[opendtv] Re: F.C.C. Is Deluged With Comments on Net Neutrality Rules
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:21:28 -0400
On Jul 21, 2014, at 10:00 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E"
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Craig, the only sentence that is relevant in the above is your last sentence.
> You're throwing around terms without placing them in a context. Explain to me
> how you think an ISP network is architected, and then maybe we can set
> straight your misconceptions about "WAN" and "last mile."
I did. I understand that there can be bottlenecks in different parts of the
Internet. I understand that edge servers can bypass some of these bottlenecks.
I also understand that bandwidth in the last mile is still a major issue. For
DSL the available bandwidth is insufficient, even if everything upstream is not
congested. For cable it is primarily an issue of building out the last mile
infrastructure, which they are doing as demand increases. For FIOS the
infrastructure is more than adequate, but the cost cannot be justified for mass
deployment.
>
>> DSL is a dedicated link, so it can deliver good QOS,
>
> That's nonsense. The DSL link is just the very last link in a long chain. At
> the head of a DSL link is a multiplexer, DSLAM, which fans out to many DSL
> links. Upstream of the DSLAM there's a lot of other ISP network, including
> routers, with potential for congestion and consequent QoS issues.
>
Not nonsense at all. DSL is dependent on upstream congestion; all I was saying
is that the "last mile" link to the customer is not the problem, as it is
dedicated. The problem for DSL is that it is too slow. The telcos can deploy
the necessary equipment at the CO and at upstream interconnection hubs to
eliminate congestion. And they can offer co-location space for edge servers.
The fact that they are dragging their heels on these infrastructure investments
is not a last mile problem, nor is it a "Netflix" problem. They are just
behaving like a Title II regulated utility.
> "QoS," a term you bandy about, is managed in routers primarily, and some
> people lazily use the term also for possibly prioritizing of queues in layer
> 2 switches. But that's really a misnomer, and there are no performance
> standards for the latter.
>
> So, in telco DSL nets, JUST AS in cableco nets, you want to have video
> servers feeding high bandwidth content as close to the edges as possible,
> bypassing many or most of those congestion points (routers). Once you're at
> the DSL link, or in the passive part of the cable network, you're BEYOND
> anything that gives you QoS knobs, Craig.
Yes. I already explained all of that. I would point out that the local loops
for cable are NOT passive. they are a shared resource and available bandwidth
can fluctuate based on demand. The cable company can manage the loop to a
limited extent, if they have more channels available to support data, but the
only reliable way to improve a congested loop is to reduce the number of homes
it supports. That means building more infrastructure.
>
>> Cable is limited by the number of customers on the neighborhood loop,
>> and the number of downstream data channels they dedicate to that
>> neighborhood.
>
> Cable creates multiple passive networks, and each "neighborhood loop"
> gradually passes fewer and fewer homes, Craig, as you need to provide more
> and more bandwidth to each home. The fiber optic part of the neighborhood
> network is ALSO a passive network, which ultimately ALSO has to pass fewer
> and fewer homes.
Yes, the loops are getting "smaller," gradually. This is all about investing in
more risers. In most cases the main fiber trunks are in place. A new riser may
require a new fiber to be installed to connect the riser to the closest trunk.
>
> In both cases, edge servers bypass the parts of the network upstream of where
> the servers are physically connected to. That's all that matters. If you can
> bypass a lot of those core routers in the ISP network, the video streams
> won't get in the way of the other streams, and vice versa.
Correct. Edge servers have been a reality for more than a decade. They are
clearly an important part of the total solution, if we are ever to transition
to an on-demand infrastructure for all content delivery via the Internet. By
this I mean replacing the streams that the MVPDs deliver today, and having the
customer either connect to a multicast for live events or initiate a VOD event.
>
>> All services require a modem in the home.
>
> What the heck does that have to do with anything?
It was in response to your assertion that it is more difficult for the telcos
to connect a broadband customer than a cable system. For DSL and cable the
customer can do the installation. For FIOS the telco must connect to the
premises and install the termination equipment.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
