lie.
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
clubs: | Shared netowrk DUH. So every chicken coop and pig pen will not have 100/100 all of the time? COAX can do it., | |
| 
Rob A
Same Old Jets
Premium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ | Fantastic! Now please bring it here! | |
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | More interested in when 40 Mbps will available to 95%+ American homes. | |
|
TeUser
@tedata.net
| ye i live in EGYPT....you pay 65$ for 30/5 right? ....the max speed here is 2mb/512k and it cost 100$, surprise? lol
the service however is decent and you can get full speed at least 5 days a week 24/7 unlimited.
i immagine an american guy or something......WTF!!.....100$ for a 2mb service?
immagine us here.....WTF! 65$ for 30/5 service?!
the surprise is always 2 way. | |
| |
saveongas
@verizon.net
| Re: ye said by TeUser :
i live in EGYPT....you pay 65$ for 30/5 right? ....the max speed here is 2mb/512k and it cost 100$, surprise? lol
the service however is decent and you can get full speed at least 5 days a week 24/7 unlimited.
i immagine an american guy or something......WTF!!.....100$ for a 2mb service?
immagine us here.....WTF! 65$ for 30/5 service?!
the surprise is always 2 way.
And your gasoline is what? .50 cents per gallon (converted $ US dollars) Look at all the money you save on travel.. well worth the 100$.. of course.. living in the M.E. is no great thing with all the random and not so random violence. The other joke is.. 90% of the governments in the M.E. are not investing in infrastructure.. just weapons... Egypt too (yes, I know that's can be seen as a stereotype, but true none the less).
| |
| 
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| When are people going to learn that...... EVERY internet connection that isn't a business T-1 or DS-3 will share bandwidth at one point or another, whether it be cable, DSL over copper, or FTTH solutions like FIOS.
Even business DSL, business cable and business FIOS will be shared at one point. And prices confirm this: You can get decent business DSL and Cable for $70 to $100, wheras a slower T-1 costs you $350 a month on average, less populated areas as high as $500 or more a month.
Difference between T-1 and DSL, FIOS or Cable? The first one is guaranteed, the latter is not.
Difference between business and residential? The first one guarantees you be up again in a 4 hour window, the latter does not. THAT'S where the difference in price comes in.
Don't be fooled into believing that DSL, Cable or FIOS is "better" then the other when it comes to sharing your bandwidth, because NONE of them can and will guarantee you the bandwidth they advertise.
The 100 Mbps connections in Hong Kong are just as shared. Sure, they have a nice thick 10 Gbps ring running through the city, but if everyone would download stuff at the same time, they will NOT reach their "promised" 100 Mbps.
Want guarantees? Shell out the big bucks for a DS3 line.
--
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -
Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father. | |
| | 
LaY LoW
join:2007-09-14
Orange, CA | Re: When are people going to learn that...... well said : )
Eduardo | |
| | | |
|
|
·
100Mbs/UP and 2Mbs/Down