Economics of the UFB CIR

Forums › New Zealand UFB › Economics of the UFB CIR

Ragnor

6895 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Topic # 87605 2-Aug-2011 15:40
Fascinating blog post about how the guaranteed 2.5Mbit CIR on 50Mbit UFB from your line to the ISP is unlikely to carry across to the ISP's transit (at least for small scale ISP's). http://nztelco.com/content/?p=285

1 | 2 | 3

687 posts

Ultimate Geek

UberGroup

Reply # 500862 2-Aug-2011 15:51
I wish CFH would never have included the words CIR, There is NO isp out there in NZ offering any CIR on sub-$100 internet connections. That graph also excludes the use of local caching and CDN nodes at the regional NNI points. All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

Ragnor

6895 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 500874 2-Aug-2011 16:02
Beccara: I wish CFH would never have included the words CIR, There is NO isp out there in NZ offering any CIR on sub-$100 internet connections. That graph also excludes the use of local caching and CDN nodes at the regional NNI points. Yeah it's a simplified example, which he clearly states. Whether they publish it or not surely most residential ISP's do operate within some kind of contention ratio range internally for purchasing more transit to cope with customer growth I would have thought. There are of course some ISP's that don't, we've observed the Slingshot complaint-o-meter at work in the past, ie: don't buy more international transit until their are a lot of complaints about slow peak time speeds. Ex staff even confirm this is how they used to operate.

Zeon

2382 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 500924 2-Aug-2011 17:25
TBH I would just cut out connectivity with non-peerers (Telecom/Telstra) entirely. They host very little content in comparison to what you can get over the APE. Better to upgrade the speed of international (including better buying power) and peer with them via your upstream in AUS or the US. That cuts a massive chunk out.....

eXDee

2859 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Reply # 500955 2-Aug-2011 18:20
Zeon: TBH I would just cut out connectivity with non-peerers (Telecom/Telstra) entirely. They host very little content in comparison to what you can get over the APE. Better to upgrade the speed of international (including better buying power) and peer with them via your upstream in AUS or the US. That cuts a massive chunk out..... This would be nice in theory, but mums and dads on telecom home broadband won't be happy when they can't access sites, and prospective website hosters will also be annoyed when a big chunk of their customer base is no longer accessible. Rock and hard place? (i hope i interpreted what you said correctly).

1080p

996 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 500990 2-Aug-2011 19:42
eXDee: Zeon: TBH I would just cut out connectivity with non-peerers (Telecom/Telstra) entirely. They host very little content in comparison to what you can get over the APE. Better to upgrade the speed of international (including better buying power) and peer with them via your upstream in AUS or the US. That cuts a massive chunk out..... This would be nice in theory, but mums and dads on telecom home broadband won't be happy when they can't access sites, and prospective website hosters will also be annoyed when a big chunk of their customer base is no longer accessible. Rock and hard place? (i hope i interpreted what you said correctly). Not really, they would still be able to access the sites but they would cross their ISPs international link rather than interconnecting directly. Workstation: Intel DH67CL ~ i5-2500 ~ 4GB Corsair RAM (x2) ~ Intel X25-M 80GB SSD Laptop: Dell Inspiron 1564 ~ i5-520M ~ 4.00GB RAM ~ 500GB SATA HDD ~ Win7 Home Premium x64 Common misconceptions.

Zeon

2382 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 501104 2-Aug-2011 23:54
eXDee: Zeon: TBH I would just cut out connectivity with non-peerers (Telecom/Telstra) entirely. They host very little content in comparison to what you can get over the APE. Better to upgrade the speed of international (including better buying power) and peer with them via your upstream in AUS or the US. That cuts a massive chunk out..... This would be nice in theory, but mums and dads on telecom home broadband won't be happy when they can't access sites, and prospective website hosters will also be annoyed when a big chunk of their customer base is no longer accessible. Rock and hard place? (i hope i interpreted what you said correctly). They will still have access just via international links rather than the ISP paying Telecom/Telstra for the privilege of providing their user with content over "domestic transit". Most website hosters go with ICONZ, Orcon, Web Drive, Maxnet etc. who are all open peerers so it wouldn't really affect them. As a content provider for our company, if we end up getting our own AS we will probably just get Citylink peering at APE for our NZ node and feed Telecom/Telstra from our US East Coast node. ATM it seems the norm that your colo provider provides free national including Telecom/Telstra but with that kind of pricing nearing international I wonder how long that's going to last....

Beccara

687 posts

Ultimate Geek

UberGroup

Reply # 501189 3-Aug-2011 09:39
ISP's are extremely complex beasts that really can't be simplified into "pretty chart" format and remain accurate. It's ignoring waaaay to much of the things that help improve user's experiences and fail's to actually understand the UFB. For a start there is a 24:1 split on the GE-Pon which means the GE-Pon link of 2.4gbit is actually 100mbit/50mbit "CIR" on the access medium. The Handover points? 10gbit interconnection costs less per month than you can buy a smart phone for so there is no vaild reason apart from being a tight wad to have contention on the NNI. The regional based NNI handover points also create the need/opportunities for regional based IX's to enable near-linespeed client to client communication paths's within the same region. You can also place CDN/Caching gear in each region to reduce the inter-region link's size. The assumption that International Transit has to come via AKL is just plain stupid and old again. I know for sure of at least one transit provider that will drop the transit off in any region in the north island for free which reduces the costs again. And all that ignore's the fact that CIR on a residential connection is just never going to happen. Consumers want more speed with more cap for less price All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

webwat

1275 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Reply # 501383 3-Aug-2011 14:46
I don't think the UFB CIR specs were ever intended to translate to "internet speed" for someone's downloads. There should be options for VoIP providers and vidieo broadcasters to use a vlan that takes advantage of the CIR, thus preventing realtime traffic from compeating with best efforts traffic. The objective is to use the same connection for different types of service without the more sensitive usage suffering whenever someone does a download. Qualified in business, certified in fibre, stuck in copper, have to keep going ^_^

raytaylor

1606 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 501905 4-Aug-2011 13:43
As I understand, the CIR was on the physical fibre from the node to the home. This ment different technologies could be used? It wont refer to the isp running over the top. Also remember that isps can lease space in chorus exchanges and setup local p2p and web caches, rather than centralising it all. And others can provide specialised services like cable tv over the fibre with multicast data. Ray Taylor Napier, NZ www.taylorcommunications.co.nz

Beccara

687 posts

Ultimate Geek

UberGroup

Reply # 501939 4-Aug-2011 15:11
raytaylor: As I understand, the CIR was on the physical fibre from the node to the home. This ment different technologies could be used? It wont refer to the isp running over the top. Also remember that isps can lease space in chorus exchanges and setup local p2p and web caches, rather than centralising it all. And others can provide specialised services like cable tv over the fibre with multicast data. Unless I've missed something UFB is all fibre all the time All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

raytaylor

1606 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 502016 4-Aug-2011 16:58
sorry i should clarify what i ment tv via fibreoptic cable, or cable. Telstra's network is HFC which is a blend of the two - hybrid fibreoptic coaxial but a company could create an all-fibre cable tv network in NZ using the UFB and deliver tv services using radio over fibre transmission and renting dark fibre, or if they rented layer 2 fibre, they could use multicast tcp/ip Ray Taylor Napier, NZ www.taylorcommunications.co.nz

Ragnor

6895 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 502068 4-Aug-2011 18:09
raytaylor: sorry i should clarify what i ment tv via fibreoptic cable, or cable. Telstra's network is HFC which is a blend of the two - hybrid fibreoptic coaxial but a company could create an all-fibre cable tv network in NZ using the UFB and deliver tv services using radio over fibre transmission and renting dark fibre, or if they rented layer 2 fibre, they could use multicast tcp/ip The question is why. I think broadcast TV where you have a large number of people watching the same show at the same time is in slow decline. Live sport and maybe news are two exceptions, everything else is better on demand (see the popularity of tv episode and movie downloads/torrents). Sky already has their satellite infrastructure, freeview has satellite and uhf, Telstraclear cable - it would only make sense to move to UFB for Telstraclear out of those three in the medium term. There's no really space for another broadcast network, what content would they possibly be able to run? Personally I think the future in on demand for everything over the internet.

Ragnor

6895 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 502071 4-Aug-2011 18:24
Beccara: For a start there is a 24:1 split on the GE-Pon which means the GE-Pon link of 2.4gbit is actually 100mbit/50mbit "CIR" on the access medium. The Handover points? 10gbit interconnection costs less per month than you can buy a smart phone for so there is no vaild reason apart from being a tight wad to have contention on the NNI. The regional based NNI handover points also create the need/opportunities for regional based IX's to enable near-linespeed client to client communication paths's within the same region. You can also place CDN/Caching gear in each region to reduce the inter-region link's size. The assumption that International Transit has to come via AKL is just plain stupid and old again. I know for sure of at least one transit provider that will drop the transit off in any region in the north island for free which reduces the costs again. And all that ignore's the fact that CIR on a residential connection is just never going to happen. Consumers want more speed with more cap for less price Fair points, but what you're saying ie: that due to costs residential ISP's will still have fairly high contention on their transit.... is basically what the blog post concludes .

PenultimateHop

612 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 502072 4-Aug-2011 18:25
Beccara: For a start there is a 24:1 split on the GE-Pon which means the GE-Pon link of 2.4gbit is actually 100mbit/50mbit "CIR" on the access medium. For clarity, the proposed architecture is GPON. EPON is quite different from GPON (there is no such beast as "GE-PON"). Beccara: The regional based NNI handover points also create the need/opportunities for regional based IX's to enable near-linespeed client to client communication paths's within the same region. You can also place CDN/Caching gear in each region to reduce the inter-region link's size. All of that assumes you have a BNG or other suitable PE deployed immediately adjacent to the NNI, otherwise you're hauling it to your (presumably centralised) POP.

Beccara

687 posts

Ultimate Geek

UberGroup

Reply # 502094 4-Aug-2011 18:53
Sorry you are right it is GPON, old habbit if GE die hard it seems. Its also in placed, not proposed I think the model if 'central' pops are gone, its simply not cost effective to haul that much data away from the region when a decent chunk of it can be handled in region at IX's or with CDN's. Any ISP that simply backhauls it to AKL/WGTN/CHCH is going to be slower or make less money than an ISP that's smart about it All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

1 | 2 | 3