Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Patrick Giagnocavo]

Michael Sokolov wrote:
> Another possible way to solve the middle mile issue would again be to
> use the copper plant that's already in the ground.  Unlike fiber, the
> copper plant is *ubiquitous*: I don't know of any place in the 1st or
> 2nd worlds that doesn't have copper pairs going to it.  Also AFAIK T1s
> are available everywhere too: if you order a T1, they'll deliver it to
> you regardless of how deep you are in the middle of nowhere, although I
> suppose there likely are extra surcharges involved.
> 

Pardon me if attribution is screwed up ...

> Granted, a T1 at 1.5 Mbps may not be much for backhaul, but what about
> bonded T1s?  Bond 4 of them to get 6 Mbps symmetric - not too bad in my
> book for a rural community.
> 
> And again using SDSL instead of T1 offers a cost reduction opportunity.
> One could get that 6 Mbps symmetric for much cheaper by bonding 4 SDSL
> circuits running at 1.5 Mbps each instead of T1s.  There is a Covad
> DSLAM with SDSL capability in virtually every CO in the country, but

Isn't this really an issue (political) with tariffed T1 prices rather
than a technical problem?

I was told that most T1s are provisioned over a DSLAM these days
anyways, and that the key difference between T1 and DSL was the SLA
(99.99% guarantee vs. "when we get it fixed").

And T3/DS3 can run over what, 4 copper pairs?  Yet how much is the
typical tariffed rate for that?

--Patrick

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Michael Sokolov]

Charles N Wyble  wrote:

> The biggest problem is middle mile. That is where the money needs to go.
> You need something to back haul to the interwebz. There is a lot of
> fiber in the ground already,

Another possible way to solve the middle mile issue would again be to
use the copper plant that's already in the ground.  Unlike fiber, the
copper plant is *ubiquitous*: I don't know of any place in the 1st or
2nd worlds that doesn't have copper pairs going to it.  Also AFAIK T1s
are available everywhere too: if you order a T1, they'll deliver it to
you regardless of how deep you are in the middle of nowhere, although I
suppose there likely are extra surcharges involved.

Granted, a T1 at 1.5 Mbps may not be much for backhaul, but what about
bonded T1s?  Bond 4 of them to get 6 Mbps symmetric - not too bad in my
book for a rural community.

And again using SDSL instead of T1 offers a cost reduction opportunity.
One could get that 6 Mbps symmetric for much cheaper by bonding 4 SDSL
circuits running at 1.5 Mbps each instead of T1s.  There is a Covad
DSLAM with SDSL capability in virtually every CO in the country, but
they serve out a whacky flavor of SDSL/2B1Q.  I have good reason to
suspect that I may be the last person alive on Earth who knows how to
make CPE for this flavor *and* who cares about such things.

> but there are numerous layer 8 issues with
> getting to it most of the time. Solving those is an exercise left for
> the reader.

Layer 8?  Assuming that layers 8, 9 and 10 are management, financial and
political, respectively, the issues that keep me from being able to
build that Covad-compatible bonded NxSDSL CPE device lie at Layer 9.
Anyone interested in helping me solve those issues?

MS

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[William Herrin]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Michael Sokolov
 wrote:
> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
> into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.  What
> I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
> politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
> COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
> NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
> (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
> SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for repeaters
> and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a repeater
> unofficially.
>
> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm seeking
> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
> repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?

You wouldn't. The ILECs have resisted doing that sort of thing tooth
and nail. They may not want to sell you service yet but they don't
want anyone else to get a foot in the door while they get around to
it.

However, if it really is a 31kft copper loop all the way back to the
CO and not to a closer vault (try driving the wire path to find out)
you may be able to knock on a few doors in the middle around the 15kft
point, make a new friend, order a DSL in the middle, order an "alarm
circuit" or "dry copper pair" from the 15kft point to you and run your
own signal over the alarm circuit.

Your terrain may also be a factor. Rolling hills and 3-story trees
make wireless hard but if you can see rooftops near the CO with
binoculars from your rooftop, amplifying an 802.11 signal for a 6-mile
transmission is a walk in the park. Probably not helpful in western
Mass, but possible in southern CA.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: 
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Charles N Wyble]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> On 03/01/2010 05:34 PM, Akyol, Bora A wrote:
>> Michael
>>
> 
> point-to-point  and ptmp 802.11phy derived tdm gear has been
> outperforming cellular access layers on the throughput and cost
> equations for a number of years. 

Yep. There was a cool experiment in Venuzella with a 237 mile link.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2007/06/w_wifi_record_2/

The tdm firmware is really interesting stuff. More at
http://tier.cs.berkeley.edu/wiki/Wireless


The choice of frequencies and licensed
> vs unlicensed operation continues to proliferate as the radios get more
> flexible and cheaper...
> 
> see for one ptp backkhul example:
> 
> http://www.ubnt.com/nanobridge

I love the ubnt stuff. It's simply amazing.

> 
> It is now possible to put together a passable community or wisp network
> for what essentially is microcap money. 

Yep.

Unlike rural electrification or
> rural ftfth the prospects of doing such a deployment for the low
> hundreds of dollars per household in aggregate are not hard to imagine.

Exactly. Yay for unlicensed ISM bands.

> 
> As far as I'm concerned someone else with capital can solve the mobility
> problem, the fixed wireless problem can be addressed in many cases with
> sound engineering, sweat equitity, community involvement and a little
> capital.

For sure.

Way to many folks focused on celluar as a solution. *peers over at my 16
node openwrt mesh testing lab*

In my opinion, last mile access is a very mature area, with well
understood operational models etc. Granted all sorts of interesting wifi
related issues pop up on the WISPA list, but so does BGP issues on Nanog
or weird cisco bugs on c-nsp.

The biggest problem is middle mile. That is where the money needs to go.
You need something to back haul to the interwebz. There is a lot of
fiber in the ground already, but there are numerous layer 8 issues with
getting to it most of the time. Solving those is an exercise left for
the reader.

- --
Charles N Wyble
Linux Systems Engineer
char...@knownelement.com (818)280-7059
http://www.knownelement.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkuNQ6gACgkQJmrRtQ6zKE/AMACfXBpFiBGIt9lv1jErkMB6c+cW
VugAn1LqdiyTnveAMdslH1KLnuM94C2K
=tkW1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 03/01/2010 05:34 PM, Akyol, Bora A wrote:
> Michael
> 
> I think for the people in the situation you are describing, the best bet 
> would be
> one of the wireless technologies. Someone on the thread mentioned LTE (which 
> should
> be coming out in a couple years time), and to that we can add WiMAX and 
> even the 3G/3.5G HSPDA type wireless. The prices will not be USD19.99 but for
> less than USD70/month it is quite possible to get reasonable high speed 
> Internet 
> access. Will it be as fast as GigE to the house? No. But it will certainly 
> support
> most web apps. The only challenge is that some of these wireless technologies 
> still have
> much higher latency when compared to the wired DSL/cable modem links.

point-to-point  and ptmp 802.11phy derived tdm gear has been
outperforming cellular access layers on the throughput and cost
equations for a number of years. The choice of frequencies and licensed
vs unlicensed operation continues to proliferate as the radios get more
flexible and cheaper...

see for one ptp backkhul example:

http://www.ubnt.com/nanobridge

It is now possible to put together a passable community or wisp network
for what essentially is microcap money. Unlike rural electrification or
rural ftfth the prospects of doing such a deployment for the low
hundreds of dollars per household in aggregate are not hard to imagine.

As far as I'm concerned someone else with capital can solve the mobility
problem, the fixed wireless problem can be addressed in many cases with
sound engineering, sweat equitity, community involvement and a little
capital.

If a technology can connect a bunch of ngo's in haiti or connect
transponder sites for hf radio relays in New Guinea it ought to work in
the less developed parts of the developed world.

> Regards
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org] 
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:05 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
> 
> Brandon Galbraith  wrote:
> 
>> http://www.rric.net/
> 
> I'm very familiar with those folks of course, they've been an inspiration
> to me for a long time.
> 
> However, my needs are different.  RRIC's model basically involves a
> specific community with a well-defined boundary: bring the bandwidth
> into the community via a bulk feed, then sublet inside the community.
> 
> But I don't have a specific community in mind - I'm trying to develop a
> more generic solution.  (The case of my friend who is at 31 kft from a
> Covad-enabled CO is only an example and nothing more.)  Again, consider
> a town with a Covad-enabled CO plus an outlying countryside.  The people
> in the town proper already have Covad xDSL available to them, and if we
> could stick my SDSL/2B1Q repeater in the middle of some longer loops, it
> would enable the people in the countryside to get *exactly the same*
> Covad (or ISP-X-via-Covad) services as those in the town proper.
> 
> My repeater approach would also allow me to stay out of ISP or ISP-like
> business which I really don't want to get into - I would rather just
> make hardware and let someone else operate it.  A repeater is totally
> unlike a router, it is not IP-aware, it just makes the loop seem shorter,
> allowing farther-outlying users to connect to *existing* ISPs with an
> already established business structure.
> 
> Anyway, I just saw a post on NANOG about an area deprived of "high-speed
> Internet" services and thought I would post my idea in the hope that
> someone would have some ideas that would actually be *helpful* to what
> I'm trying to do.  If not - oh well, I'll just put the idea back on the
> dusty shelf in the back of my mind until I'm ready to try presenting it
> to the folks who own the CO-colocated DSLAMs it would have to work with
> - gotta finish a few other things before I open that can of worms in the
> earnest.
> 
> MS
> 
> 

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Shon Elliott]

Hmm... unless I'm completely off, 1,080. About enough for a DS3. Maybe half of a
DS3.. as long as it overreaches their T1 or HDSL capacity. It seems that while
DS3 is a copper product, it's typically delivered to the site broken off of a
fiber node. Wouldn't want to see the installation bill of that, though. That's
been my experience of AT&T here in California.

-S



Jared Mauch wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:34 PM, Akyol, Bora A wrote:
> 
>> Michael
>>
>> I think for the people in the situation you are describing, the best bet 
>> would be
>> one of the wireless technologies. Someone on the thread mentioned LTE (which 
>> should
>> be coming out in a couple years time), and to that we can add WiMAX and 
>> even the 3G/3.5G HSPDA type wireless. The prices will not be USD19.99 but for
>> less than USD70/month it is quite possible to get reasonable high speed 
>> Internet 
>> access. Will it be as fast as GigE to the house? No. But it will certainly 
>> support
>> most web apps. The only challenge is that some of these wireless 
>> technologies still have
>> much higher latency when compared to the wired DSL/cable modem links.
> 
> Some of the WISP hardware is getting "cheap".  It's no longer $500 NIUs, you 
> can get something that can go a fair distance at high speeds for ~$80.
> 
> http://www.ubnt.com/products/nanobridge.php
> 
> You can find used microwave (unlicensed & licensed) equipment "cheap" as 
> well. ($1-2k per pair/hop).
> 
> The FTTH equipment is ~$600 for 20km reach @ 1Gb/s.
> 
> Life is getting interesting these days.. I'm seeing interest in solving this 
> last mile issue, but I suspect some networks will eventually be forced to 
> abandon their DSL strategy (ATT, Qwest) before too long.  They are going to 
> start to lose out to the competitors.  Verizon seems to be the only (large) 
> US based provider with a decent strategy.
> 
> I'm expecting regulatory intervention in the next few years to actually 
> require universal broadband access from the iLECs, and the only way to reach 
> these further distances is with FTTH gear (cost effectively). 
> 
> I have wondered, how many POTS lines do I need to order to get them to build 
> fiber/access to me.  Anyone have guesses/data?
> 
> - Jared
> 

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Jared Mauch]

On Mar 1, 2010, at 8:34 PM, Akyol, Bora A wrote:

> Michael
> 
> I think for the people in the situation you are describing, the best bet 
> would be
> one of the wireless technologies. Someone on the thread mentioned LTE (which 
> should
> be coming out in a couple years time), and to that we can add WiMAX and 
> even the 3G/3.5G HSPDA type wireless. The prices will not be USD19.99 but for
> less than USD70/month it is quite possible to get reasonable high speed 
> Internet 
> access. Will it be as fast as GigE to the house? No. But it will certainly 
> support
> most web apps. The only challenge is that some of these wireless technologies 
> still have
> much higher latency when compared to the wired DSL/cable modem links.

Some of the WISP hardware is getting "cheap".  It's no longer $500 NIUs, you 
can get something that can go a fair distance at high speeds for ~$80.

http://www.ubnt.com/products/nanobridge.php

You can find used microwave (unlicensed & licensed) equipment "cheap" as well. 
($1-2k per pair/hop).

The FTTH equipment is ~$600 for 20km reach @ 1Gb/s.

Life is getting interesting these days.. I'm seeing interest in solving this 
last mile issue, but I suspect some networks will eventually be forced to 
abandon their DSL strategy (ATT, Qwest) before too long.  They are going to 
start to lose out to the competitors.  Verizon seems to be the only (large) US 
based provider with a decent strategy.

I'm expecting regulatory intervention in the next few years to actually require 
universal broadband access from the iLECs, and the only way to reach these 
further distances is with FTTH gear (cost effectively). 

I have wondered, how many POTS lines do I need to order to get them to build 
fiber/access to me.  Anyone have guesses/data?

- Jared

RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Akyol, Bora A]

Michael

I think for the people in the situation you are describing, the best bet would 
be
one of the wireless technologies. Someone on the thread mentioned LTE (which 
should
be coming out in a couple years time), and to that we can add WiMAX and 
even the 3G/3.5G HSPDA type wireless. The prices will not be USD19.99 but for
less than USD70/month it is quite possible to get reasonable high speed 
Internet 
access. Will it be as fast as GigE to the house? No. But it will certainly 
support
most web apps. The only challenge is that some of these wireless technologies 
still have
much higher latency when compared to the wired DSL/cable modem links.

Regards


-Original Message-
From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:05 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

Brandon Galbraith  wrote:

> http://www.rric.net/

I'm very familiar with those folks of course, they've been an inspiration
to me for a long time.

However, my needs are different.  RRIC's model basically involves a
specific community with a well-defined boundary: bring the bandwidth
into the community via a bulk feed, then sublet inside the community.

But I don't have a specific community in mind - I'm trying to develop a
more generic solution.  (The case of my friend who is at 31 kft from a
Covad-enabled CO is only an example and nothing more.)  Again, consider
a town with a Covad-enabled CO plus an outlying countryside.  The people
in the town proper already have Covad xDSL available to them, and if we
could stick my SDSL/2B1Q repeater in the middle of some longer loops, it
would enable the people in the countryside to get *exactly the same*
Covad (or ISP-X-via-Covad) services as those in the town proper.

My repeater approach would also allow me to stay out of ISP or ISP-like
business which I really don't want to get into - I would rather just
make hardware and let someone else operate it.  A repeater is totally
unlike a router, it is not IP-aware, it just makes the loop seem shorter,
allowing farther-outlying users to connect to *existing* ISPs with an
already established business structure.

Anyway, I just saw a post on NANOG about an area deprived of "high-speed
Internet" services and thought I would post my idea in the hope that
someone would have some ideas that would actually be *helpful* to what
I'm trying to do.  If not - oh well, I'll just put the idea back on the
dusty shelf in the back of my mind until I'm ready to try presenting it
to the folks who own the CO-colocated DSLAMs it would have to work with
- gotta finish a few other things before I open that can of worms in the
earnest.

MS

RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Warren Bailey]

How do you think we feel in Alaska. Until mid last year, most cellular
BTS were backhauled via DS1. Only Within the last 12 months have we
(insert obligatory "I work for a GSM and CDMA cellular provider serving
most of Alaska") even migrated from Local copper to fiber or air
interfaces (ds1/ds3 microwave). 

I've always been curious as to why the people who aren't being served
with "broadband" type of services haven't made a larger fuss about this.
The idea of running a copper pair to a home should have died long ago,
IMHO. As an RF Engineer, I see everyone turning to fiber and dry loops
when it's just not necessary or even cost effective. Put up the
*LICENSED* loop and call it a day.. Or a 5.8 RAD shot when you feel like
rolling the deice. Either way, cellular isn't the drop dead answer to
solving a sparsely covered area.

About 95% of my state is not covered by cellular, but we've had no
problems deploying the largest cellular (rural obviously) provider in
the United States - just look up. It's not as expensive as you would
think. 


//warren

Warren Bailey
GCI Communication Corp.
RF Network Engineering
907.868.5911 office
907.903.5410 mobile
 

-Original Message-
From: Daniel Senie [mailto:d...@senie.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:21 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

Hopefully someone will bother to cover the rural areas with cell service
eventually.

Much of western Massachusetts (by which I mean the Berkshires, more than
I mean the Pioneer Valley) is not covered by cell service. Where there
is cell service, most cell sites have only minimal data speeds. Vermont
is far worse, as is much of Maine. If there were 3G cellular, it'd be a
big step up. But I expect the inner cities will all be running LTE for
years before more rural areas even get voice service.

On Feb 26, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Haney, Wilson wrote:

> As we all know it's expensive building out any landline network. Rural
areas just get over looked. 
> 
> Check out this tech coming out of Motorola and to a Verizon/ATT tower
near you soon.
> 
> 100 Mbps possible off cellular signals. Looks like they will throttle
it to 20 Mbps and less though. 
> 
> http://business.motorola.com/experiencelte/lte-depth.html
> 
> http://news.techworld.com/networking/3203498/motorola-predicts-20mbps-
> download-speed-with-future-lte-networks/
> 
> WPH
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Crooks, Sam [mailto:sam.cro...@experian.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:51 PM
> To: Michael Sokolov; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
> 
> I had good luck getting my dad some form of broadband access in rural 
> Oregon using a 3g router (Cradlepoint), a Wilson Electronics signal 
> amp (model 811211), and an outdoor mount high gain antenna.  It's not 
> great, but considering the alternatives (33.6k dialup for $60/mo or 
> satellite broadband for $150-$200/mo) it wasn't a bad deal for my dad 
> when you consider that the dialup ISP + dedicated POTS line cost about

> as much as the 5GB 3G data plan does.
> 
> Speed is somewhere between  dialup and Uverse or FIOS.  I get the 
> sense that it is somewhere in the range of 256 - 512 kbps with high 
> latency (Dad's not one for much in the way of network performance
testing).
> 
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org]
>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:35 PM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
>> 
>> Daniel Senie  wrote:
>> 
>>> Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no
> connectivity
>> at =
>>> all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
>> 
>> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea 
>> what the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of

>> quite a few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy,

>> let
> alone
>> fiber.
>> 
>> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern 
>> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run
> a
>> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  
>> The CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural

>> residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much 
>> point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is

>> typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such 
>> places.
>> 
>> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended i

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[gordon b slater]

On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 19:20 -0500, Daniel Senie wrote:
> Hopefully someone will bother to cover the rural areas with cell
>  service eventually.
> 

I'm finding a fair number (about 40%+) of the tech-savvy
"must-have-for-business-emails" users here in very rural UK out of reach
of RA-ADSL) are using/have used Lynx as their browser and Mutt as email
client, in some cases even when 3G (fringe reception only, possibly with
tropopausal involvement*) is sometimes reachable.

This only came to my attention last week when I noticed a strange
Mailer: header and kinda shocked me at first, so I quizzed the sender
further. They say that WAP-enabled sites are a non-starter for "daily"
use.

Worth looking into if the end-user can handle it in these situations. 
Rural DSL for them usually means Damn Small Linux - their joke not mine.


Gord

(* I'm not convinced about this - it fits their anecdotes, but I'm not
sure about the timing/latency issues of the RF-side )  

--
Explain to me again how pig's bladders may be employed to prevent
earthquakes

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 02/26/2010 03:10 PM, Paul Bosworth wrote:
> I think a lot of people often forget that ISPs are actually
> businesses trying to turn a profit.

Bearing in mind that the facilities that exist in much of the rural
united states are actually there  because we collectively payed for them
rather than simply:

waiting for the right set of economic incentives to exist

or leaving people to suffer.

It not unlikely in some cases that the economic incentive for universal
service may never exist may never exist in some  reasons which doesn't
mean that we shouldn't do something about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural_Electrification_Administration#History

> At my last job we built out a fiber to the home ILEC in relatively
> rural Louisiana. This means that we had quite a number of customers
> that didn't meet the density requirements for deployment. Using 
> made-up numbers for the sake of discussion, lets assume that a
> customer provides $1/month for service. If you can place deployment
> in a highly-dense area you'll make a lot more of those $1's per month
> with that investment. When you start deploying further to the edge
> you really slide into the "we're not even breaking even on this"
> market. Obviously anyone that has a job for profit knows that this is
> a no-no.
> 
> As telcos deploy high-density technologies (fiber, metroE, etc) they
> can pull the legacy technology (xDSL, T1, etc) and push that to the
> edge. Unfortunately the edge is always going to get the hand-me-downs
> but it's better than nothing. My wife is from a tiny town in central
> PA (the vortex between Pittsburgh and Philly) and her parents have
> had dialup until last year, when the local telco finally pushed DSL
> to their location. They only draw 1.5meg but it's better than the 56k
> they were paying for.
> 
> As they say in vegas, "It's just business, baby."
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Crooks, Sam
> wrote:
> 
>> I had good luck getting my dad some form of broadband access in
>> rural Oregon using a 3g router (Cradlepoint), a Wilson Electronics
>> signal amp (model 811211), and an outdoor mount high gain antenna.
>> It's not great, but considering the alternatives (33.6k dialup for
>> $60/mo or satellite broadband for $150-$200/mo) it wasn't a bad
>> deal for my dad when you consider that the dialup ISP + dedicated
>> POTS line cost about as much as the 5GB 3G data plan does.
>> 
>> Speed is somewhere between  dialup and Uverse or FIOS.  I get the
>> sense that it is somewhere in the range of 256 - 512 kbps with high
>> latency (Dad's not one for much in the way of network performance
>> testing).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> -Original Message- From: Michael Sokolov
>>> [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010
>>> 3:35 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Locations with no good
>>> Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
>>> 
>>> Daniel Senie  wrote:
>>> 
 Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no
>> connectivity
>>> at =
 all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
>>> 
>>> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no
>>> idea what the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly
>>> aware of quite a few places in "first world USA" where DSL is
>>> still a fantasy, let
>> alone
>>> fiber.
>>> 
>>> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern 
>>> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've
>>> run
>> a
>>> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.
>>> The CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those
>>> rural residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps
>>> (not much point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The
>>> latter figure is typically well out of range for the kind of
>>> people who live in such places.
>>> 
>>> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely
>>> far into the boondocks because those signal formats support
>>> repeaters. What I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing
>>> with SDSL - and I mean politically rather than technically.  The
>>> technical part is easy: some COs already have CLECs in them that
>>> serve G.shdsl (I've been told that NEN does that) and for G.shdsl
>>> repeaters are part of the standard (searching around shows a few
>>> vendors making them); in the case of SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and
>>> DSL.net) there is no official support for repeaters and hence no
>>> major vendors making such, but I can build such a
>> repeater
>>> unofficially.
>>> 
>>> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm
>> seeking
>>> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a
>>> mid-span repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From
>>> what I understand (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when
>>> a CLEC orders a loop from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the
>>> CLEC actually orders a T1 or ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC
>>> rather than a dry pa

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Greg Bur]

On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 18:10 -0500, Paul Bosworth wrote:
> I think a lot of people often forget that ISPs are actually businesses
> trying to turn a profit.

That sums it up pretty well.  In a previous life I operated an ISP in a
small town.  When I entered the arena there was one other competitor,
another independent ISP deploying 2.4GHz wireless.  The RBOC and cable
company weren't even considering rolling out high speed service but
there was a definite demand, especially from the business community.  I
ended up having some measure of success deploying a mix of 2.4GHz and
900MHz wireless with DSL to fill in a few gaps.  Before I sold the
business my main competitor folded and the RBOC pushed out DSL.  I think
the local cable company joined the fray a couple years ago, too.

My achilles heel wasn't having to compete with a goliath RBOC, it was
all of the marketing.  People would see ads on TV and in newspapers from
providers who didn't even serve the area.  When they were told "sorry,
no broadband for you" from one of these national providers they would
often accept that as a final answer.  Folks often confused my wireless
service with cellular or satellite access.  They would have a hard time
understanding why I could not provide them service well out of range of
my POP where they could get "four bars" on their cell phone.  Toward the
end I floated the idea of a co-op but local politics prevailed over
common sense and I quietly exited the business.

Things are slightly better today but the areas that were underserved
four years ago are still underserved.  Population density will keep it
that way for some time but I think people have better options today than
a few years ago.  My parents still only have 384k DSL but they are quite
satisfied with it.  Broadband co-ops will help in areas where local
politics don't get in the way, but otherwise it is like Paul said, it's
just business.

That's my two cents, feel free to give change.

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Daniel Senie]

Hopefully someone will bother to cover the rural areas with cell service 
eventually.

Much of western Massachusetts (by which I mean the Berkshires, more than I mean 
the Pioneer Valley) is not covered by cell service. Where there is cell 
service, most cell sites have only minimal data speeds. Vermont is far worse, 
as is much of Maine. If there were 3G cellular, it'd be a big step up. But I 
expect the inner cities will all be running LTE for years before more rural 
areas even get voice service.

On Feb 26, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Haney, Wilson wrote:

> As we all know it's expensive building out any landline network. Rural areas 
> just get over looked. 
> 
> Check out this tech coming out of Motorola and to a Verizon/ATT tower near 
> you soon.
> 
> 100 Mbps possible off cellular signals. Looks like they will throttle it to 
> 20 Mbps and less though. 
> 
> http://business.motorola.com/experiencelte/lte-depth.html
> 
> http://news.techworld.com/networking/3203498/motorola-predicts-20mbps-download-speed-with-future-lte-networks/
> 
> WPH
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Crooks, Sam [mailto:sam.cro...@experian.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:51 PM
> To: Michael Sokolov; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
> 
> I had good luck getting my dad some form of broadband access in rural
> Oregon using a 3g router (Cradlepoint), a Wilson Electronics signal amp
> (model 811211), and an outdoor mount high gain antenna.  It's not great,
> but considering the alternatives (33.6k dialup for $60/mo or satellite
> broadband for $150-$200/mo) it wasn't a bad deal for my dad when you
> consider that the dialup ISP + dedicated POTS line cost about as much as
> the 5GB 3G data plan does.  
> 
> Speed is somewhere between  dialup and Uverse or FIOS.  I get the sense
> that it is somewhere in the range of 256 - 512 kbps with high latency
> (Dad's not one for much in the way of network performance testing).
> 
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org]
>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:35 PM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
>> 
>> Daniel Senie  wrote:
>> 
>>> Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no
> connectivity
>> at =
>>> all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
>> 
>> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea
>> what
>> the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite
>> a
>> few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let
> alone
>> fiber.
>> 
>> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
>> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run
> a
>> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
>> CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
>> residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
>> point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
>> typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
>> places.
>> 
>> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
>> into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.
>> What
>> I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
>> politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
>> COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
>> NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
>> (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
>> SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for
>> repeaters
>> and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a
> repeater
>> unofficially.
>> 
>> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm
> seeking
>> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
>> repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
>> (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
>> from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1
>> or
>> ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
>> mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
>> responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?
>> 
>> So how could one extend thi

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Michael Sokolov]

Brandon Galbraith  wrote:

> http://www.rric.net/

I'm very familiar with those folks of course, they've been an inspiration
to me for a long time.

However, my needs are different.  RRIC's model basically involves a
specific community with a well-defined boundary: bring the bandwidth
into the community via a bulk feed, then sublet inside the community.

But I don't have a specific community in mind - I'm trying to develop a
more generic solution.  (The case of my friend who is at 31 kft from a
Covad-enabled CO is only an example and nothing more.)  Again, consider
a town with a Covad-enabled CO plus an outlying countryside.  The people
in the town proper already have Covad xDSL available to them, and if we
could stick my SDSL/2B1Q repeater in the middle of some longer loops, it
would enable the people in the countryside to get *exactly the same*
Covad (or ISP-X-via-Covad) services as those in the town proper.

My repeater approach would also allow me to stay out of ISP or ISP-like
business which I really don't want to get into - I would rather just
make hardware and let someone else operate it.  A repeater is totally
unlike a router, it is not IP-aware, it just makes the loop seem shorter,
allowing farther-outlying users to connect to *existing* ISPs with an
already established business structure.

Anyway, I just saw a post on NANOG about an area deprived of "high-speed
Internet" services and thought I would post my idea in the hope that
someone would have some ideas that would actually be *helpful* to what
I'm trying to do.  If not - oh well, I'll just put the idea back on the
dusty shelf in the back of my mind until I'm ready to try presenting it
to the folks who own the CO-colocated DSLAMs it would have to work with
- gotta finish a few other things before I open that can of worms in the
earnest.

MS

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Brandon Galbraith]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Paul Bosworth  wrote:

> I think a lot of people often forget that ISPs are actually businesses
> trying to turn a profit.
>

There are alternatives though, if the need exists and folks are able:

http://www.rric.net/

-- 
Brandon Galbraith
Mobile: 630.400.6992
FNAL: 630.840.2141

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Paul Bosworth]

I think a lot of people often forget that ISPs are actually businesses
trying to turn a profit. At my last job we built out a fiber to the home
ILEC in relatively rural Louisiana. This means that we had quite a number of
customers that didn't meet the density requirements for deployment. Using
made-up numbers for the sake of discussion, lets assume that a customer
provides $1/month for service. If you can place deployment in a highly-dense
area you'll make a lot more of those $1's per month with that investment.
When you start deploying further to the edge you really slide into the
"we're not even breaking even on this" market. Obviously anyone that has a
job for profit knows that this is a no-no.

As telcos deploy high-density technologies (fiber, metroE, etc) they can
pull the legacy technology (xDSL, T1, etc) and push that to the edge.
Unfortunately the edge is always going to get the hand-me-downs but it's
better than nothing. My wife is from a tiny town in central PA (the vortex
between Pittsburgh and Philly) and her parents have had dialup until last
year, when the local telco finally pushed DSL to their location. They only
draw 1.5meg but it's better than the 56k they were paying for.

As they say in vegas, "It's just business, baby."



On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Crooks, Sam wrote:

> I had good luck getting my dad some form of broadband access in rural
> Oregon using a 3g router (Cradlepoint), a Wilson Electronics signal amp
> (model 811211), and an outdoor mount high gain antenna.  It's not great,
> but considering the alternatives (33.6k dialup for $60/mo or satellite
> broadband for $150-$200/mo) it wasn't a bad deal for my dad when you
> consider that the dialup ISP + dedicated POTS line cost about as much as
> the 5GB 3G data plan does.
>
> Speed is somewhere between  dialup and Uverse or FIOS.  I get the sense
> that it is somewhere in the range of 256 - 512 kbps with high latency
> (Dad's not one for much in the way of network performance testing).
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org]
> > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:35 PM
> > To: nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
> >
> > Daniel Senie  wrote:
> >
> > > Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no
> connectivity
> > at =
> > > all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
> >
> > Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea
> > what
> > the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite
> > a
> > few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let
> alone
> > fiber.
> >
> > As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
> > California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run
> a
> > prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
> > CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
> > residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
> > point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
> > typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
> > places.
> >
> > That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
> > into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.
> > What
> > I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
> > politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
> > COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
> > NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
> > (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
> > SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for
> > repeaters
> > and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a
> repeater
> > unofficially.
> >
> > The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm
> seeking
> > the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
> > repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
> > (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
> > from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1
> > or
> > ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
> > mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
> > responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?
> >
> > So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
> > service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
> > process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a
> third
> > party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it
> > have
> > to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
> > CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
> > and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC i

RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Haney, Wilson]

As we all know it's expensive building out any landline network. Rural areas 
just get over looked. 

Check out this tech coming out of Motorola and to a Verizon/ATT tower near you 
soon.

100 Mbps possible off cellular signals. Looks like they will throttle it to 20 
Mbps and less though. 

http://business.motorola.com/experiencelte/lte-depth.html

http://news.techworld.com/networking/3203498/motorola-predicts-20mbps-download-speed-with-future-lte-networks/

WPH

-Original Message-
From: Crooks, Sam [mailto:sam.cro...@experian.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 4:51 PM
To: Michael Sokolov; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

I had good luck getting my dad some form of broadband access in rural
Oregon using a 3g router (Cradlepoint), a Wilson Electronics signal amp
(model 811211), and an outdoor mount high gain antenna.  It's not great,
but considering the alternatives (33.6k dialup for $60/mo or satellite
broadband for $150-$200/mo) it wasn't a bad deal for my dad when you
consider that the dialup ISP + dedicated POTS line cost about as much as
the 5GB 3G data plan does.  

Speed is somewhere between  dialup and Uverse or FIOS.  I get the sense
that it is somewhere in the range of 256 - 512 kbps with high latency
(Dad's not one for much in the way of network performance testing).



> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:35 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
> 
> Daniel Senie  wrote:
> 
> > Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no
connectivity
> at =
> > all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
> 
> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea
> what
> the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite
> a
> few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let
alone
> fiber.
> 
> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run
a
> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
> CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
> residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
> point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
> typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
> places.
> 
> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
> into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.
> What
> I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
> politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
> COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
> NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
> (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
> SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for
> repeaters
> and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a
repeater
> unofficially.
> 
> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm
seeking
> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
> repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
> (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
> from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1
> or
> ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
> mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
> responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?
> 
> So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
> service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
> process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a
third
> party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it
> have
> to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
> CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
> and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC is not
> interested in providing such a service - any PUC/FCC/etc political
> process via which they could be forced to cooperate?
> 
> Things get even more complicated in those locations where the CO has a
> Covad DSLAM in it serving out SDSL/2B1Q, but no other CLEC serving
> G.shdsl.  Even if the ILEC were to provide a G.shdsl transport service
> with repeaters, it wouldn't help with SDSL/2B1Q.  My idea involves
> building a gadget in the for

RE: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Crooks, Sam]

I had good luck getting my dad some form of broadband access in rural
Oregon using a 3g router (Cradlepoint), a Wilson Electronics signal amp
(model 811211), and an outdoor mount high gain antenna.  It's not great,
but considering the alternatives (33.6k dialup for $60/mo or satellite
broadband for $150-$200/mo) it wasn't a bad deal for my dad when you
consider that the dialup ISP + dedicated POTS line cost about as much as
the 5GB 3G data plan does.  

Speed is somewhere between  dialup and Uverse or FIOS.  I get the sense
that it is somewhere in the range of 256 - 512 kbps with high latency
(Dad's not one for much in the way of network performance testing).



> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Sokolov [mailto:msoko...@ivan.harhan.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:35 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)
> 
> Daniel Senie  wrote:
> 
> > Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no
connectivity
> at =
> > all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
> 
> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea
> what
> the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite
> a
> few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let
alone
> fiber.
> 
> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run
a
> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
> CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
> residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
> point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
> typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
> places.
> 
> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
> into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.
> What
> I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
> politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
> COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
> NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
> (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
> SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for
> repeaters
> and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a
repeater
> unofficially.
> 
> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm
seeking
> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
> repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
> (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
> from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1
> or
> ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
> mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
> responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?
> 
> So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
> service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
> process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a
third
> party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it
> have
> to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
> CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
> and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC is not
> interested in providing such a service - any PUC/FCC/etc political
> process via which they could be forced to cooperate?
> 
> Things get even more complicated in those locations where the CO has a
> Covad DSLAM in it serving out SDSL/2B1Q, but no other CLEC serving
> G.shdsl.  Even if the ILEC were to provide a G.shdsl transport service
> with repeaters, it wouldn't help with SDSL/2B1Q.  My idea involves
> building a gadget in the form factor of a standard mid-span repeater
> that would function as a converter from SDSL/2B1Q to G.shdsl: if the
> loop calls for one mid-span repeater, stick this gadget in as if it
> were that repeater; if the loop calls for 2 or more repeaters, use my
> gadget as the first "repeater" and then standard G.shdsl repeaters
> after it.  But of course this idea is totally dependent on the ability
> of a third party to stick these devices in the middle of long rural
> loops, perhaps in the place of loading coils which are likely present
> on such loops.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> MS

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Michael Sokolov]

Brandon Galbraith  wrote:

> Get dry loops from the ILEC and place repeaters at strategic points?

I guess I need a little more education on how the process of ordering
dry pairs from an ILEC works.  I thought it works like this:

1. You have to be colocated in the CO to begin with.

2. You give the ILEC the address of an end site and they run a dry pair
   from your cage within their CO to that address.

3. You don't get access to any intermediate points.

As far as placing the repeaters at "strategic points", yeah, that's
exactly what I meant, but my point was that these "strategic points" are
owned by the ILEC, and I was/am wondering how to go about making it
possible for a third party to stick repeater equipment in there.

I envision the following picture:

* There is a CO in a town, and there is a Covad DSLAM in that CO,
  serving those folks who are located in the town itself.

* There is a winding mountain road going out of town into the
  countryside, and there are phone wires running alongside that road,
  several miles long.

* There gotta be a bunch of cyan-colored cross-connect boxes on the side
  of the road, manholes and other places where the ILEC has mid-span
  access to those lng loops.  They also very likely have loading
  coils on loops like that, and although I confess that I've never seen
  one of those coils with my own eyes, I've heard that they are rather
  bulky in terms of physical dimensions, probably bigger than a repeater
  PCB.

The problem is that these mid-span access points are property of the
ILEC along with the rest of the loop plant, and although there probably
exists an ILEC-internal procedure for installing mid-span repeaters for
T1s and maybe ISDN BRI, that is most certainly done by the ILEC itself,
not by any third parties.  Making it possible for a third party to
access those intermediate points to install repeater equipment which the
ILEC won't understand (handling Covad's non-standard flavor of
SDSL/2B1Q) is the problem I'm trying to solve.

MS

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[James Jones]

I am in planning states for a new metro ethernet service here in the 
springfield area. that will slowly extend to the town as I can get there.


On 2/26/10 4:45 PM, Daniel Senie wrote:

 From what I've read, they may well get higher bandwidth out to the town 
centers on fiber. There has been little discussion of how to distribute from 
there. I suppose Verizon, the only company offering anything out there, will 
take advantage and use the fiber to improve speeds in the centers of towns. But 
there's no CATV in most of the hill towns, and unless MBI intends to stretch 
fiber out to the neighborhoods, I remain skeptical.

Today, most of the town halls have public access wifi, and people drive up and 
sit in their cars and get their email that way. This isn't a solution.


On Feb 26, 2010, at 4:40 PM, James Jones wrote:

   

The Massachusetts Broadband Institute is currently working a middle mile 
solution to help with some of the issues in western ma. Thing do sound 
promising.


On 2/26/10 4:34 PM, Michael Sokolov wrote:
 

Daniel Senie   wrote:


   

Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no connectivity at =
all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.

 

Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea what
the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite a
few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let alone
fiber.

As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run a
prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
places.

That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.  What
I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
(searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for repeaters
and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a repeater
unofficially.

The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm seeking
the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
(someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1 or
ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?

So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a third
party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it have
to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC is not
interested in providing such a service - any PUC/FCC/etc political
process via which they could be forced to cooperate?

Things get even more complicated in those locations where the CO has a
Covad DSLAM in it serving out SDSL/2B1Q, but no other CLEC serving
G.shdsl.  Even if the ILEC were to provide a G.shdsl transport service
with repeaters, it wouldn't help with SDSL/2B1Q.  My idea involves
building a gadget in the form factor of a standard mid-span repeater
that would function as a converter from SDSL/2B1Q to G.shdsl: if the
loop calls for one mid-span repeater, stick this gadget in as if it
were that repeater; if the loop calls for 2 or more repeaters, use my
gadget as the first "repeater" and then standard G.shdsl repeaters
after it.  But of course this idea is totally dependent on the ability
of a third party to stick these devices in the middle of long rural
loops, perhaps in the place of loading coils which are likely present
on such loops.

Any ideas?

MS


   
   

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Daniel Senie]

From what I've read, they may well get higher bandwidth out to the town centers 
on fiber. There has been little discussion of how to distribute from there. I 
suppose Verizon, the only company offering anything out there, will take 
advantage and use the fiber to improve speeds in the centers of towns. But 
there's no CATV in most of the hill towns, and unless MBI intends to stretch 
fiber out to the neighborhoods, I remain skeptical.

Today, most of the town halls have public access wifi, and people drive up and 
sit in their cars and get their email that way. This isn't a solution.


On Feb 26, 2010, at 4:40 PM, James Jones wrote:

> The Massachusetts Broadband Institute is currently working a middle mile 
> solution to help with some of the issues in western ma. Thing do sound 
> promising.
> 
> 
> On 2/26/10 4:34 PM, Michael Sokolov wrote:
>> Daniel Senie  wrote:
>> 
>>   
>>> Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no connectivity at =
>>> all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
>>> 
>> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea what
>> the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite a
>> few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let alone
>> fiber.
>> 
>> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
>> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run a
>> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
>> CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
>> residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
>> point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
>> typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
>> places.
>> 
>> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
>> into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.  What
>> I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
>> politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
>> COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
>> NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
>> (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
>> SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for repeaters
>> and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a repeater
>> unofficially.
>> 
>> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm seeking
>> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
>> repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
>> (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
>> from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1 or
>> ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
>> mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
>> responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?
>> 
>> So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
>> service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
>> process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a third
>> party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it have
>> to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
>> CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
>> and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC is not
>> interested in providing such a service - any PUC/FCC/etc political
>> process via which they could be forced to cooperate?
>> 
>> Things get even more complicated in those locations where the CO has a
>> Covad DSLAM in it serving out SDSL/2B1Q, but no other CLEC serving
>> G.shdsl.  Even if the ILEC were to provide a G.shdsl transport service
>> with repeaters, it wouldn't help with SDSL/2B1Q.  My idea involves
>> building a gadget in the form factor of a standard mid-span repeater
>> that would function as a converter from SDSL/2B1Q to G.shdsl: if the
>> loop calls for one mid-span repeater, stick this gadget in as if it
>> were that repeater; if the loop calls for 2 or more repeaters, use my
>> gadget as the first "repeater" and then standard G.shdsl repeaters
>> after it.  But of course this idea is totally dependent on the ability
>> of a third party to stick these devices in the middle of long rural
>> loops, perhaps in the place of loading coils which are likely present
>> on such loops.
>> 
>> Any ideas?
>> 
>> MS
>> 
>>   

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[James Jones]

The Massachusetts Broadband Institute is currently working a middle mile 
solution to help with some of the issues in western ma. Thing do sound 
promising.



On 2/26/10 4:34 PM, Michael Sokolov wrote:

Daniel Senie  wrote:

   

Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no connectivity at =
all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
 

Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea what
the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite a
few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let alone
fiber.

As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run a
prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
places.

That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.  What
I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
(searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for repeaters
and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a repeater
unofficially.

The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm seeking
the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
(someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1 or
ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?

So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a third
party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it have
to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC is not
interested in providing such a service - any PUC/FCC/etc political
process via which they could be forced to cooperate?

Things get even more complicated in those locations where the CO has a
Covad DSLAM in it serving out SDSL/2B1Q, but no other CLEC serving
G.shdsl.  Even if the ILEC were to provide a G.shdsl transport service
with repeaters, it wouldn't help with SDSL/2B1Q.  My idea involves
building a gadget in the form factor of a standard mid-span repeater
that would function as a converter from SDSL/2B1Q to G.shdsl: if the
loop calls for one mid-span repeater, stick this gadget in as if it
were that repeater; if the loop calls for 2 or more repeaters, use my
gadget as the first "repeater" and then standard G.shdsl repeaters
after it.  But of course this idea is totally dependent on the ability
of a third party to stick these devices in the middle of long rural
loops, perhaps in the place of loading coils which are likely present
on such loops.

Any ideas?

MS

   

Re: Locations with no good Internet (was ISP in Johannesburg)

[Brandon Galbraith]

Get dry loops from the ILEC and place repeaters at strategic points?

On 2/26/10, Michael Sokolov  wrote:
> Daniel Senie  wrote:
>
>> Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no connectivity at =
>> all. Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines.
>
> Hmm.  Although I've never been to Western MA and hence have no idea what
> the telecom situation is like over there, I'm certainly aware of quite a
> few places in "first world USA" where DSL is still a fantasy, let alone
> fiber.
>
> As a local example, I have a friend in a rural area of Southern
> California who can't get any kind of "high-speed Internet".  I've run a
> prequal on her address and it tells me she is 31 kft from the CO.  The
> CO in question has a Covad DSLAM in it, but at 31 kft those rural
> residents' options are limited to either IDSL at 144 kbps (not much
> point in that) or a T1 starting at ~$700/month.  The latter figure is
> typically well out of range for the kind of people who live in such
> places.
>
> That got me thinking: ISDN/IDSL and T1 can be extended infinitely far
> into the boondocks because those signal formats support repeaters.  What
> I'm wondering is how can we do the same thing with SDSL - and I mean
> politically rather than technically.  The technical part is easy: some
> COs already have CLECs in them that serve G.shdsl (I've been told that
> NEN does that) and for G.shdsl repeaters are part of the standard
> (searching around shows a few vendors making them); in the case of
> SDSL/2B1Q (Covad and DSL.net) there is no official support for repeaters
> and hence no major vendors making such, but I can build such a repeater
> unofficially.
>
> The difficulty is with the political part, and that's where I'm seeking
> the wisdom of this list.  How would one go about sticking a mid-span
> repeater into an ILEC-owned 31 kft rural loop?  From what I understand
> (someone please correct me if I'm wrong!), when a CLEC orders a loop
> from an ILEC, if it's for a T1 or IDSL, the CLEC actually orders a T1 or
> ISDN BRI transport from the ILEC rather than a dry pair, and any
> mid-span repeaters or HDSLx converters or the like become the
> responsibility of the ILEC rather than the CLEC, right?
>
> So how could one extend this model to provide, say, repeatered G.shdsl
> service to far-outlying rural subscribers?  Is there some political
> process (PUC/FCC/etc) by which an ILEC could be forced to allow a third
> party to stick a repeater in the middle of their loop?  Or would it have
> to work by way of the ILEC providing a G.shdsl transport service to
> CLECs, with the ILEC being responsible for the selection, procurement
> and deployment of repeater hardware?  And what if the ILEC is not
> interested in providing such a service - any PUC/FCC/etc political
> process via which they could be forced to cooperate?
>
> Things get even more complicated in those locations where the CO has a
> Covad DSLAM in it serving out SDSL/2B1Q, but no other CLEC serving
> G.shdsl.  Even if the ILEC were to provide a G.shdsl transport service
> with repeaters, it wouldn't help with SDSL/2B1Q.  My idea involves
> building a gadget in the form factor of a standard mid-span repeater
> that would function as a converter from SDSL/2B1Q to G.shdsl: if the
> loop calls for one mid-span repeater, stick this gadget in as if it
> were that repeater; if the loop calls for 2 or more repeaters, use my
> gadget as the first "repeater" and then standard G.shdsl repeaters
> after it.  But of course this idea is totally dependent on the ability
> of a third party to stick these devices in the middle of long rural
> loops, perhaps in the place of loading coils which are likely present
> on such loops.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> MS
>
>


-- 
Brandon Galbraith
Mobile: 630.400.6992
FNAL: 630.840.2141