4 ms·

Well, ISP design their network for the average broadband used (plus a safety margin) and not for the worst case scenario. Just like the electricity utility com

by revax 7y ago

Well, ISP design their network for the average broadband used (plus a safety margin) and not for the worst case scenario. Just like the electricity utility companies cannot provide everyone at the same time with the maximum power they are allowed to use.

Mirioron 7y ago
There's a difference between them though. It's rare that people max out their power when it comes to electricity. But with the broadband it's different. Any time you download a file you try to max out your connection. There is utility for an ISP to increase their bandwidth capabilities for customers. There's much less utility for electricity companies to be able to provide more maximum power to each home. We also know from poorer countries that ISPs can provide better connections.
- chrismeller 7y ago
  What "utility" do you think exists for the ISP to increase their bandwidth capabilities? With an electricity utility, they may be able to turn on their coal generators to meet peak loads - it's a higher cost, but it's something they have available to use when needed. If engineered correctly, it also provides power consistently across all customers. Sure your house never uses enough to matter, but if all of a sudden an auto manufacturer wanted to turn on a whole new production line, they would have planned for that and gotten specific lines run to power it. There is no equivalent for an ISP. Yes, they could guarantee that each customer gets x mbit/s and provision enough capacity (both to your house, to your neighborhood, to your central office, and finally to their peering connections) to cover all of that, but your internet would cost $300/m whether you use it or not and you'd be complaining about that too.
  - Mirioron 7y ago
    >What "utility" do you think exists for the ISP to increase their bandwidth capabilities? In the US? The fact that everybody doesn't hate their guts. A future government could easily screw them over in the future, because the voters don't like those companies. In other countries? Competition. You offer a better service than other ISPs. This also gives everyone better internet and internet services can offer more things. Much poorer countries than the US and Germany have much better internet for a lower cost. As long as there's a big disparity there customers aren't going to be happy.
chrismeller 7y ago
Sometimes I really wish people got their internet bill and saw their peak vs. off-peak usage as something like megabits per second, just like they do with their power bill in kilowatts per hour. You could even provide the same kind of "neighbors near you used" metrics. Each measure could be based off of what the ISP has factored in for the "average" usage at a given time. It would be a purely synthetic number, but it would give people a better idea of exactly what they use, when, and how that compares.
- iptrans 7y ago
  You can do this yourself with a $50 router. You’d have to ask your neighbor about their usage to get comparative metrics, tho.
- tialaramex 7y ago
  My ISP provides me detailed traffic charts. For example on Monday night I lost link-layer service (as did a neighbour and perhaps my whole street, this isn't exactly the ideal time to go asking everybody in person) and I can see that on the chart, and then I can see the next night when I had a multi-way video conference with friends for several hours. Apparently in March 2019 I used a total of 106GB of download 25GB of upload, and this month so far is way below those numbers. This is biased by me working from home, so hour-long video conference calls aren't a new thing for me. The ISP's policy (for which they charge significantly more than a typical ISP in my country) is to "never be the bottleneck". If things are too slow it is never (intentionally) their fault. So that's one reason they provide these charts - you can see latency info in them, drop rates, everything.
thedance 7y ago
This is not correct. IP networks are planned for the 95th percentile peak traffic, not average.

by revax 7y ago

Mirioron 7y ago

There's a difference between them though. It's rare that people max out their power when it comes to electricity. But with the broadband it's different. Any time you download a file you try to max out your connection. There is utility for an ISP to increase their bandwidth capabilities for customers. There's much less utility for electricity companies to be able to provide more maximum power to each home. We also know from poorer countries that ISPs can provide better connections.

chrismeller 7y ago
What "utility" do you think exists for the ISP to increase their bandwidth capabilities? With an electricity utility, they may be able to turn on their coal generators to meet peak loads - it's a higher cost, but it's something they have available to use when needed. If engineered correctly, it also provides power consistently across all customers. Sure your house never uses enough to matter, but if all of a sudden an auto manufacturer wanted to turn on a whole new production line, they would have planned for that and gotten specific lines run to power it. There is no equivalent for an ISP. Yes, they could guarantee that each customer gets x mbit/s and provision enough capacity (both to your house, to your neighborhood, to your central office, and finally to their peering connections) to cover all of that, but your internet would cost $300/m whether you use it or not and you'd be complaining about that too.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  >What "utility" do you think exists for the ISP to increase their bandwidth capabilities? In the US? The fact that everybody doesn't hate their guts. A future government could easily screw them over in the future, because the voters don't like those companies. In other countries? Competition. You offer a better service than other ISPs. This also gives everyone better internet and internet services can offer more things. Much poorer countries than the US and Germany have much better internet for a lower cost. As long as there's a big disparity there customers aren't going to be happy.

chrismeller 7y ago

Sometimes I really wish people got their internet bill and saw their peak vs. off-peak usage as something like megabits per second, just like they do with their power bill in kilowatts per hour. You could even provide the same kind of "neighbors near you used" metrics. Each measure could be based off of what the ISP has factored in for the "average" usage at a given time. It would be a purely synthetic number, but it would give people a better idea of exactly what they use, when, and how that compares.

iptrans 7y ago
You can do this yourself with a $50 router. You’d have to ask your neighbor about their usage to get comparative metrics, tho.
tialaramex 7y ago
My ISP provides me detailed traffic charts. For example on Monday night I lost link-layer service (as did a neighbour and perhaps my whole street, this isn't exactly the ideal time to go asking everybody in person) and I can see that on the chart, and then I can see the next night when I had a multi-way video conference with friends for several hours. Apparently in March 2019 I used a total of 106GB of download 25GB of upload, and this month so far is way below those numbers. This is biased by me working from home, so hour-long video conference calls aren't a new thing for me. The ISP's policy (for which they charge significantly more than a typical ISP in my country) is to "never be the bottleneck". If things are too slow it is never (intentionally) their fault. So that's one reason they provide these charts - you can see latency info in them, drop rates, everything.

thedance 7y ago

This is not correct. IP networks are planned for the 95th percentile peak traffic, not average.