Thanks Tom for the information. I appreciate you taking the time our  
of your busy day to give me such good information. It is greatly  
appreciated. I will make some adjustment to increase cpe bandwidth and  
see what happens. Most of my traffic shoul be bursty because it is  
business but I do have a few people that stream HD video (around 3mb  
stream) that I will probably leave.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 20, 2010, at 10:21 AM, "Tom DeReggi"  
<[email protected]> wrote:

> That depends on how long your peaks last.
>
> The bottom line is that peaks generally only last short periods. If  
> you run
> out of peak capacity, the side effect is usually minimal. All that  
> occurs is
> that transfers during those peak time slow down a bit and spreadout  
> over a
> longer period of time.  TCP in nature handles this for you  
> automatically.
> The longer you hold off on upgrading, (meaning increasing average  
> usage) The
> usage graph starts to flatten out, with less distance between  
> average and
> peak. If you have a large number of subs on a backbone, that may not  
> have
> much of a negative effect on the users at all.  Remember most people  
> cant
> tell the difference between 1mb and 2mb without running a speed  
> test. For
> this reason, I care very little about peak usage stats.
>
> What is way more relevant is "average usage". I personally think when
> average usage is around 50%, its time to think about upgrading, and  
> when
> average usage exceeds 70%, you are way overdue
> How much you push the limits and how quickly you move to upgrade is
> determined on several factors.
>
> 1) How long it will take to deliver an upgraded pipe. If its 6  
> months, think
> ahead. If its 1 week, you might be able to wait till users start to
> complain.
>
> 2) Your SLA.  If you have a bunch of high ARPU customers with SLA,  
> you may
> want to upgrade sooner. For example, if you sell 100mb end user  
> pipe, where
> custoemr may not use it much, so oversubscription can be  
> significant, but
> the customer pays a lot to make sure 100mbps is available when they  
> send
> their large docs once a week. Where as if selling best effort end user
> services, does it really matter if they slow down during peak usage  
> hours?
>
> 3) What you charge.  There is a reality to market price and costs.   
> If your
> selling price is  low enough, and your costs are high enough, you  
> may not
> have any choice but to attempt to change end user's usage patterns.  
> For
> example, if average bandwdith gets to high, the answer may be to start
> blocking or slowing down certain types of services, to discourage  
> end users
> from performing those functions.  For $19.95 do you allow then to  
> stream
> NetFlix, or do you change your AUP and firewall to fix it?  The  
> first thing
> we always ask is.... Why is the bandwidth usage so high?  For  
> example, have
> you checked how much inbound bandwdith is from Internet born DOS,  
> SPAM,
> Spyware, Scanning, etc? OR what about network overhead? Whether to  
> roue
> versus bridge, VLAN or not VLAN, Monitor end-to-end centrally versus
> distributed local monitoring, all have a factor on bandwidth usage.
>
> A more relevent question might be... How much bandwdith per user  
> should be
> allocated on a backbone, for healthy operation and profitabilty of  
> the WISP?
> That number may depend on how Internet savy the commuity base is, or  
> cost
> structures of that market. My point here is that the decission on  
> backbone
> bandwdith may not be a technical decission. And if its technical, the
> solution may not always be to add bandwdith, and the anser might be  
> to stop
> wasting bandwidth.
>
> But from a technical perspective there are realities that need to be
> addressed. There becomes a time when action must be taken in some  
> capacity.
>
> Most importantly let me point out an example regarding the effect of  
> peak
> usage and why it is not bad. Set bandwdith management to heavilly  
> restrict
> bandwdith. For example, set a CIR to 512k and MIR to 1mb. You will  
> see low
> peak usage, and a lot of bandwidth being wasted, meaning you can  
> never go
> back in time to recover unused badnwdith. Now set CIR to512, and MIR  
> to
> 10mbps. You will see peak usage skyrocket for short periods, but the  
> average
> usage will go way down, because users use the network for short  
> periods, and
> IF there is any unused bandwdith they are free to use it, before the
> opportunity in time is lost to do so. The mentality if always free the
> network up for the next guy as soon as possible. Operating a network  
> in that
> way (high MIRs) can easilly double the amount of capacity that can be
> aggreegated accross a backbone.  In many cases, all you have to do to
> prevent bandwdith shortage, is just to INCREASE your customer's  
> configured
> peak speed. If there usage need stays the same, you will waste less
> bandwdith and more efficiently use the network.
>
> The other thing is it may matter what type backbone you have. For  
> example, a
> PTP network can use a Ethernet segment very effectively, probably up  
> to
> close to 85-90%.  But on a Multi-user segment like an office LAN,  
> Ethernet
> capacity will saterate at about 50% because of collision avoidance  
> issues.
> If you are agreegating multiple feeds into a backbone, whether the  
> data fed
> into it collides with other data fed into it may depend on the  
> bandwidth
> management methods and switching technology. IF the network is not  
> always
> available, it can cause retransmits or higher latency, and that can  
> effect
> end user's experience. So again, whether 50% or 80% backbone usage is
> acceptable may depend on many factors in your network design.
>
> Remember a network is only as fast as its weakest link, and a  
> saturated
> backbone closest to the Intenet will have an effect on all links  
> inline
> prior to on the way to the customer. IF bottle necks are reached,  
> end user
> speed slows down. (as long as capacity is free outside of peak).  
> Packet loss
> and high latency WONT occur much until capacity is saturated to  
> often during
> average usage (considering TCP, UDP is different). When you end user  
> 1mb
> circuit is averaging 100mbps,  How do you know if its because low  
> customer
> usage/activity, or because bottlenecks are incurred somewhere  
> inline? And
> how important is it to you, for that customer to have better than  
> 100kb
> speed? How drastic is the spread between peak usage and average.  
> Many what
> percentage of your daily network usage occurs at a reasonable window  
> around
> that peak period? Short peaks and a long peaks can have much different
> effects on end user's experience.  But whats important is that  
> measuring
> backbone bandwdith usage may not give you enough data to know when to
> upgrade.  You will also want to measure average packetloss and  
> latency.  You
> might find that the time to upgrade might be better determined when  
> average
> latency exceeds a specific threshold.  And the feedback from  
> subscribers may
> also be important.
>
> Also note, there are many different meaning to "average" and how it is
> calculated.  There is a reason that many bandwdith sellers use the  
> 95%tile
> algorythm. To remove the highest and lowest 5%, for the data to be  
> more
> meaningful. (or something like that).
>
> But.... in summary, without all the factors to consider.... start
> considering upgrading when "average" usage exceeds 50%, and you'll  
> be plenty
> safe, and you'll still have some flexibility to wait longer if you  
> need to.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Jeremie Chism <[email protected]>  
> wrote:
>> At what percentage of your backbone usage do you look at adding more
>> capacity. At peak times I run at 65-70 percent of capacity. Just
>> looking for suggestions.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --- 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to