Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
 
     
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned  (Read 2010 times)

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 8771
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« on: October 21, 2019, 03:48:07 AM »

Too often these days people are still talking about downstream speeds with no mention of upstream speeds. I would not be impressed with 1 GBPs downstream and 50 Mbps upstream. It’s time that ISPs get really serious about upstream. Backups and cloud services need very serious upstream bandwidth, as do site-to-site networking scenarios and some business users need symmetrical speeds.

Is there some way that we could lean on ISPs and especially comms subsystem providers to make sure that decent upstream is potentially available to those who need it, even if only as an extra cost option, and also ensure that symmetric speeds are available to business users who need them?

I think the two things are issues that should be kept separate: 1. ensuring the optional availability of high upstream speeds or symmetric speeds depending on the service offering, even if at extra cost, and 2. Ensuring that links can be upgraded / retrofitted to enable higher upstream speeds as needs increase, without encountering completely show stopping design limitations, and that the possibility of future upgrade to symmetric speeds be always considered in network design.
Logged

Ronski

  • Helpful
  • Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3683
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #1 on: October 21, 2019, 06:13:06 AM »

Leased lines are available to businesses and is probably one of the reasons better upload speeds are not available on FTTP and Virgin's FTTP.
Logged
Formerly restrained by ECI and ali,  now surfing along at 390/36  ;D

chenks

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 857
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #2 on: October 21, 2019, 07:48:27 AM »

DOCSIS 3.1 (which is what the virgin 1Gbps package uses) is limited in what i can provide upstream.
leaning on virgin wouldn be a mostly pointless exercise when the technology providing internet and cable tv over the same wire has limitations.

so whilst DOCSIS 3.1 is capable of higher upstream speeds that what is currently provided, it is not capable of fully symmetrical speeds.
DOCSIS 4 is capable of 10Gbps down and up.

although one has to be aware that Europe has a slightly different implementation of DOCSIS compared to US.
https://www.broadbandtechreport.com/docsis/headend-hub/article/16437269/the-significant-differences-between-docsis-and-eurodocsis

i supposed the question i would ask is this - does a home residential package really need more than 50Mbps upstream? if they do then i would question if they are really using a residential for commercial purposes.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2019, 08:00:32 AM by chenks »
Logged

chenks

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 857
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #3 on: October 21, 2019, 08:01:05 AM »

Leased lines are available to businesses and is probably one of the reasons better upload speeds are not available on FTTP and Virgin's FTTP.

leased lines are available to anyone. they aren't restricted to businesses.
Logged

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 8771
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2019, 08:05:45 AM »

You’re thinking that if decent upstream speeds were offered on ordinary FTTH then that might threaten ISPs’ profits because they need to sell leased line type ethernet services at a high price and make sure businesses are not going to settle for cheaper FTTH instead ? - Because ordinary FTTH’s upstream won’t be good enough.

I don’t mind the prices so much. Business oriented services will have a decent SLA too possibly, and that costs money to provide, and decent upstream requires them not to oversell network capacity especially because I presume that business users won’t put up with not getting the speeds they are paying for, in both directions, so the ISP has to make sure they’re not going to be running a congested network. I would like to have the choice though. I would like to see more high capacity quality links, or ones that are potentially so, which are throttled maybe, to allow ISPs to sell an alternative cheaper product.

Once fibre has been laid and blown, isn’t that the end of the cost apart from the cost of providing core bandwidth and transit per Mbps per as required, in order to keep congestion at bay. More bandwidth means more money on switches, more user traffic means higher payments to wholesale carriers and transit providers for traffic and for bandwidth ? If the user wants more upstream then with shared things like GPON that means a bigger slide of the cake and so fewer customers served, so more expensive; seems that that is bad news, could be very restrictive in the future with new unforeseen use cases and new applications arising. That makes me nervous about things like GPON - although I know very little about it. It seems to me it doesn’t have a future-proofing scalable nature to it - is that correct ?

This whole cloud nonsense gives me a queasy feeling, because what do you do when there is a network outage ? Outages are never going to go away. Networks getting more reliable, such as getting rid of DSL and copper, is not the whole story, as there will still be diggers, planned maintenance going wrong, human error cock ups, hardware failures, software bugs and bad software updates. So moving functions to be located in cloud services introduces a new dependency. And cloud is surely all about upstream, so crappy upstream speeds for FTTH are going to mean that businesses are more able to use certain types of cloud services than home users, if the business users have better internet access links?
Logged

j0hn

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2922
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2019, 01:17:45 PM »

OpenReach can run XG-PON on top of GPON.

They are currently trialling XGS-PON which can do 10/10G symmetrical.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/06/openreach-set-to-trial-symmetric-1gbps-uk-fttp-broadband-speeds.html

Such packages won't be cheap.
Logged

Chrysalis

  • Content Team
  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6242
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2019, 03:52:14 PM »

Primary reason will be market segmentation.  Same reason you cannot overclock XEON processors, no U.2 ports on consumer boards.  The isolation of business and residential customers.

Another reason will be of course.the argument that most consumers dont use much upload bandwidth and the market largely caters to the masses.  It is kind of like the standoff before netflix and iplayer took off.
Logged
AAISP - Billion 8800NL bridge & PFSense BOX running PFSense 2.4 - ECI Cab - LINE STATISTICS CLICK HERE

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 8771
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2019, 03:18:17 AM »

It would be good though if smallish businesses could upgrade without needing to have physical infrastructure replaced which might involve costly rework ?
Logged

dee.jay

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 466
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #8 on: October 22, 2019, 08:37:37 PM »

We have 1G and even 10Gbit circuits in Data Centers - they are several thousand pounds a month, each.
Logged
Sky + AAISP FTTC ~ 130/34 combined @ 3dB HG612's
Routed by pfSense on VMware ESX 6.7 on Ryzen 3 3200

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 8771
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #9 on: October 22, 2019, 08:43:19 PM »

Dee.jay - good for you! That’s quite a treat. Freedom.
Logged

CarlT

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1614
  • Next generation network design and deployment
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2019, 10:54:33 AM »

Too often these days people are still talking about downstream speeds with no mention of upstream speeds. I would not be impressed with 1 GBPs downstream and 50 Mbps upstream.

I'd be happy to discuss why Virgin Media's product has been released with these numbers.

You could also read my posts on this thread on ISPR's comments section - https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/10/cable-isp-virgin-media-uk-bring-1gb-broadband-to-manchester.html#comment-212315
Logged
WiFi: Nighthawk® AX12 RAX120 - 5Gb uplink
Routing: Ubiquiti UDM Pro - 10Gb uplink
Switching: 2 * Mikrotik CRS305-1G-4S-IN, 10Gb uplinks, various cheap and cheerful
Exchange: Wakefield
ISP: BT Full Fibre 900. Yes, BT, I know.

flilot

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2019, 12:28:35 PM »

Vodafone's CityFibre based "Gigafast" connections are all symmetrical, and decent prices, too.

I'll be trying them out once my street's fibre has been connected and lit (only recently had the ducting installed), and once I am out of my minimum contract with Zen on FTTC.

Logged
Carl
____________________________
cabinet8 - My journey back to xDSL after a decade with VM.

dee.jay

  • Reg Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 466
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2019, 02:54:35 PM »

Dee.jay - good for you! That’s quite a treat. Freedom.

Well you say that, it's not much good to me. We have to "run our company" on them, or something silly.
Logged
Sky + AAISP FTTC ~ 130/34 combined @ 3dB HG612's
Routed by pfSense on VMware ESX 6.7 on Ryzen 3 3200

Weaver

  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 8771
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 × 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2019, 05:57:16 AM »

Understood. It means freedom to me, not having an obvious bottleneck all the time.
Logged

CarlT

  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1614
  • Next generation network design and deployment
Re: Public policy - upstream requirements omitted, not mentioned
« Reply #14 on: November 05, 2019, 06:15:15 PM »

I'd be happy to discuss why Virgin Media's product has been released with these numbers.

You could also read my posts on this thread on ISPR's comments section - https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/10/cable-isp-virgin-media-uk-bring-1gb-broadband-to-manchester.html#comment-212315

I guess this wasn't of interest. Fixating over minor fluctuations in HLOG, SNR, bit-loading, etc, on obsolete xDSL more the order of the day.

A couple of presentations on DOCSIS 3.0, 3.1, evolution to 4.0 and FTTP variations will be up in the usual places and will I hope be of interest to some.

Evening, folks.
Logged
WiFi: Nighthawk® AX12 RAX120 - 5Gb uplink
Routing: Ubiquiti UDM Pro - 10Gb uplink
Switching: 2 * Mikrotik CRS305-1G-4S-IN, 10Gb uplinks, various cheap and cheerful
Exchange: Wakefield
ISP: BT Full Fibre 900. Yes, BT, I know.
Pages: [1] 2