how-to block ads
|
theBOFH
join:2003-08-27
Waterbury, CT
1 edit | reply to Not so fast
Re: Cable Only
said by Not so fast:
Nice try bud, but you're evading a critical point with all your BS.
"The costs of the capex infrastructure amortized over the life of the equipment, the cost of transit and peering."
Yep, but why are these costs so high? These are part of the artificially inflated costs. Simply shifting from the cost of a router to other expenditures is an obfuscation. Nice try though.
Start an ISP with multigigabit backhaul between POPs, dispersed throughout the country. Purchase enough transit from multiple providers to service your multigigabit network. Purchase routers capable of servicing said links. Guarantee 1.5Mbps symmetrical with an SLA and sell this for $40.00. Time how long it takes you to go out of business.
Better yet... lay your own fiber between POPs, build your own buildings that your POPs will occupy. Develop a new last mile delivery method, so you don't have to rely on the fiber and copper of the ILECs to get your cheap bandwidth to your customer. Create a business plan, taking into account all of the potential variables. Offer 24x7 support, SLAs, 1.5Mbps symmetrical at a price point of $40.00/month.
Show me a positive ROI within 24 months, and I will fund your venture.
As far as capex, I'm sorry, but quagga on Intel/AMD/etc will not support gigabit throughput, so you'll have to purchase Cisco or Juniper for your POPs. They aren't cheap and there are reasons why. Do you think some kid with linux and an old Dell can provide the stability, scalablity and performance of routers and switches made by the likes of Cisco, Juniper, Foundry, Extreme, RedBack, etc?
Prove me wrong. Design a router than can forward packets at near line speed... Say a 1Tbps backplane? Offer the ability to insert cards that will support Ethernet, OC3 through OC192, T1 - T3, HDLC, SONET, ATM. How much can you sell it for? Who is going to design it for you? Will they design it for free? Who is going to manufacture it? Who is going to respin the boards when you realize you've made a design flaw? Who's going to design the ASICs and manufacture them? Don't tell me you'd use an FPGA for the logic on this magical device? Sill, who'd program the FPGAs?
Things cost money. That is my only point. There is no bandwidth cartel that is secretly setting arbitrary prices on bandwidth so Johnny Consumer (who likes to download "warez", "pr0n", movies, and mp3s) has to pay $30 more a month to get a business class DSL or cable connection (which is still cheap. very cheap...) After all, you could be paying $600-$1000 a month for T1 or frame relay. Unless, of course, Cogent is able to drop 100Mbps to your location for $1000/month.
--
*clickity click* | |
Not so fast
@hinet.net
| reply to theBOFH
Nice try bud, but you're evading a critical point with all your BS.
"The costs of the capex infrastructure amortized over the life of the equipment, the cost of transit and peering."
Yep, but why are these costs so high? These are part of the artificially inflated costs. Simply shifting from the cost of a router to other expenditures is an obfuscation. Nice try though. | |
theBOFH
join:2003-08-27
Waterbury, CT
2 edits | reply to haplo2112
said by haplo2112  :You hit the Nail directly on the head....the cost of bandwidth is an artifical number. The providers just don't want to you to know that though. The bigger problem is the upstream issue. You Cable/DSL provider gets their bandwidth from someone else and on up the stream untill you hit the really big providers that own and provide the "BackBones" of the Internet. However up at that level bandwidth is really a seriously artifical number.
Not quite true. Bandwidth has a cost. Providing bandwidth to customers as a service has a cost.
There is the cost of a company's capex infrastructure amortized over the life of the equipment, the cost of transit and peering (which I think is what you were trying to allude to in your second paragraph), there are leases for datacenters, cages in colos, metro fiber runs, backhaul between POPs, support costs, salaries, ad nauseum. There is nothing cheap about bandwidth.
The cost of a T1 (1.5 Mbps) is around $1000/mo, a T3 (28 T1s) can be as high as $12,000/month. OC3's (155 Mbps) can cost anywhere between $20,000 to $45,000 a month. Considering that most DSL users are roughly 1.5M/256k, an OC3 would support 100 DSL users downloading at their max and roughly 600 DSL users uploading at their max. With cable, figure about 50 users downloading at their max rate.
Not only can transit be expensive, but the routers and switches can be very expensive. Some of the Cisco and Juniper routers and switches when fully configured can cost into the millions. Not only does your ISP have expensive routers, but every ISP they buy transit from has even more expensive routers. This is one of the numerous reasons why a T3 isn't $99/month. SLAs, latency, jitter, support, etc also have a lot to do with it.
The reason cable and DSL are so cheap is due to over-subscription. The ISP signs up more users than they actually have bandwidth for. It keeps costs low and provides good service when the majority of users aren't bandwidth hogs (i.e. the user's traffic is "bursty": email, chat, web browsing, small sporadic downloads, telnet, ssh, etc.) It does not scale when people run high traffic servers, participate heavily in p2p, or download large files all day long.
Bandwidth is not yet a commodity, though it seems that way to people who are only exposed to consumer level services.
--
*clickity click* | |
haplo2112
join:2003-05-12
Charlton, MA
| reply to dsanders16
You hit the Nail directly on the head....the cost of bandwidth is an artifical number. The providers just don't want to you to know that though.
The bigger problem is the upstream issue. You Cable/DSL provider gets their bandwidth from someone else and on up the stream untill you hit the really big providers that own and provide the "BackBones" of the Internet.
However up at that level bandwidth is really a seriously artifical number.
It's always been my belief that the FCC(and equivalents in other nations) should require ommunications companies to invest a significant portion of profits realized from internet services (ie anything that own which moves about digital bits) back into the net thereby lowering that already artifical cost. | |
dsanders16
join:2001-02-24
Auburn, AL | reply to Voyager2K2
I dont understand why its such a big deal, why is bandwidth even expensive, what exactly does it take other then cabale switches and cables to give someone that much bandwidth. | |
|
