4K content is still comparatively rare (at least at high enough bit rates to really matter), that will probably eventually change, but at this point it doesn't surprise me that the actual usage on FTTH isn't that much different than what WISPs are seeing. Yeah, there are the people that "need" to have video streaming on 16 different devices in their house at all times, but the majority still just do what they do regardless of how fast the connection is, and I suspect that a lot of devices like tablets and phones do still default to using lower quality, even if they are capable of wasting bandwidth for higher quality video that no human can see the difference in on a 4" screen.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 9:24 AM Nate Burke <[email protected]> wrote: > From what I see, throwing more bandwidth doesn't really change the video > streaming. So that makes sense what the FTTH Guys say. Streams happily > sit around 5-7mb/stream regardless of the available bandwidth. I've been > testing this out, running multiple video streams, between 4k and 1080 TV's, > hardwired and WIFI. I can barely get my total connection to top 20mb/s > sustained only by having 3 streams running at once. > > For VOD Shows, I see a spike in Bandwidth at the beginning of a show, up > to the connection max (Downloading what appears to be a specific size > buffer, the faster it runs the shorter the burst), but then it settles down > during the show. For Live Viewing, it's just constant 5-7mb. > > File Downloading/game updates are a different story, they will take all > available bandwidth, but only until the download is finished. The faster > the speed, the shorter it takes. > > > > On 8/9/2019 9:04 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > Maybe the trend is accurate, but I don’t think you can do network planning > based on GB/mo because what matters is peak traffic levels. It used to be > peak traffic was Monday morning when everyone got to work and opened their > email. Now it’s 8-9pm when everyone is streaming video. > > > > The other factor is video streams (and to a certain extent software > downloads) use more bandwidth if you have a faster connection. People are > not cranking up the video quality dial from 480 to 720 to 1080 to 2160, > they may not even appreciate the extra pixels they are seeing. It just > happens automagically because their connection allows it. > > > > Perhaps this doesn’t matter because monthly data usage and peak bandwidth > are correlated. Same reason mobile network operators charge by gigabytes > per month, it’s easier to track and the people who use the most data > probably are the heaviest users at peak times. Kind of unfair to people > who game, watch TV, or download software in the middle of the night. But > that’s why the satellite Internet guys give you “bonus bytes” in the middle > of the night. > > > > I am still amazed that the FTTH providers here report customers use about > the same data usage per customer as we see on our bandwidth constrained > WISP network. If I could give every customer gigabit or even 100 Mbps, a > lot of their video streams would automagically jump to 20 Mbps as their > kids watch My Little Pony in 4K UHD on their iPads. Of course everyone in > the house has their own video stream going on their own device. No more > whole family sitting in front of the living room TV watching the same > show. Even the kids have their own iPad and watch different cartoons. > > > > > > *From:* AF <[email protected]> <[email protected]> *On Behalf > Of *Adam Moffett > *Sent:* Friday, August 9, 2019 8:02 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Future FTTH bandwidth usage standard > > > > Here's a study from Cisco forecasting 26% worldwide compound annual growth > in IP traffic through 2022, and 21% for North America: > > > https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networking-index-vni/white-paper-c11-741490.html#_Toc532256789 > > I'm currently seeing 3mbps on average per FTTH household at peak traffic > time. Chuck was saying 4 earlier....so we're in the same ballpark. Allow > at least a gig of overhead so your gig customer can get a gig when he > actually wants/needs it. > > We've been around 25% or so CAGR on bandwidth for a long time, but it > varies on individual years from 15% to 100%. I think it was a year in the > early 2010's where we had the 100%. > > -Adam > > On 8/8/2019 9:23 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: > > Mark, I'm working on a grant application and they are wanting to see proof > (and a PE stamp) on the design that it will meet performance requirements > for X years. I'm very comfortable with GPON at a 32 split or less being > fine for probably at least 8+ years. Just was asking if there is an > industry standard way of calculating this or if everyone doesn't worry > about it. I suppose it would be much more relevant if we were proposing a > VDSL system instead of FTTH. > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 8:36 PM Mark - Myakka Technologies <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Chris, > > Does it really matter? If you are AE you get 1GB per customer dedicated. > Not too hard or expensive to to bump that to 10GB per customer dedicated. > GPON does 2.5Gbps per pon usually shared by 32 customers. New 10 Gbps PON > will do 10 per pon or I've even heard that they can do 40Gbps per pon using > different wave lengths. > > Our system has been up and running for 6+ years. I've had to upgrade > switches and routers. Even had to upgrade to sfp+ uplink cards on one of > my fiber systems. Haven't had to touch GPON cards or customer ONT's. In > my system I see the 2.5Gbps PON lasting for many many years unless > something drastic happens. > > > -- > Best regards, > Mark <[email protected]>mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]> > > Myakka Technologies, Inc. > www.Myakka.com > > ------ > > Thursday, August 8, 2019, 6:34:06 PM, you wrote: > > Is there any standard or common rule of thumb to design for future usage > when designing a FTTH deployment? As in, we estimate average usage per sub > to be 2Mbps now and increase by 40% per year. The intent being to certify > that your design will meet demand for say 10 years. > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
