Re: Bonded SDSL (was RE: ITU G.992.5 Annex M - ADSL2+M Questions)
Michael Sokolov wrote: Frank Bulk - iName.com frnk...@iname.com wrote: We offer it, but practically speaking we haven't gotten much higher than 1.5 Mbps on the upstream. Sorry that I'm coming into this thread late (I have just subscribed), but since I see people discussing DSL with beefy upstream, I thought I would be brave and ask: do you esteemed high-end network op folks think that there may be anyone in the world who might be interested in bonded SDSL or not? I have spent the past 5 years of my life learning everything there is to know about SDSL. Don't ask me why, I don't really know the answer to that question myself. I won't waste the bandwidth of this elite list with dirty details of just what I've done with SDSL over the past 5 y, but I'll give a link to an open source project that contains the body of SDSL knowledge amassed over those years: Michael, I'm but a small humble ISP. We have sold SDSL since ~1996. The bonded circuits have been terminated differently over the years, but I still have a fair number of business clients that have SP supplied CPE that is extremely affordable, and that require little to no work on our part. Other than a few stragglers that I keep afloat on SDSL that require fail-over, I've been trying to get rid of the dedicated copper as much as possible, since I 'lease' the copper for the dry circuit(s). We've reached past the break-even point for fibre access within our area, and am at the point where the *very* 'ritzy' resi clients can and will soon be approached. The max length of SDSL that I currently have is 6.7 wired km. Bonded, our longest distance is 5.4 km. Peak throughput over our longest bonded (2 pair) SDSL circuit is 2.25Mb. Given relative average, in the locations that I can provide optics, there is a gain of revenue percentage that I achieve over standard copper SDSL. IOW, when revenue for a bonded SDSL circuit is $285 and I pay $49.40 per circuit for the four wire copper, things begin to look more attractive when I pay *nothing* for the dark fibre, but am able to provide multiple times the bandwidth at the same price to the client ;) fwiw, for bonded SDSL, we have currently: - Symmetric GoWide units deployed (both on the PE and CPE) that inherently manage two-pair which requires but one switch port and no configuration. Aggregates internally. - an 'Elastic' rack that requires a bit more setup on both ends. Terminate into a vlan on a switch to aggregate properly. A 'setup' fee covers this one-time fix. Remember, small ISP, I'm not used to scaling human resources ;) - multiple other stand-alone SDSL modem types (dslam/non-dslam, such as PairGain etc) - Copper Mountain BTW, while on topic, if you know anyone who wants a fully shelved and carded Copper Mountain CE200 dslam w/ dual power supplies, let me know ;) Steve
RE: Bonded SDSL (was RE: ITU G.992.5 Annex M - ADSL2+M Questions)
It's being done by Actelis, Hatteras, and Zhone. More exactly SHDSL or similar variants. The market is being well-served. Frank -Original Message- From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org] Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 9:40 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Bonded SDSL (was RE: ITU G.992.5 Annex M - ADSL2+M Questions) Frank Bulk - iName.com frnk...@iname.com wrote: We offer it, but practically speaking we haven't gotten much higher than 1.5 Mbps on the upstream. Sorry that I'm coming into this thread late (I have just subscribed), but since I see people discussing DSL with beefy upstream, I thought I would be brave and ask: do you esteemed high-end network op folks think that there may be anyone in the world who might be interested in bonded SDSL or not? I have spent the past 5 years of my life learning everything there is to know about SDSL. Don't ask me why, I don't really know the answer to that question myself. I won't waste the bandwidth of this elite list with dirty details of just what I've done with SDSL over the past 5 y, but I'll give a link to an open source project that contains the body of SDSL knowledge amassed over those years: http://ifctfvax.Harhan.ORG/OpenSDSL/ To make the long story short, for most of those years I kept trudging on my project, treating it as an ultra-weird hobby that no one else in the world could possibly have any interest in. That persisted until 2009 when my project got noticed by two fairly major North American DSL network operators. (Well, one very major and one semi-major, but I'll spare the names.) Both of those had contacted me via my Open SDSL Connectivity Project expressing interest in SDSL bonding. Both companies were telling me how much interest they had in SDSL bonding, how much it would help their business to be able to offer bonded SDSL services at 3 or 6 Mbps, how many customers they would be able to sign up for these services, etc. But when I asked them to back their verbally-expressed interest with the tiniest amount of money or even no money at all but a letter of intent which I could show to SBA etc, they both went silent. We've been playing a game of cat-and-mouse ever since. As far as I could understand the existing situation is that the SDSL infrastructure already deployed en masse by the major North American DSL network operators already has the capability to serve out bonded SDSL circuits, bonding either in the DSLAM or somewhere upstream of it, using MLPPP, Multilink Frame Relay or whatever else one can think of, but the problem is with CPE. Apparently bonding-capable multiport SDSL CPE devices are quite scarce. Considering everything I've done with SDSL over the past 5 y, I believe I have a right to say with confidence that I am more than capable of designing and building a bonding-capable multiport SDSL CPE device for any existing SDSL flavor with any desired number of ports (2, 4 or whatever). But what I don't know, and what I'm asking this highly esteemed list for advice with, is this question: is there anyone at all in the world who might have a real serious interest in such a thing? If there is someone in the world who would truly appreciate having a bonded SDSL solution, I would be delighted to work on developing such a thing. I would see it as a service to humanity whereby more use would be made out of existing copper infrastructure in the ground instead of having to dig more ditches to bury more fiber or whatever. But if there is no one in the world who would be interested in bonded SDSL (or at least interested enough to invest one dime into development), then why bother... MS
RE: Bonded SDSL (was RE: ITU G.992.5 Annex M - ADSL2+M Questions)
Frank Bulk - iName.com frnk...@iname.com wrote: It's being done by Actelis, Hatteras, and Zhone. More exactly SHDSL or ^ similar variants. The market is being well-served. ^ The highlighted sentence is precisely the difference between what they are doing and what I am doing. The SHDSL folks seem to live in some kind of fantasy world where they think that all major network operators are going to throw out all their SDSL/2B1Q infrastructure and install SHDSL DSLAMs across the country instead. My SDSL work on the other hand is oriented toward working with the existing SDSL/2B1Q infrastructure massily deployed across USA by networks like Covad and what used to be DSL.net (now part of MegaPath). My Open SDSL Connectivity Project has successfully reverse-engineered the proprietary SDSL/2B1Q flavors used by the DSLAM brands deployed by the two networks named above, and I want to build bonded SDSL CPE for those flavors/networks. And yes, I have already had discussions with some people at both of the named companies. It wasn't even necessary for me to initiate contact with them as both of them have sought my open source project out and contacted me on their own about this very idea of SDSL bonding. However, despite lots of excited talk, both dialogues have ended with a mutter. Apparently there is some kind of wall of arrogance that prevents those folks from even considering getting their CPE from a mosquito like me, even though I can deliver it for one-tenth to one-hundredth of what the big vendors would want for the same thing if they would even consider building such - those big vendors have plenty of their own arrogance! Therefore, my next angle of approach is to see if there are any ISPs who go through Covad or through MegaPath's ex-DSL.net component as their Layer 2 transport (I know that at least in Covad's case there is a huge number of ISPs large and small who do that) and who want bonded SDSL badly enough to punch through that wall of arrogance. If you are an ISP who rents Layer 2 transport from Covad and I were to supply you the CPE, I think you should be able to serve bonded SDSL to your customers without having to beg Covad to descend from the heavens and give that service its blessing. Just order 2 (or 3 or 4 or however many loops you want to bond) ATM transport pipes from Covad terminating at your customer's address on one end and at your DS3/ATM interconnection point on the other end. Have your Cisco/Redback/whatever router run PPPoA on each of those ATM pipes and do MLPPP bonding between them. All that would be needed then is the CPE, and that's what the Open SDSL Connectivity Project is for... MS
Bonded SDSL (was RE: ITU G.992.5 Annex M - ADSL2+M Questions)
Frank Bulk - iName.com frnk...@iname.com wrote: We offer it, but practically speaking we haven't gotten much higher than 1.5 Mbps on the upstream. Sorry that I'm coming into this thread late (I have just subscribed), but since I see people discussing DSL with beefy upstream, I thought I would be brave and ask: do you esteemed high-end network op folks think that there may be anyone in the world who might be interested in bonded SDSL or not? I have spent the past 5 years of my life learning everything there is to know about SDSL. Don't ask me why, I don't really know the answer to that question myself. I won't waste the bandwidth of this elite list with dirty details of just what I've done with SDSL over the past 5 y, but I'll give a link to an open source project that contains the body of SDSL knowledge amassed over those years: http://ifctfvax.Harhan.ORG/OpenSDSL/ To make the long story short, for most of those years I kept trudging on my project, treating it as an ultra-weird hobby that no one else in the world could possibly have any interest in. That persisted until 2009 when my project got noticed by two fairly major North American DSL network operators. (Well, one very major and one semi-major, but I'll spare the names.) Both of those had contacted me via my Open SDSL Connectivity Project expressing interest in SDSL bonding. Both companies were telling me how much interest they had in SDSL bonding, how much it would help their business to be able to offer bonded SDSL services at 3 or 6 Mbps, how many customers they would be able to sign up for these services, etc. But when I asked them to back their verbally-expressed interest with the tiniest amount of money or even no money at all but a letter of intent which I could show to SBA etc, they both went silent. We've been playing a game of cat-and-mouse ever since. As far as I could understand the existing situation is that the SDSL infrastructure already deployed en masse by the major North American DSL network operators already has the capability to serve out bonded SDSL circuits, bonding either in the DSLAM or somewhere upstream of it, using MLPPP, Multilink Frame Relay or whatever else one can think of, but the problem is with CPE. Apparently bonding-capable multiport SDSL CPE devices are quite scarce. Considering everything I've done with SDSL over the past 5 y, I believe I have a right to say with confidence that I am more than capable of designing and building a bonding-capable multiport SDSL CPE device for any existing SDSL flavor with any desired number of ports (2, 4 or whatever). But what I don't know, and what I'm asking this highly esteemed list for advice with, is this question: is there anyone at all in the world who might have a real serious interest in such a thing? If there is someone in the world who would truly appreciate having a bonded SDSL solution, I would be delighted to work on developing such a thing. I would see it as a service to humanity whereby more use would be made out of existing copper infrastructure in the ground instead of having to dig more ditches to bury more fiber or whatever. But if there is no one in the world who would be interested in bonded SDSL (or at least interested enough to invest one dime into development), then why bother... MS
