Connection reliability (was Re: Telstra's Outage)
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, David Robb wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Simon Allard wrote:
You can't expect good uptimes and run your business which requires high availability internet on a $39.95 DSL account.
Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two.
Where Good==Reliable, I assume? Since the relative goodness of broadband products for most consumers is often associated with their fastness and cheapness, with reliability (provided one can actually pass packets, of course) being an unconsidered factor. I do agree with Dean that we know you can't reasonably expect multiple nines of reliability from a residential service, but we, as geeks, have far different expectations from the average consumer. Plus, with NZ's high incidence of home-based businesses, how many users have actually had ANY choice of carrier until quite recently? I can probably get Woosh at home, and we have a Telecom landline. What are my other choices? TCL is still delivering over TCNZ's cable, so that's a non-starter. I could maybe get hooked into Vector's fibre, though I don't think it comes quite far enough down Great South Rd. And I'm in a better position than a lot of residential users, who can't get Woosh and aren't even close to someone's fibre network. When people have no choice, is it any wonder that they expect the earth for nothing? Nobody's telling them about the limitations of the one service they can afford, and nobody's offering them anything with better reliability for a reasonable price - what would one pay for a 2Mbps frame connection that, while unquestionably giving better upstream performance, comes in, at best, at half the downstream speed of a DSL connection? Many, many multiples of $40/month, that's for sure. Total no-brainer. We can sneer at the great unwashed, but the reality is that the marketroids aren't offering anything to fill the gaping void between DSL and frame/ISDN (does anyone even use ISDN for data anymore?). PS: Why pay metric boatloads for something like frame when Telecom won't give you credit if their network fails? Nobody got a cent out of them after the rat and the errant backhoe took out much of the country for several hours, so what's the point in handing them extra? Pardon the pun. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
I do agree with Dean that we know you can't reasonably expect multiple nines of reliability from a residential service, but we, as geeks, have far different expectations from the average consumer. Plus, with NZ's high incidence of home-based businesses, how many users have actually had ANY choice of carrier until quite recently? I can probably get Woosh at home, and we have a Telecom landline. What are my other choices? TCL is still delivering over TCNZ's cable, so that's a non-starter. I could maybe get hooked into Vector's fibre, though I don't think it comes quite far enough down Great South Rd. And I'm in a better position than a lot of residential users, who can't get Woosh and aren't even close to someone's fibre network.
Well written. I think there is a big market need for something that is better then consumer grade ADSL, delivered over copper to be widely available, and cheaper then outdated often unreliable Frame Relay. An ISP could charge a premium for this service. Nowhere in any of my previous posts did I ask for something as cheap as consumer grade ADSL - despite a few replies complaining it can't be done, we don't make enough yada yada, I didn't actually state that it had to be as chaep as Jetsream. Bring on LLU - 2 to 3 years from now I think we'll be talking about a different landscape.
From: John @ netTRUST [mailto:john(a)nettrust.net.nz] Sent: Thursday, 21 December 2006 12:13 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Connection reliability (was Re: Telstra's Outage) [...] I think there is a big market need for something that is better then consumer grade ADSL, delivered over copper to be widely available, and cheaper then outdated often unreliable Frame Relay.
An ISP could charge a premium for this service. Nowhere in any of my previous posts did I ask for something as cheap as consumer grade ADSL - despite a few replies complaining it can't be done, we don't make enough yada yada, I didn't actually state that it had to be as chaep as Jetsream.
Bring on LLU - 2 to 3 years from now I think we'll be talking about a different landscape.
Er, how does LLU increase the level of redundancy in anything? - Donald Neal Donald Neal | The correct answer to any Alcatel-Lucent | engineering question about Support Engineer | network traffic is "it depends". Technology Operations | - Priscilla Oppenheimer HTC, Caro Street, Hamilton +---------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.
Er, how does LLU increase the level of redundancy in anything?
(not speaking for anyone but myself) Some of us are hoping that LLU will result in ISPs or CLECs provisioning their own backhaul into exchanges. How often is it that a network outage is a result of a last-mile copper cut? JB
Jonathan Brewer wrote:
How often is it that a network outage is a result of a last-mile copper cut?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20060929-1037-crime-france-theft.ht... -- Juha Saarinen www.geekzone.co.nz/juha | Skype: juha_saarinen blogs.pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/techsploder www.computerworld.co.nz | MSN: juha_saarinen(a)msn.com Voice: +64 9 950 3023 Subtle recursive jokes in .sigs are not funny.
On 21/12/2006, at 12:30 PM, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Jonathan Brewer wrote:
How often is it that a network outage is a result of a last-mile copper cut?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20060929-1037-crime-france- theft.html
Most of my connectivity issues from home are due to a loss of connectivity between my access provider and other supposedly well connected hosts located within New Zealand. One can speculate as the the cause of this, but I think there is a very real lack of care taken when making network changes at times, a general lack of interest in ensuring that domestic connectivity stays alive and well, combined with the usual arrogance of the larger players that see themselves as "the internet" rather than a player in a co-operative network. regards Peter Mott -/-
On 21/12/2006 4:22 p.m., Peter Mott wrote:
Most of my connectivity issues from home are due to a loss of connectivity between my access provider and other supposedly well connected hosts located within New Zealand. One can speculate as the the cause of this,
Peer. Just do it... All of you...
On 20-Dec-2006, at 18:27, Jonathan Brewer wrote:
Some of us are hoping that LLU will result in ISPs or CLECs provisioning their own backhaul into exchanges.
In my experience (in a market where such things are already possible, and have been for some time) most recurring outages are due to shitty copper, and not DSLAM ports.
How often is it that a network outage is a result of a last-mile copper cut?
Cut, or suffering from cross-talk, or exposed terminals somewhere that become horribly unbalanced when it rains, or a mis-patch in a roadside cabinet, or just rotten old copper somewhere that needs to be replaced. Someone once showed up at my house in Burlington, Ontario and helpfully aerated my lawn for me, for free. That's when I found out that the last ten feet of my Bell Canada last mile was only buried about an inch beneath the grass. Joe
Cut, or suffering from cross-talk, or exposed terminals somewhere that become horribly unbalanced when it rains, or a mis-patch in a roadside cabinet, or just rotten old copper somewhere that needs to be replaced.
Sounds like the time that my ISDN circuit stopped working in Melbourne. The Telstra tech showed up, plugged in his test unit and sure enough no B channels. There was however a PSTN dialtone. Dean
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, John @ netTRUST wrote:
I think there is a big market need for something that is better then consumer grade ADSL, delivered over copper to be widely available, and cheaper then outdated often unreliable Frame Relay.
*SNIP*
Bring on LLU - 2 to 3 years from now I think we'll be talking about a different landscape.
And there's the rub. currently You have to go through Telecom if you're outside WLG/CHC and want a terrestrial connection to your home. They govern the bottom two layers of the connection absolutely, so even if an ISP wanted to offer a premium service with higher reliability they couldn't do it without laying their own network. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
Matthew Poole wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, John @ netTRUST wrote:
Bring on LLU - 2 to 3 years from now I think we'll be talking about a different landscape.
And there's the rub. currently You have to go through Telecom if you're outside WLG/CHC and want a terrestrial connection to your home. They govern the bottom two layers of the connection absolutely, so even if an ISP wanted to offer a premium service with higher reliability they couldn't do it without laying their own network.
To compliment Donald's question a little more (the answer, Donald, is "more DSLAMs = more redundancy, right?"), LLU doesn't help that much either. Sure, you eliminate TNZ's backhaul & access network, but now the ISP with much less resources has to manage those, probably with less diversity. However.... the biggest fault point: from the exchange/CO/cabinet/DSLAM to the subscriber is still managed by the incumbent. So when that faults, due to a truck hitting a copper bundle, or someone setting fire to a cabinet, or a landslide, or whatever, you're still reliant on the incumbent truck-rolling to get that sorted. If you really want end-to-end QoS and SLA guarantees, then you kinda need your own network end-to-end.
From: Alastair Johnson [mailto:aj(a)sneep.net] Sent: Thursday, 21 December 2006 12:26 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Connection reliability (was Re: Telstra's Outage) [...] To compliment Donald's question a little more (the answer, Donald, is "more DSLAMs = more redundancy, right?"), LLU doesn't help that much either.
Let's suppose that right now you have n customers attached to a Telecom DSLAM. Zap! Regulate! Unbundling takes place. iCuddle, Nazgulon and maybe other ISP's to a total of m ISP's all install their own DSLAM's in the exchange building and all build redundant access networks from there back to a redundant core. For some values of "redundant". Suppose all are equally successful at attracting customers. Then a single failure can affect no more than n/m customers as opposed to n previously. But more parts for a given MTBF means more failures. The availability of service to any single end user only improves at the point at which something is built which is _more_ reliable than what was there before. - Donald Neal Donald Neal | The correct answer to any Alcatel-Lucent | engineering question about Support Engineer | network traffic is "it depends". Technology Operations | - Priscilla Oppenheimer HTC, Caro Street, Hamilton +--------------------------------- This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.
Donald Neal wrote:
Let's suppose that right now you have n customers attached to a Telecom DSLAM.
Zap! Regulate! Unbundling takes place.
iCuddle, Nazgulon and maybe other ISP's to a total of m ISP's all install their own DSLAM's in the exchange building and all build redundant access networks from there back to a redundant core. For some values of "redundant". Suppose all are equally successful at attracting customers. Then a single failure can affect no more than n/m customers as opposed to n previously.
But more parts for a given MTBF means more failures. The availability of service to any single end user only improves at the point at which something is built which is _more_ reliable than what was there before.
Dear Donald, I think it's totally unfair of you to insert logic into this discussion Cheers mark
Mark Harris wrote:
I think it's totally unfair of you to insert logic into this discussion
You would think it was logic. However Australian experience shows that it's just rubbish and FUD. Donald hasn't considered any number of other factors that come in to play when you open up the exchange and start installing equipment from a community of providers. Cheers WTW
Don Gould wrote:
Mark Harris wrote:
I think it's totally unfair of you to insert logic into this discussion
You would think it was logic. However Australian experience shows that it's just rubbish and FUD.
Donald hasn't considered any number of other factors that come in to play when you open up the exchange and start installing equipment from a community of providers.
Enlighten us, I'm yet to see such fantastic things. aj. -- still waiting for my "unbundled" dsl in Australia. also, you really should investigate atm and ipv4. I hear they're both the technologies of the future. really. they are. ipv6 is overstated and a problem looking for a solution. pbt? not going to happen. mpls? it's just atm for ip+ethernet. adopt what you know to be true - atm.
Alastair Johnson wrote:
Enlighten us, I'm yet to see such fantastic things.
See: http://www.dslamwatch.com.au/ See: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum.cfm You might like to consider the range of additional services customers are now able to get. Network reliability improved dramatically once the network was properly opened up. While the amount of equipment increased, the resourcing to back the equipment up also increased. The price came down to the consumer. The over all market size grew. Cheers Don -- Don Gould www.thinkdesignprint.co.nz - www.tcn.bowenvale.co.nz - www.bowenvale.co.nz - www.hearingbooks.co.nz - www.buxtonsquare.co.nz - skype:ThinkDesignPrint?add - Good ideas: www.solarking.co.nz
Don Gould wrote:
Mark Harris wrote:
I think it's totally unfair of you to insert logic into this discussion
You would think it was logic. However Australian experience shows that it's just rubbish and FUD.
Donald hasn't considered any number of other factors that come in to play when you open up the exchange and start installing equipment from a community of providers.
This is a truth right there. Infact, experience shows us that the world is flat. The crackpots out there that think it is round have not considered any number of other factors that come into play when you open your eyes and start looking around you. -- Steve.
Funny how many people see LLU as the 'light at the end of the tunnel' when in reality it's going to be the same sh*t offered up by someone else. Not only that but it will probably only be in the main centres where the population density makes it financially viable for ISP's / Network Companies < Telecom to invest. Regards Tim Price -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Poole [mailto:matt(a)p00le.net] Sent: Thursday, 21 December 2006 12:19 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] Connection reliability (was Re: Telstra's Outage) On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, John @ netTRUST wrote:
I think there is a big market need for something that is better then consumer grade ADSL, delivered over copper to be widely available, and cheaper then outdated often unreliable Frame Relay.
*SNIP*
Bring on LLU - 2 to 3 years from now I think we'll be talking about a different landscape.
And there's the rub. currently You have to go through Telecom if you're outside WLG/CHC and want a terrestrial connection to your home. They govern the bottom two layers of the connection absolutely, so even if an ISP wanted to offer a premium service with higher reliability they couldn't do it without laying their own network. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer." _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
On 21/12/2006, at 12:19 PM, Matthew Poole wrote:
And there's the rub. currently You have to go through Telecom if you're outside WLG/CHC and want a terrestrial connection to your home. They govern the bottom two layers of the connection absolutely, so even if an ISP wanted to offer a premium service with higher reliability they couldn't do it without laying their own network.
The real rub: if you (company, individual, community) want to have your own network, you've got to go out and build it. That is exactly what many of us here do. Enough said. Jonny.
On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 12:30 +1300, Jonny Martin wrote:
The real rub: if you (company, individual, community) want to have your own network, you've got to go out and build it. That is exactly what many of us here do.
Enough said.
Jonny.
_______________________________________________
Does this include hiring a mobile home and laying fibre up and down the country? Long live the apple cores. MiLK_MaN
John @ netTRUST wrote:
I think there is a big market need for something that is better then consumer grade ADSL, delivered over copper to be widely available, and cheaper then outdated often unreliable Frame Relay.
Yeah I totally agree. As with IPv6 though. If it can't be shown to the telcos that this a good business decision, then they just won't build it. The target market for this product will come from two existing areas.... 1) The people who currently pay much more for the redundant services mentioned in other posts 2) The people who get home DSL lines and wish that they were better. In the case of 1) the Telco will loose money on the deal. In the case of 2) if these customers are paying their bills each month, then the telco is pretty happy. For the most part, if someone is not unhappy enough to leave, they arn't unhappy enough to pay double either. I think that business grade SLA access is something to lobby for, but as with IPv6, you have to do it in words that telcos understand. Dean
participants (16)
-
Alastair Johnson -
Cameron Jenkins -
Dean Pemberton -
Don Gould -
Donald Neal -
Gerard Creamer -
Joe Abley -
John ＠ netTRUST -
Jonathan Brewer -
Jonny Martin -
Juha Saarinen -
Mark Harris -
Matthew Poole -
Peter Mott -
Steve Phillips -
Tim Price