Hi, Actually, I don't think that is quite true.
If you look at overall utilization, in most cases a doubling of access data rate only results in a 10% increase in overall data usage, at most. If the "last mile" is increased to Gigabit speeds, you will enable things like fast remote backup to your parents/friends/kids house (if in the same city). Sharing of local media archives between friends, etc, but the amount of "external" bandwidth used will not go up by the huge amounts you might think it would. It will grow over time, but it is not the huge backbone hit you think it would be. The local school district here is moving to a 1Gig hand over at each school, (100+ sites), but only has a total of 1000Mbit of external connectivity, and it is NOT pegged, it's running about 700Mbit/sec max. The Internet backbones could easily handle consumers moving to Gigabit last mile, it may move the bottleneck out at peak times, but it won't cause the saturation your thinking it would. I have dealt with many networks with tens of thousands of users (think University level), and the overall external bandwidth needs are quite tiny compared to the number of users connected at 100/1000 mbit range. -Harry On 9/23/13 8:02 AM, Bryan Seitz wrote: > Well it isn't even necessarily about money. A lot of the backbone is private > and (well NSA tapped) the limiting factor > really is technology. Ie, the big links just aren't big enough and the > routers not powerful enough to sustain a country > full of gigabit users. Granted 100G ports and tech aren't cheap at all, > quite the opposite. > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:19:18AM -0400, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >> And this is a shame because this is exactly what should exist, were it >> not for the fact that the US is in decline. >> On 9/23/2013 10:16 AM, Bryan Seitz wrote: >>> The internet backbone isn't anywhere near where it needs to be to support >>> Gigabit. Not even close, >>> no way, no how. 40Gbps backbone links are standard with 100Gbps being >>> upgraded to but do the math >>> if everyone has gigabit.... not gonna happen. >>> >>> (I have 500/100 here in Northern VA). >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:14:25AM -0400, DSinc wrote: >>>> Anthony, >>>> On this point I am squarely in your corner! >>>> Yes, I am blessed to live here. I have no plans to ever leave. >>>> Duncan >>>> >>>> On 09/23/2013 09:51, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >>>>> I think a lot of markets controllers won't have to provide affordable >>>>> gigabit...they want to have customers pay through the nose for it. >>>>> You seem to be in a part of the country where the thinkers are more >>>>> progressive and forward thinking. Greed is the bottom line. >>>>> >>>>> On 9/23/2013 8:08 AM, DSinc wrote: >>>>>> Thanks Anthony, >>>>>> Actually, not certain where I am ATM. I am still a bit freaked out. I >>>>>> suppose EPB (Electric Power Board) was serious about building out the >>>>>> "Scenic City" area to showcase a Giga-bit networkgrid. Sure, I know >>>>>> EPB didit mainly so they could control all the new modern power >>>>>> distribution and switching equipment they installed to provide better >>>>>> QOS. >>>>>> I guess I'm confused still. If EPB can and has done GBit, what is >>>>>> stopping other major metro areas from doing the same thing? Sure, >>>>>> money, equipment, vision, dedication, whatever. At EPB, TN I have >>>>>> Harold Depriest sitting at the top of EPB; and, Harold risked a bit >>>>>> and said, "Let's make this so!"He pulled it off. Thank you Harold. >>>>>> Duncan >>>>>>
