Greg,
I do agree with your perspective. Yes 'Video' does appear to be the
killer app driving
any increase of Internet bandwidth. Yes, I know that there are many
commercial and private
high speed data network channels. I lump all these assets as the
'backbone.' Perhaps wrong,
but it works for me at my perspective.
The last time I had direct access to any of this was when I was at Xerox
during the birth of Ethernet
at Xerox/Parc. Back then we were clearly connected with DARPA. Fine.
Ethernet works and all the
rest of this is its' progeny. I'm happy to have been around when it all
started.
I fully believe that my ISP gracing me with a 1.680Gbps bandwidth
locally between my
home and my ISP will make it easier for my ISP to paper me with all
manner of TV and Video
offerings. Bring it on! My shredder is always hungry. I am still an
off-the-air troglodyte. LOL!
Duncan
On 09/23/2013 11:53, Greg Sevart wrote:
That's a little disingenuous though. The killer app for gigabit is video,
and most video (just under half of all North American internet traffic is
Netflix and Youtube) is or is transitioning to a CDN model whereby very
little traffic actually egresses your ISP's (and sometimes even more
granular than that) network. That's actually true for most top sites. Even
smaller providers often have CDN edge devices running within their network.
Plus (and I know you already know this), there's not a single "backbone" - a
lot of companies run national data transit networks, and almost every ISP is
multi-homed.
The "backbone" would similarly fall over if current subscribers used all of
their existing bandwidth, even locally - your standard 8-channel D3 node has
about 343mbit and serves a few hundred customers, yet most cable providers
offer a 100+mbit package. 4 customers could therefore kill the node--but
that very rarely happens. A faster connection certainly means that fewer
customers would have to fully leverage it for congestion to take place, but
I don't believe there's a linear relationship between consumption and link
speed. The doomsdayers have been prognosticating the imminent exaflood
forever now, and it has yet to pass.
Your core argument is that 40gb links are not fast enough to support a full
nation with gigabit connections. I don't necessarily disagree, but providers
aren't going to upgrade unless they have to. As traffic increases, the major
data transit links will be upgraded to keep pace.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bryan Seitz
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 10:02 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H] Just a question?
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
