On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 8:02 AM, David Connors <[email protected]> wrote:
> (in fact I get 9.79Mbps up, 34.42Mbps down) Now if you say "but that's >> not from a CDN, sure, I agree, because a majority of them are currently in >> the USA. But without something like a fibre network in Australia, what >> incentive is there with ADSL's mediocre speeds to build them here? (Hint, >> the speeds I mentioned I'm getting are from Transact, which WAS ALREADY >> USING FIBRE)) >> > > People often think of bandwidth in absolute terms and expect peak speeds > between two sites where there is adequate bandwidth. Unfortunately, this is > not how reality works. TCP has some really clever mechanisms built into it > to avoid network congestion over an arbitrary and unknown network topology. > The upshot of this is that you will ONLY ever see really good single stream > performance from a local CDN (or any site with very, very low latency), > except under special conditions where you do a lot of tuning at both ends. > > I'm thinking though, that NBN will encourage local CDN's > During commissioning at TechEd each year, the only site on the intarwebs > where we can get *close* to single TCP stream performance of 1gbps is > AARNet's local mirror ( > https://twitter.com/DavidConnors/status/243088857380319232). Also, that > is with the very best active ethernet fibre money can buy (which is not > what you get with NBN). > > David. > Is the 'lack' in the NBN internet in the fibre, or the electronics? -- Meski http://courteous.ly/aAOZcv "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
