|
Motronic posted:I'm going to guess the number one difference impacting this between wherever you live and the US is geography/size. It's the same reason we didn't go to the moon, and why we have the world's smallest military: geography.
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
Motronic posted:I'm going to guess the number one difference impacting this between wherever you live and the US is geography/size. Exceptionalism. Got it. klosterdev posted:a few large companies where none are willing to cross into not-their-territory unless is a dense city Are there actually any dense cities in the US where FTTH is available across the city? dragonshardz posted:Basically, nationalize ISPs. I fully support this. Well, the retail side can stay private. I'd like to see (like we have here) the public owning the infrastructure, to which any retail ISP can buy access in order to offer service to the public. Bonus points if there's also a no-frills public retail option to keep a check on retailers forming a price cartel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
Something I've noticed is that internet exchanges and peering, bar *very* few exceptions in the single digits, are for-profit in the US and generally a nonprofit association in Europe with heavily open peering apart from a few lovely people (DTAG, Liberty Global, etc) In the US, peering is something you pay for. If you are not a massive player, then eyeball networks won't even talk to you, and explicitly won't peer with you if you only have one location. Internet exchanges are commercial and you pay like hundreds to a thousand for even 100 Mbps port. Big ones are run by for-profit, like Any2 or Equinix. Cross connections cost hundreds to thousands. In Europe, XCs are much more reasonable, and there are a lot more smaller ISPs running over either communal infrastructure or just in existence at all, that actually do BGP. Many smaller businesses also at least have an ASN. This is partially because RIPE is a lot more reasonable on allocating them; ARIN charges a $500 setup fee plus annual cost per ASN. AMSIX, LINX, and other large exchanges are member-owned nonprofits. LINX is something like $50/month equivalent for membership. The fact that smaller ISPs exist at all mean that they are a lot more open (and probably desperate for) settlement free peering with as many people as possible. It's common to see small, single person/1-2 people company/ISP rear end in Europe on exchange and multihomed. IRR/RPKI is well done in RIPE's anchor. On the other hand, in the US, everyone wants lovely, worthless paper letter of authorisation for IP space announcement, charge huge setup fees every time you make a router change, rely on broken, insecure RADB.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
You don’t even have to fully nationalize to make it work. Just subsidize the heck out of internet access and make sure the strings attached are consumer friendly. It’s baffling there isn’t a bigger push to do that at a minimum, but American politics avoids making things public goods for all the reasons people posted above plus a really ill informed electorate. Privatization of vital infrastructure and services is bad in most cases, but a lot of people will call nationalizing them socialism while ignoring they’re a really basic part of our social contract.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
if there is one thing I love its paying equinix
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Yeah, I'm sure it's the geography stopping us, and has nothing to do with Congress and local governments being wholly-owned subsidiaries of corporate interests. You don't think the cost and complexity of the geography is a driver for the granted monopolies in the first place? I've been involved with the negotiation on these municipal contracts. Have you? Weatherman posted:Exceptionalism. Got it. Snark and lack of understanding. Got it. Weatherman posted:Are there actually any dense cities in the US where FTTH is available across the city? Yes. Large and small.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
Weatherman posted:Are there actually any dense cities in the US where FTTH is available across the city? Pretty much every major-major (like San Diego would not qualify) west coast city has it in some way, but they're almost all constrained to large MDUs with few exceptions. Usually modern apartment blocks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
Motronic posted:You don't think the cost and complexity of the geography is a driver for the granted monopolies in the first place? I've been involved with the negotiation on these municipal contracts. Have you? Motronic posted:Yes. Large and small.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Oh, I'm sure that's the excuse. But it's difficult for municipalities to effectively negotiate with the ISPs when the ISPs have already carved up the country between each other ahead of time, and lobby super loving hard to stop municipal broadband from being an option. The rich part of Bellevue (Amazon's new HQ1) is almost totally covered with Lumen (SFH) and Wave (apartments). Seattle is Lumen for outskirts houses and Wave/Atlas/Google for apartments. None of this is municipal, and the luxury buildings have their choice of 2-3+ FTTH providers. Unfortunately, all of it terminates in the telecoms closet, so you can't get 2x1G from two different providers, there's only a single Cat6 run from the closet into your unit. Atlas will do 10G to the home. I know of at least one apartment building in Bellevue that can choose between 5 FTTH providers, with diverse fiber paths, all underground utilities, with multiple 10G providers. A 3 bedroom is $24k/m. In San Francisco you have Paxio, Sonic, Webpass/Google. Unfortunately they all cap out at gigabit only and won't do 10G. I used Fastmetrics (business ISP) in SF. Impotence fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Nov 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:What large city has FTTH available across the city? The only small cities I know of that do have municipal broadband. Everett, but it's Frontier
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
Considering the lifetime of a building, putting in a Cat6 cable during construction rather than a fibre seems really short sighted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:08
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:Considering the lifetime of a building, putting in a Cat6 cable during construction rather than a fibre seems really short sighted. Real estate developers: famous for taking the long view
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:12
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Snark and lack of understanding. Got it. Look dude I'm quite happy with my own country's fibre situation. I'm not going to advocate on Americans' behalf -- you're either happy with your situation or there's nothing you can do about it so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Thanks Ants posted:Considering the lifetime of a building, putting in a Cat6 cable during construction rather than a fibre seems really short sighted. The Labor Party in Australia announced the National Broadband Network that was to be a future-proofed FTTH project. Once the Liberal Party (that's the Conservative party, no it's you who are wrong) got in they said "nope, too expensive and it will take away from our corporate sponsors" and changed it to "fibre to the street corner, then coax or copper from there". Basically made the NBN into a laughingstock overnight, but it means they could hand over billions of dollars to Telstra for their lovely copper network. Earlier this year the same Liberals said "welp copper's a failure, guess we should roll out FTTH" to a nationwide response of WE loving TOLD YOU SO
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Weatherman posted:Look dude I'm quite happy with my own country's fibre situation. I'm not going to advocate on Americans' behalf -- you're either happy with your situation or there's nothing you can do about it so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Are you just posting in bad faith here? Nobody asked you to advocate. Nobody said they were happy with the situation. The conversation was around your uninformed reasoning for how it ended up the way it is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
hahahaha australian nbn isn't even just copper they consider wireless (like 1-2 digit megabit speeds, not good microwave or similar) as part of it too
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:21
|
|
Motronic posted:Are you just posting in bad faith here? Nobody asked you to advocate. Nobody said they were happy with the situation. The conversation was around your uninformed reasoning for how it ended up the way it is. You have some weirdly aggressive energy about this
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:22
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:Considering the lifetime of a building, putting in a Cat6 cable during construction rather than a fibre seems really short sighted. Somehow, my current apartment came with HOA provided fibre and is internally wired for CAT-6. I get 30/30 for free with my rent, and I can a la carte more bandwidth onto it if I want. So far, even with heavy VPN use while WFH and multiple streams/games at any given time, I don't get any speed issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
Biowarfare posted:The rich part of Bellevue (Amazon's new HQ1) is almost totally covered with Lumen (SFH) and Wave (apartments). Seattle is Lumen for outskirts houses and Wave/Atlas/Google for apartments. None of this is municipal, and the luxury buildings have their choice of 2-3+ FTTH providers. Unfortunately, all of it terminates in the telecoms closet, so you can't get 2x1G from two different providers, there's only a single Cat6 run from the closet into your unit. Atlas will do 10G to the home. Also, to my knowledge, Google Fiber never hit Seattle...?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
i am a moron posted:You have some weirdly aggressive energy about this Yeah, I was going to say this. I used to work for an ISP, geographical challenge is a bullshit excuse unless you're literally tunneling through mountains. If you can get utility power grid to some of these locations, there's no reason you can't get some form of internet access, and it's a long running trend that major ISPs actively go out of their way to avoid competition and refuse to extend services beyond arbitrary points, even when they are contractually obligated and took public funds to do so. Sorry it offends you, but it's the truth in how this poo poo operates in the vast majority of America.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 21:49
|
|
|
The most common reason is yeah someone declined to do it because of: 1) Not interested in fighting de-facto monopolies in areas 2) Area wasn't populated enough for them to think it'll pay off in time Sometimes if the government pays then that'll fix point 2 but never point 1.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:00
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:So, I assumed "across the city" meant universal access. Seattle in no way has universal access to fiber. Yeah, a lot of the bigger buildings do, but a ton of places do not. Webpass is Google Fiber
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
i am a moron posted:You have some weirdly aggressive energy about this The US government has been largely about privatization for better or for worse (spoiler: it's worse). There is no way to solve "cheap fiber everywhere" without subsidies or dropping the whole privatization thing because it's not commercially viable based on the geography, size and population density of this country. That's it. It's that simple. There are a LOT of nuances and details of how we got to where we are right now based on the path of privatization, but in the end there is no "exceptionalism" or whatever other snarky poo poo going on about the size and breadth of parts of this country that would have to be covered with fiber to make this a reality. And any first year business student can recognize that there is no payoff incentive to service low population density areas that are far away. This is not unique to fiber. We did it with phones. We did it with highways. We did it with airports. Before that we had to do it with the postal system. Just because it's fiber and the internet doesn't make it a new problem space. So yes, I'm going to call out uninformed posting. If you think that's weirdly aggressive that's a you problem. E: and I almost forgot. It's not even clear that "fiber everywhere" is the correct solution. I don't believe it is. Motronic fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Nov 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
so you're saying the problem isn't geography but politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
Wonder how those other public utilities got built in the first place then. It's a mystery that first-year business students may never solve.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:so you're saying the problem isn't geography but politics. That's an incredibly simplistic view to the point of being blatantly inaccurate. If the geography challenges didn't exist it would be commercially viable to do this to a point that multiple private actors would have already. E: Weatherman posted:Wonder how those other public utilities got built in the first place then. It's a mystery that first-year business students may never solve. Wow.....I even gave you the breadcrumb to figure this one out in the post you were responding to and you still didn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
I think confusing a nuanced understanding of how things are with peoples ideas for how things could be better and then also telling a bunch of extremely knowledgeable people they don’t know anything about a pretty easily understood topic they interact with constantly is weirdly aggressive yes
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
i am a moron posted:I think confusing a nuanced understanding of how things are with peoples ideas for how things could be better and then also telling a bunch of extremely knowledgeable people they don’t know anything about a pretty easily understood topic they interact with constantly is weirdly aggressive yes I'm not telling this to extremely knowledgeable people. It's you and weatherman.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:40
|
|
Motronic posted:I'm not telling this to extremely knowledgeable people. It's you and weatherman. Motronic posted:The US government has been largely about privatization for better or for worse (spoiler: it's worse). There is no way to solve "cheap fiber everywhere" without subsidies or dropping the whole privatization thing because it's not commercially viable based on the geography, size and population density of this country. i am a moron posted:You don’t even have to fully nationalize to make it work. Just subsidize the heck out of internet access and make sure the strings attached are consumer friendly. Oh so wait would subsidies work or are we both not knowledgeable about the subject
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:43
|
|
|
Motronic posted:That's an incredibly simplistic view to the point of being blatantly inaccurate. If the geography challenges didn't exist it would be commercially viable to do this to a point that multiple private actors would have already.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
Weatherman posted:Wonder how those other public utilities got built in the first place then. It's a mystery that first-year business students may never solve. My good-faith read is that he's saying that geography creates a problem (and I can appreciate that it does, this country is largely a hollow shell) and our privitization policies haven't been successfully addressing them. I think you are deliberately talking past him, and he isn't outright rejecting your point. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Nov 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:but you said cheap fibre everywhere could be done with government subsidies or a public network so it doesn't seem inaccurate at all to state the problem does not lie in the challenges to be overcome but in the contestants. He addresses and even seems to acknowledge this in his post. Y'all, please take a breath. The acknowledgement of your "we possibly need to invest publicly" point is right there with the comment about how we haven't wrangled ISPs/internet like we did phone companies, highway construction, or rural airports. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Nov 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:48
|
|
|
He presented a super dumb appeal to his own authority to dismiss points people aren’t really making and basically asked someone to not talk about the subject because no one asked them. Come on now.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:50
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:He addresses and even seems to acknowledge this in his post.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
Biowarfare posted:Webpass is Google Fiber Also, I looked at the city's fiber map, and it's not actually a fiber map, it's a gigabit map. A bunch of it is serviced by Comcast, which as far as I know isn't gigabit fiber, but gigabit DOCSIS; a lot of Wave's gigabit is fiber, but a healthy amount of it is also DOCSIS, and I don't really buy gigabit DOCSIS being a thing, in spite of how it's advertised. And while I'm not the most knowledgeable on this, clearly, I don't think I've ever seen symmetrical gigabit DOCSIS; it's almost always gigabit down, and whatever the gently caress we feel like up (it is possible this has changed in recent years). Seattle is probably one of the better-wired places in the U.S. (I would say top 20% certainly, very possibly top 5% or 10%), and it still kinda sucks. Not enough competition, not enough fiber. It's definitely been getting better, but I think if we'd have started on municipal broadband back during the McGinn administration like a whole loving lot of us wanted to (including the mayor), we'd be looking a whole fuckton better right now, and it would be downright prescient in the face of COVID.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 22:56
|
|
|
I live in bumfuck so I'm on satellite internet. It costs $100 a month. Sometimes image-heavy threads won't load so I have to use my phone as a hotspot instead. My only hope for future improvement is companies promising to offer 5g hotspots as home internet because there's no chance anyone is ever going to run any kind of cable or fiber out here. It wouldn't be so bad but assumptions about 24/7 reliable internet access make it harder every year to just download things at work and transfer them. Installers that are actually download managers are my nemesis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 23:47
|
|
|
Gigabit docsis down is absolutely a thing and I think it's only a matter of time before we get it even higher. But it's not symmetrical and I'm not sure if it's even possible or feasible with current tech. And even if it was, the demand isn't there for the insane amount is resources it'll take to implement. Gig down and 50mbps up sounds like a rip off but the average consumer doesn't even come close to utilizing that. Even with constant zoom meetings and all the extra WFH, that hasn't changed. The problem with contention is due to the cumulative use across the entire node, but individually the average customer still doesn't really utilize it. I don't know the dollar amount but field upgrades are loving expensive, and upstream speeds are heavily dependent on field equipment. Yeah ISPs are greedy fucks but at the end of the day I don't think it's too unreasonable to expect them to skip certain upgrades if it's not worth it. If the demand is there then maybe in the future things will change.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Renegret posted:Gigabit docsis down is absolutely a thing and I think it's only a matter of time before we get it even higher. Upload was really important when bittorrent was huge but now that streaming is ubiquitous most people don't need a lot of upload capacity. Like at most people need to push out a 4K stream now for when they're streaming or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I don't know how I loving missed this. Huh. Wave has two separate things, Wave G and Wavecable. The latter generally is terrible. The former is good only on gigabit plans (from what I've heard, if a Wave FTTH building only has a 100M plan, then it was an inherited legacy building that never had fiber run to it, is running off microwave, and oversubscribed/constant outage).
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2020 00:08
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:We're with Exponential-e at the office for our ethernet service, they have presence in the local exchange and it's their network all the way back to London, and they seem to have a ton of peering arrangements and transit using providers like NTT for other things. I've seen too many startup providers throw everything at Cogent and it's just not worth the tiny savings once you're at the point where you're buying ethernet. Is that their business leased line service? Do you know what your install cost was?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:45 |
|
|
I have gigabit docsis. It's 1000/50, they'll be able to raise the upload once they've kicked analog radio off the cable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2020 00:43
|
|
