3 ms·
Would each new local customer be given 10gig symmetric, or does your loop get 10gig total and your price drops based on # of people on it? Most people want con
by floatingatoll 6y ago
Would each new local customer be given 10gig symmetric, or does your loop get 10gig total and your price drops based on # of people on it?
Most people want conferencing that doesn't suck, so that they can Zoom/FaceTime/LTE-over-WiFi/Landline-over-VoIP without having Netflix interrupt their call. But I have that solved on a 50mbit down / 5mbit up connection by using an anti-bufferbloat NAT shaper (Eero SQM, or IQrouter, or homebuilt can all do this).
So if you said "this fiber internet ensures that your calls will stop being interrupted by netflix", that might be a great selling point for people who've experienced this problem on their current Internet, without having to discuss bufferbloat in any significant detail.
(Note that you can still have fairness issues with the wireless router, independent of bufferbloat upstream of it — the above-listed devices apply their fairness stuff not only to the WAN uplink but also to the WiFi downlinks — so 10gbit fiber isn't a complete solution, but it's certainly 95% of the way there.)
- linsomniac 6y agoThe standard service is 1gbps, there is a 5x more expensive 10gig service. Neither one is "local loop speed", but they also do design the service with expected overcommit. I suspect most of the contention is going to be inbound though, so if I'm serving something to the local community there hopefully will be plenty of bandwidth out of my neighborhood.
- floatingatoll 6y agoFor 1gbps service, the question would be: Does either the 'modem' linking your home up to the fiber service, or the service network itself, introduce significant high-latency buffering when capacity is exceeded either at your router or at their router? If the answer is "yes, we introduce significant latency to artificially boost throughput when network capacity is exceeded in either direction", then their 1mbps service is no better than Comcast and is not attractive as a solution to the latency issues of classical providers, and I may as well stick with my 50/5 shaped connection instead of their 1000/1000 connection.
- linsomniac 6y agoI think you're talking about bufferbloat? If so, I hope the answer is no...
- jrumbut 6y agoWould you be willing to expound more on bufferbloat? I had never heard of it.
- waste_monk 6y agoThere's a whole wiki for it: https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Introduction/ https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Introduction... To quote: Bufferbloat is the undesirable latency that comes from a router or other network equipment buffering too much data. It is a huge drag on Internet performance created, ironically, by previous attempts to make it work better. The one-sentence summary is “Bloated buffers lead to network-crippling latency spikes.”
- easytiger 6y agoI've met a related issue in the field on shared dark fiber links managed by fairly clueless vendors who's switche's buffer configuration led to connections being basically blackholed after a certain number of megabytes of data was sent.