6 ms·

AT&T kills DSL, leaves tens of millions of homes without fiber Internet

76 points by vo2maxer 6y ago

gumby 6y ago
The collusion issue needs to be emphasized. AT&T participates on paper only in certain regions so that its competitors can have a de facto monopoly (AT&T acts as an antitrust “beard) in exchange for the same in different service areas. I don’t expect any national government to take this up.
- bogomipz 6y ago
  They all do this though don't they? There's a tacit understanding that they don't encroach on the each other's monopolies.
  - gumby 6y ago
    Exactly.
  - Keverw 6y ago
    I always kinda thought multiple providers in the same area would be a logistical and technical challenge, could t eh share the same lines? Like Comcast and Charter both providing cable as a option to the same house.
    - sokoloff 6y ago
      If they were both on the poles outside, it wouldn’t be any logistical trouble to switch from one to the other. It would take a truck roll, but that’s why they have trucks.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      Yes, it would be wasteful to run multiple fibers all over the place, just like it would be wasteful to run multiple water, sewer, electrical, and gas lines. Hence fiber internet should be a public utility, like water, sewer, gas, and electric.
      - ncmncm 6y ago
        Fiber takes up overwhelmingly less space than others services' lines. So, in principle there should be little trouble having two or even more providers. Furthermore: fibers provide overwhelmingly more bandwidth capacity than (almost) anyone needs, and hardly nobody needs two fiber connections. So, different providers can share the same fiber installation, either renting to one another, or renting from local government. Finally, maintaining fiber is much less costly than, say, sewers, they last much longer, and are way simpler to manage, so local governments can operate them directly, and provide service more cheaply by dispensing with billing activity, folding costs into the tax base, as with sewage service.
        dividedbyzero 6y ago
        > fibers provide overwhelmingly more bandwidth capacity than (almost) anyone needs Until everyone wants to use the SpaceX Mars Landing Live Immersion app on their Apple Shades that streams the entire 360° 3D 16k Ultra HDR helmet camera with fully directional sound. Or a protracted pandemic forces people to actually iterate on remote work tech, and instead of god-awful laptop webcams, eventually setups with 4k 3D video become the norm, and then you may have two working adults and kids taking remote lessons at the same time... not saying that current-gen fiber will become too slow anytime soon, and I'm sure there's still a lot of headroom left, but such statements have a tendency to age badly. Not that I'm against treating this as a utility (I think that's absolutely the way to go), but it should be one that has frequent upgrades planned into it (unlike e.g. sewers)
    - physicsguy 6y ago
      In the UK we have a really odd situation like this. British Telecom was privatised by the government in the 1980s, and since then, it's been split into two arms - BT, which is the consumer company, and OpenReach, which is the infrastructure company. OpenReach have to offer access to other providers, and so you can sign up to internet via their lines via Sky, TalkTalk, etc. Simultaneously, in the late 1980s, various regional companies tried to set up cable TV and phone networks by laying their own cable, and eventually they consolidated into NTL, which was eventually rebranded. These have their own fibre cable network, but because it was privately funded and set up, there's no obligation for other companies to have access to it.
    - PoignardAzur 6y ago
      The technical term is "local loop unbundling". There's multiple levels of sharing, but just having regulation to force telecoms to lease the most local part (the cable that goes from your house to a shared switch) goes a long way. The US isn't well-regulated on that front. In France, not only is the local loop (and much of the network) shared, when Orange came to install fiber in our apartment they had to install four fiber ports + wires in the same cable, so we can switch to any the other major 3 operators painlessly (or, we could if any of them had fiber in our building). The infrastructure-sharing regulations, as well as aggressive anti-trust action, is why France has one of the best internet coverages in the world at one of the lowest prices, 15 years after the public telecom operator was privatized.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
martinald 6y ago
This article is pretty confusing. Are they terminating new service for all DSL based technologies, or just actual "old school" DSL? It focusses on FTTH but most of AT&Ts service area is actually FTTN. I assume FTTN service (VDSL) is not being terminated to new subscribers? If it's just DSL service then to be honest 4G is likely to be vastly better for most people. Some will be left out though, which is a real pain, but many countries are switching off new DSL connections (though probably not as quickly/aggressively in rural areas as AT&T is here) if not migrating en mass to at least VDSL. DSL requires a tonne of maintence compared to even VDSL/FTTN, as you can replace the main run of copper from the exchange to the local node with fibre and then just need to worry about the last mile connection part. In most network topologies this reduces the amount of copper in the last mile by 70%+, with significant opex savings. 4G/5G can provide better speeds in nearly all cases with none of the cost. Starlink will also be super interesting for this segment too.
- wnissen 6y ago
  Yeah, I wonder that, too. Best ISP in the world sonic.net is still reselling Fiber To The Node (FTTN) AT&T 50Mbps DSL in my area. It's still really unfortunate, we only have one option (Comcast) for truly fast Internet. I will say that I would rather have Sonic than Comcast, the latter is very unreliable and the DSL has been rock-solid if you reboot the router every couple months. Really, really hoping 5G creates some competition in the home Internet space.
  - bogomipz 6y ago
    >" Best ISP in the world sonic.net is still reselling Fiber To The Node (FTTN) AT&T 50Mbps DSL in my area." How does this work? Is it FTTN from one ISP and then copper from the node to the home via another ISP? Is it one bill?
    - martinald 6y ago
      Not entirely sure of that exact setup but usually the "monopoly" ISP will terminate the connection to the "resselling ISP" in some sort of IP tunnel. The underlying physical connection is basically invisible to the reselling ISP and it just looks like a normal IP tunnel they can route to and from. The ISP providing the physical connection bills the reselling ISP a wholesale rate for the connection, which then bills the end customer.
ncmncm 6y ago
ATT collected a half $trillion extra from subscribers on legislation that was supposed to fund building out rural fiber, and pocketed it. At first they did build out some fiber, but never lit it. One terminates 200 yards from my house, since a decade ago, but they have been selling 3Mb DSL instead at $50/mo. Until now. Now, nothing. String them up.
FandangoRanger 6y ago
Starlink is going to be brutal for these combined entertainment slash Internet mega corps.
- phone8675309 6y ago
  Not it’s not. It will either litigate them into a standstill, buy and kill them, or co-opt them like it has any other viable competitor.
  - ncmncm 6y ago
    Not if Starlink ends up worth a lot more.
  - tinus_hn 6y ago
    That’s all pretty difficult as Starlink is not location bound while everything else is. I think they’ll try convincing people it’s not good enough, not enough bandwidth, too high latency, limited quotas.
- anaganisk 6y ago
  Why should i believe it to be any different, its just another corporate. Just like "OPEN" AI which is completely closed.
Mountain_Skies 6y ago
Maybe they're planning on selling those lines to a rural ISP like Frontier or Windstream. The price would have to be cheap as one is in bankruptcy and the other just left it. More likely is that Starlink and competitors end up being good enough in rural areas to make DSL even less of a viable product than it is now. The government subsidizes these services but how long will that make sense for the government, the telecoms, or the customers?

76 points by vo2maxer 6y ago

The collusion issue needs to be emphasized. AT&T participates on paper only in certain regions so that its competitors can have a de facto monopoly (AT&T acts as an antitrust “beard) in exchange for the same in different service areas. I don’t expect any national government to take this up.

bogomipz 6y ago
They all do this though don't they? There's a tacit understanding that they don't encroach on the each other's monopolies.
- gumby 6y ago
  Exactly.
- Keverw 6y ago
  I always kinda thought multiple providers in the same area would be a logistical and technical challenge, could t eh share the same lines? Like Comcast and Charter both providing cable as a option to the same house.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    If they were both on the poles outside, it wouldn’t be any logistical trouble to switch from one to the other. It would take a truck roll, but that’s why they have trucks.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    Yes, it would be wasteful to run multiple fibers all over the place, just like it would be wasteful to run multiple water, sewer, electrical, and gas lines. Hence fiber internet should be a public utility, like water, sewer, gas, and electric.
    - ncmncm 6y ago
      Fiber takes up overwhelmingly less space than others services' lines. So, in principle there should be little trouble having two or even more providers. Furthermore: fibers provide overwhelmingly more bandwidth capacity than (almost) anyone needs, and hardly nobody needs two fiber connections. So, different providers can share the same fiber installation, either renting to one another, or renting from local government. Finally, maintaining fiber is much less costly than, say, sewers, they last much longer, and are way simpler to manage, so local governments can operate them directly, and provide service more cheaply by dispensing with billing activity, folding costs into the tax base, as with sewage service.
      - dividedbyzero 6y ago
        > fibers provide overwhelmingly more bandwidth capacity than (almost) anyone needs Until everyone wants to use the SpaceX Mars Landing Live Immersion app on their Apple Shades that streams the entire 360° 3D 16k Ultra HDR helmet camera with fully directional sound. Or a protracted pandemic forces people to actually iterate on remote work tech, and instead of god-awful laptop webcams, eventually setups with 4k 3D video become the norm, and then you may have two working adults and kids taking remote lessons at the same time... not saying that current-gen fiber will become too slow anytime soon, and I'm sure there's still a lot of headroom left, but such statements have a tendency to age badly. Not that I'm against treating this as a utility (I think that's absolutely the way to go), but it should be one that has frequent upgrades planned into it (unlike e.g. sewers)
  - physicsguy 6y ago
    In the UK we have a really odd situation like this. British Telecom was privatised by the government in the 1980s, and since then, it's been split into two arms - BT, which is the consumer company, and OpenReach, which is the infrastructure company. OpenReach have to offer access to other providers, and so you can sign up to internet via their lines via Sky, TalkTalk, etc. Simultaneously, in the late 1980s, various regional companies tried to set up cable TV and phone networks by laying their own cable, and eventually they consolidated into NTL, which was eventually rebranded. These have their own fibre cable network, but because it was privately funded and set up, there's no obligation for other companies to have access to it.
  - PoignardAzur 6y ago
    The technical term is "local loop unbundling". There's multiple levels of sharing, but just having regulation to force telecoms to lease the most local part (the cable that goes from your house to a shared switch) goes a long way. The US isn't well-regulated on that front. In France, not only is the local loop (and much of the network) shared, when Orange came to install fiber in our apartment they had to install four fiber ports + wires in the same cable, so we can switch to any the other major 3 operators painlessly (or, we could if any of them had fiber in our building). The infrastructure-sharing regulations, as well as aggressive anti-trust action, is why France has one of the best internet coverages in the world at one of the lowest prices, 15 years after the public telecom operator was privatized.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

martinald 6y ago

This article is pretty confusing. Are they terminating new service for all DSL based technologies, or just actual "old school" DSL? It focusses on FTTH but most of AT&Ts service area is actually FTTN. I assume FTTN service (VDSL) is not being terminated to new subscribers? If it's just DSL service then to be honest 4G is likely to be vastly better for most people. Some will be left out though, which is a real pain, but many countries are switching off new DSL connections (though probably not as quickly/aggressively in rural areas as AT&T is here) if not migrating en mass to at least VDSL. DSL requires a tonne of maintence compared to even VDSL/FTTN, as you can replace the main run of copper from the exchange to the local node with fibre and then just need to worry about the last mile connection part. In most network topologies this reduces the amount of copper in the last mile by 70%+, with significant opex savings. 4G/5G can provide better speeds in nearly all cases with none of the cost. Starlink will also be super interesting for this segment too.

wnissen 6y ago
Yeah, I wonder that, too. Best ISP in the world sonic.net is still reselling Fiber To The Node (FTTN) AT&T 50Mbps DSL in my area. It's still really unfortunate, we only have one option (Comcast) for truly fast Internet. I will say that I would rather have Sonic than Comcast, the latter is very unreliable and the DSL has been rock-solid if you reboot the router every couple months. Really, really hoping 5G creates some competition in the home Internet space.
- bogomipz 6y ago
  >" Best ISP in the world sonic.net is still reselling Fiber To The Node (FTTN) AT&T 50Mbps DSL in my area." How does this work? Is it FTTN from one ISP and then copper from the node to the home via another ISP? Is it one bill?
  - martinald 6y ago
    Not entirely sure of that exact setup but usually the "monopoly" ISP will terminate the connection to the "resselling ISP" in some sort of IP tunnel. The underlying physical connection is basically invisible to the reselling ISP and it just looks like a normal IP tunnel they can route to and from. The ISP providing the physical connection bills the reselling ISP a wholesale rate for the connection, which then bills the end customer.

ncmncm 6y ago

ATT collected a half $trillion extra from subscribers on legislation that was supposed to fund building out rural fiber, and pocketed it. At first they did build out some fiber, but never lit it. One terminates 200 yards from my house, since a decade ago, but they have been selling 3Mb DSL instead at $50/mo. Until now. Now, nothing. String them up.

FandangoRanger 6y ago

Starlink is going to be brutal for these combined entertainment slash Internet mega corps.

phone8675309 6y ago
Not it’s not. It will either litigate them into a standstill, buy and kill them, or co-opt them like it has any other viable competitor.
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Not if Starlink ends up worth a lot more.
- tinus_hn 6y ago
  That’s all pretty difficult as Starlink is not location bound while everything else is. I think they’ll try convincing people it’s not good enough, not enough bandwidth, too high latency, limited quotas.
anaganisk 6y ago
Why should i believe it to be any different, its just another corporate. Just like "OPEN" AI which is completely closed.

Mountain_Skies 6y ago

Maybe they're planning on selling those lines to a rural ISP like Frontier or Windstream. The price would have to be cheap as one is in bankruptcy and the other just left it. More likely is that Starlink and competitors end up being good enough in rural areas to make DSL even less of a viable product than it is now. The government subsidizes these services but how long will that make sense for the government, the telecoms, or the customers?