Quote:
|
Originally Posted by erol
I understand what you are saying and generally you are right that the more people that are contended on a larger pipe (at same contention ratio) the less such contention tneds to affect users. You are also right that with IP Stream all ISPs with users on that exchange are contended by BT onto a 'big pipe'. However it does not necesarily mean that a datastream or LLU will naturaly have greater contention or the same contention as IP stream on a smaller pipe. If you take easynet for example, they (generally) have their own physical network built out to exchanges they have DSLAMS in. As it costs them pretty much the same to put a small pipe into an exchange as a massive one, the chances are they have ample capacity, both in terms of actual contention and in terms of the size of the pipe for a given contention.
You are right that bulldogs quoted contention of 40:1 may have more impact on a users as an IP stream product at 50:1 contention (because of the effect of size of pipe and also because in general BT does not actually run anywhere near its maximums. As ever the subject of 'contention' is a complicated one (even contentious you could say). Personally I would not discount an ISP just because they use Datastream (or LLU) rather than IP Stream. A good ISP using Datastream will ensure that they have sufficent capacity from an exchange to their pop. It' s true however that for an ISP that wants to load users beyond the BT 50:1 contetion in the IP stream products would look at datastream as a means of achieveing this, as well as the general idea that their connection from echange to themselves will tend to be less users on a smaller pipe than IP stream services on that exchange.
|
WTF has this got to do with this thread which is abt price increases?
