North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: BitTorrent swarms have a deadly bite on broadband nets

  • From: Tim Franklin
  • Date: Tue Oct 23 05:49:39 2007

On Tue, October 23, 2007 2:55 am, Leo Bicknell wrote:

> 3) Is there any chance US providers could offer similar technologies at
> similar prices, or are there significant differences (regulation,
> distance etc) that prevent it from being viable?

For the UK (and NL), on the tech side we're seeing some success with EFM
on copper, in this particular case on an Actelis platform.  It's a new
unit in the CO, from 1-8 pairs from the CO to the customer premises, up to
a total bandwidth across all pairs of 40Mb/s in each direction. 
(Admittedly 40Mb/s is 8 pairs at something like 1km from the exchange, but
I'm seeing some useful 6-10M symmetric services on 4 or so pairs).

Upstream from the CO box is FE or GE, either a VLAN or multiple
double-tagged VLANs per customer, so if you want to offer uncontended, you
just have to get enough backhaul from the CO to cope with all your

This is still running in the tromboning, everything-is-backhauled model,
but there's no technical reason why you couldn't put a switch or router in
the CO to keep local traffic local.  (I'm mostly using this for VPN access
circuits, so there's rarely traffic between sites on the same CO, but if
you were rolling it out large-scale for Internet, it might make sense).

It *is* nice though in that Ethernet frames go in, Ethernet frames come
out - no need for fancy router interfaces, nasty PPPoSomething nonsense,
or anything similar - it looks to the networking equipment on both ends
like a long piece of Cat5.

How you market "less downstream, more upstream" to customers (assuming
you're getting more like the 10M symmetric, not 40M), and how you make all
this happen for $40, I'm not so sure...