> CO facilities rental. CO equipment. Data link between CO > and ISP NOC (T1, multiple T1s, or even T3 or other *REALLY* > high-speed stuff). ISP backbone equipment. > ISP servers (DNS, mail, etc.). ISP NOC facilities charges. > Test equipment. Support/service/administrative overhead. > Upstream feed.
The exsiting ISP, be it Vitts, MV, Joe Blow local ISP, they should already have ISP backbone equipment in place for their dialups. At the most they'll have to upgrade their pipe or get an aditional T and they can do this while new customers roll in.. That's what MV did. DNS and POP mail (what most ISPs offer) you can run on a beefy workstation for the most part unless you have a MASSIVE customer base, then you just get a big 'ol Dell server and be done with it. I found when I did tech support that it was FAR easier to deal with troubleshooting DSL problems then dial-up. > When we resold Vitts Networks (before the went under) back > in 2001, their up-front cost to open a CO was between > $200,000 and $300,000. Each. Yah, and Verizon was already rolling out Cos for their DSL service, and there's all the other ISPs out there. There is no reason for one ISP to eat the cost of an entire CO > I'm not familiar enough with CATV infrastructure to speak > accurately, but I imagine the situation is similar, if not > quite as bad. The way cable modems work is TOTALLY different the DSL, it works on a node system and has some token-ringish qualities to it.. It is "shared" bandwidth but you would have to have TONS of people on one node to notice anything. When I was working for M1 they had about 200-300 people per node in NH/MA.. In LA they had over 1000 on some nodes. > > When Mediaone delivered cable-modem service in our area > they thought > > they'd be doing well if they got a 3% penetration. > > Pets.com thought they could make money selling pet supplies online. > > They were both wrong. The difference here is that M1/AT&T/Comcast were already established. Also it wasn't just for internet, it was also for digital cable, push the button on the remote PPV, music, and phone service. The cable TV alone probably makes more then enough to cover the cost of the upgrade of the lines (that also stops "leakage" something that had to take care of anyway) > No, we're not. But other than the local loop, everybody's > using the same kind of equipment they were using five years > ago. As for the local loop, DSL and cable both require > significant new equipment to be placed in the CO, completely > outside the traditional infrastructure. You know that Verizon has been getting ready for DSL stuff for years and probably would have been rolled out sooner if the cable modems came out sooner. The only reason they didn't start rolling it out was because they didn't have to and they could still milk people for second phone lines for dial-up modems. _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
