Check This Out - ntl 100Mbps - Page 4

RoNa7dO · 06-02-2006, 19:51

im definetly looking forward for 100Mbps connection like in sweden and other places in asia

Rob2005 · 06-02-2006, 20:03

Another point on whether we get this 100mb is money. Both ntl and Telewest are in hugely in debt and according to the Telwest merger document I received yestesday, the merger is going to cost a hell of a lot more money. The more in debt a company is the less it can borrow and has to pay higher rates. Will ntl have enough dosh to roll this 100MB out, or this just a pipe dream? Wouldn't it be more sensible to offer the customer fibre to the home, charge the customer a few 100 quid installation, then offer as much speed, hdtv, vod, catv services etc as can be pumped down the pipe? All for a cost of course.

---------- Post added at 21:03 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by homealone

I agree that switching off analogue will free up bandwidth, but I'm not sure if you are being optimistic on the timescale. There are still areas of NTL that can only get analogue, for example - I guess that will have to be addressed, first?

Yes, and as I posted above this is because of money. Plus, there's nothing stopping BT offering fibre to the home and they don't even have to dig up streets, just connect another wire to their poles. They would really cause ntl problems. In America the former bells are now offering fibre to the home, posing a real threat to the cable cos there.

sollp · 06-02-2006, 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob2005

Another point on whether we get this 100mb is money. Both ntl and Telewest are in hugely in debt and according to the Telwest merger document I received yestesday, the merger is going to cost a hell of a lot more money. The more in debt a company is the less it can borrow and has to pay higher rates. Will ntl have enough dosh to roll this 100MB out, or this just a pipe dream? Wouldn't it be more sensible to offer the customer fibre to the home, charge the customer a few 100 quid installation, then offer as much speed, hdtv, vod, catv services etc as can be pumped down the pipe? All for a cost of course.

---------- Post added at 21:03 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------

Yes, and as I posted above this is because of money. Plus, there's nothing stopping BT offering fibre to the home and they don't even have to dig up streets, just connect another wire to their poles. They would really cause ntl problems. In America the former bells are now offering fibre to the home, posing a real threat to the cable cos there.

Like you have already said, NTL and Telewest will be in more debt after this merger so less money is going to be available, unless of course the company is then bought up by some other bigfirm and money is made available that way,(which could happen). So providing fibre to the home would involve a huge investment which just isn't going to happen at the moment, the cable networks of NTL and Telewest are only just starting to be utilised, the equipment that is already in the ground has not yet begun to pay back what it has cost to put in, they don't need fibre to the home yet, the next investment will be VOIP. Yes this will cost but not as much as FTTH will, NTL is trying to get as much out of the network without having to spend too much at the moment, apart from upgrades to the broadband network that is it and i can't see much money being invested on FTTH for years.

DaggaDagga · 06-02-2006, 21:22

BT would have to dig up the streets where cables are underground (any modern estate). Even re-stringing the poles would be a major job.

Ignition's link gives details about what *might* be under trial by NTL. It uses out-of-band frequencies within the existing coax cable (just as ADSL does on a voice line). So, it doesn't require any digging or replacement of cable. Just a new modem and a few bells and whistles within the network. They claim it can all be installed without disrupting any existing equipment.

Note that, as it's outside the existing spectrum, this is not dependant on NTL switching off the analogue TV. It uses frequencies that are currently used for precisely nothing.

This has got to be good news. I just wonder what will be fast enough? I can't see much use for anything above 20Mb myself, but then again I did once think the internet was like teletext with pictures.

Chrysalis · 07-02-2006, 03:40

If I read that doc right on the site the backbone for this would be 400mbit 4 x copper (in the local area) so like how the 10meg is the customer's max is 25% of the capacity for his area making it easy to saturate or have I got it completely wrong. Their is a downside to this and something makes me think it wont perform well in a mass market, if it was such a miracle technology other countries wouldnt be spending cash on fibre rollouts.

As for what homealone said judging ntl by their past history it wouldnt surprise me the slightest if the analogue only areas and areas unable to get above 1megabit in the evenings were left in their current states whilst this is pushed so they can have more marketing bragging rights.

Ignition · 07-02-2006, 08:30

I am actually astonished that people expect a connection like this to be anything but saturated at peak times.

Ask someone on Bredbandsbolaget Sweden or NTTK fibre in Japan how often they see 100Mbit or anywhere near

The PON networks they run on split 622Mbit downstream and only 155Mbit between 32 homes. Server 100Mbit down each of those, well, you can see the issues.

As the max speeds go up, so the % of that max speed you can expect to reliably get goes down.

Derek · 07-02-2006, 08:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignition

Ask someone on Bredbandsbolaget Sweden or NTTK fibre in Japan how often they see 100Mbit or anywhere near

aldrig or konrinzai?

dragon · 07-02-2006, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignition

I am actually astonished that people expect a connection like this to be anything but saturated at peak times.

Ask someone on Bredbandsbolaget Sweden or NTTK fibre in Japan how often they see 100Mbit or anywhere near

The PON networks they run on split 622Mbit downstream and only 155Mbit between 32 homes. Server 100Mbit down each of those, well, you can see the issues.

As the max speeds go up, so the % of that max speed you can expect to reliably get goes down.

the question id ask from this UPTO speed will they set a minimum Quality of service (which i think they should do with the 10mbit but maybe they cant atm) so you are gurranteed a certian minimum speed?

instead of selling it as 100mbit if they sold it as 4mbit (100mbit burstable) or something like that people wouldnt be able to complain when they didn't hit 100mbit.

like instead of doing Upto 10mbit why dont they make it 3mbit burstable to 10 or something so then everyone gets a steady 3mbit but if theres more available bandwith it goes faster...?

Ignition · 07-02-2006, 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon

the question id ask from this UPTO speed will they set a minimum Quality of service (which i think they should do with the 10mbit but maybe they cant atm) so you are gurranteed a certian minimum speed?

instead of selling it as 100mbit if they sold it as 4mbit (100mbit burstable) or something like that people wouldnt be able to complain when they didn't hit 100mbit.

like instead of doing Upto 10mbit why dont they make it 3mbit burstable to 10 or something so then everyone gets a steady 3mbit but if theres more available bandwith it goes faster...?

Yeah right like people are going to buy a 4Mbit burstable service when the competition are selling 24Mbit...

You think Joe Bloggs cares about 'burstable' ?

dragon · 07-02-2006, 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignition

Yeah right like people are going to buy a 4Mbit burstable service when the competition are selling 24Mbit...

You think Joe Bloggs cares about 'burstable' ?

would that be the 24mbit adsl2 with a range of a whopping 300Meters

(least thats what i read on the internet about it)

and im not sure if thats 300meteres from the exchange or 300 meteres of cable, if its the latter then 300meteres might not even get you outside the exchange

mandrake · 07-02-2006, 22:09

I see they haven't included their standard get-out regarding this new speed, "up to 100MB or 1MB to 100 if your lucky"

Chrysalis · 08-02-2006, 00:33

ignition I am starting to see signs that people prefer to have a minimal sustainable level of service rather then a hyped up max speeds that plummets to below what they had previously, now I know in the business of residental broadband speeds will go down during peak time that is to be expected. But I think if the customers max is 25% of the total max that is shared between a couple of hundred people then their is going to be the same problems that we have now with 10meg. 100megabit on fibre eg. isnt linked to a 400mbit backhual it would probably be at least 1 gigabit so 10% of max making it take longer to hit saturation. In japan I believe its sort of like sweden they get good speeds within their own isp so little local saturation but the international peering is crappy so actual internet traffic is poor. Japan cant really do much about that tho it is their location in the world they will suffer distance related problems.

Downloads · 08-02-2006, 06:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon

would that be the 24mbit adsl2 with a range of a whopping 300Meters

(least thats what i read on the internet about it)

and im not sure if thats 300meteres from the exchange or 300 meteres of cable, if its the latter then 300meteres might not even get you outside the exchange

All you are doing is proving Ignotions point though. NTL offer the same type of service as their competitors. A max speed but say it is up to. 'Joe Bloggs' won't care if you are being more honest and thats a fact. They look at the biggest number and then order. People on this forum might have the intelligence and common sense to know the difference and make an educated choice, but the public don't research and just get what they perceive tro be the most bang for their buck.

dragon · 08-02-2006, 06:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

ignition I am starting to see signs that people prefer to have a minimal sustainable level of service rather then a hyped up max speeds that plummets to below what they had previously, now I know in the business of residental broadband speeds will go down during peak time that is to be expected. But I think if the customers max is 25% of the total max that is shared between a couple of hundred people then their is going to be the same problems that we have now with 10meg. 100megabit on fibre eg. isnt linked to a 400mbit backhual it would probably be at least 1 gigabit so 10% of max making it take longer to hit saturation. In japan I believe its sort of like sweden they get good speeds within their own isp so little local saturation but the international peering is crappy so actual internet traffic is poor. Japan cant really do much about that tho it is their location in the world they will suffer distance related problems.

exactly i have no problems with them saying its UPTO a certian speed all im suggesting is they have a minimum Speed that you should be able to reach regardless of how congested the network is, Its all very well saying you have 100mbit but it would suck if someone down the road was able to hog all the bandwith and everyone else get stuck on sub dialup speeds...

As speeds get higher and congestion on the network gets worse things are only going to get worse unless they set a minimum threshold where anything below that speed is deemed unacceptable.

I know sometimes a slow transfer isn't down to ntl but the speed of whatever it is you are connecting to so i don't expect miricles what I do expect is a standard of service to be kept.

Actually I'm one of the more lucky ones at the moment the 2mbit around here its quite steady but i can see things changing if we have another round of speed increases on the lower teirs.

Ignition · 08-02-2006, 08:22

Guys this is a technical trial not a commercial product launch, enough about the semantics of how much you should and shouldn't expect, etc, eh?

dragon regarding your issue, this is certainly doable except people bitch moan and scream as soon as traffic shaping is mentioned. Some resi services already have a minimum guaranteed bandwidth. But again the point is that most people don't actually care...

P.S. Congestion is good if managed properly, means an ISP is making the most of its' assets and can supply services at best possible cost, however contrary to the beliefs of some that a 'dumb' network is the best way of doing this networks are increasing in intelligence in an attempt to balance the needs of P2P monsters with gamers with occasional browsers with news leechers.

P.P.S. Any service delivering 100Mbit that isn't being done over BPON or GPON will only, if you're lucky, give you near 100Mbit to your next door neighbour at 5:01am on a Sunday with the wind blowing in the right direction and a swiftly risen sun shining on your back.