Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 07:45 -0600, Mike wrote: > If it would run on say a MT 450G, and > the price was right, you'd sell a bunch! I'd buy several for my network. After installing this on an RB600 moving about 4k pps I saw it move CPU from an average of about 60% up to about 80-100% (more often 100 than 80). On an RB1000, moving about 8k pps, we went from about 30% to an average of about 60%. I guess the point is, it just depends on how many users and how many packets you'd be moving through. I would be comfortable installing this on an rb450G with 3-500 users and up to about 3k pps (maybe more, but not much more). Does that help? > An agnostic approach to bandwidth management is MY preferred way to > deal with network congestion. If the pipe is getting clogged, look > for long duration threads and delay those packets in deference to > those short duration network transactions. Let the web pages load > fast, let users retrieve email fast, but if there is congestion, take > the headroom away from the bandwidth hogs until the congestion frees up. That's exactly what this system does. It just looks for what appears to be "non-interactive" traffic and moves it toward the bottom of the priority chain. It does NOT set speed limits on anything. It is just a priority scheduler that is much more intelligent than anything I've seen done in Mikrotik. > We currently have such a device running on our network that has made > a dramatic difference in the dynamics of how our network > operates. The device already exists. It's called a > NetEqualizer. There are a couple things about the NetEq your OS will > no doubt fix and add value to a net op. One thing that is a HUGE difference is that I can do nearly everything the NetEq does, for a FRACTION of the cost. This system, for what it's worth, is available for $175 installed on your hardware. > The second place your OS would correct a shortcoming of NetEq is > again moving it away from the core. At the core, every connection > from a separate subnet, say from a distant tower deployment will look > like they come from a single IP instead of from the many who might be > using the tower. NetEq will still identify each thread as unique, > UNLESS multiple users happen to be connected to the same distant IP > address like Google, or MSN, or others. If the appliance were to be > moved to the remote tower site, it could do its own "agnostic" > conditioning of bandwidth BEFORE it gets on the backbone. FWIW, traffic is not classified by IP. It is classified by connection. I use PCQ in my system, however, so the "equalization" technique would segment traffic in the queues by IP. This is something that could be overcome, if we changed to something like RED queues (which is designed to follow/track individual "flows" instead of equally managing IP addresses), but I am convinced that PCQ is the best approach to what I am trying to accomplish with this system. > So Butch, if there is good value in the system; its affordable, and > will run on affordable hardware, and works well, count me in for > several of them. As I said, I think at $175, it is very affordable considering what it does. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I know I've been through this many times, but most people don't even know what's available in their area. I try my best, but I can't know what fiber is available in everyone's backyard. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: "Butch Evans" Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 10:44 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay. >> At 03:09 PM 11/12/2009, you wrote: >> >I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly >> >because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which >> >is, >> >to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to >> >use >> >these, and have them work fine. >> > >> >Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which >> >puts >> >video ahead of surfing, etc. > > This is a good point. The fact is, that a GOOD bandwidth manager will > allow traffic to flow as fast as possible. One thing to bear in mind, > with regard to my QOS system, is that I don't speed limit ANYTHING. I > simply prioritize traffic so that the time sensitive stuff gets out > first. There is no reason to limit even P2P if there is available > bandwidth. Every class that I give that covers QOS, I restate this one > maxim: "QOS is not simply LIMITING bandwidth. Rather, QOS is about > MANAGING the available bandwidth resources." There is an important > distinction there that your comments don't take into account. > >> >We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near >> >future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. > > Even with sufficient bandwidth available, there are links and network > infrastructure where a good QOS mechanism will benefit the network. > >> >I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per >> >customer, >> >oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > > For many, 4:1 would mean out of business. Even at 10:1, many would not > survive. There are places in this country where bandwidth is still > quite expensive ($200/Meg would sound GOOD to some people). Even at > that price, a 4:1 ratio is $50/customer before you add in ANY costs. > Even 10:1 is to high. It would be NICE if the price for wholesale BW > came down, but too many folks do not have the benefit of reasonable > bandwidth. > -- > > * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* > * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * > * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * > * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
Have you talked to these guys? http://www.pnptnetworks.com/Userfiles/DavenporttoDesMoines.gif Linn VP, Sales & Marketing Pinpoint Network Solutions 402.203.0123 l...@pnpt.com www.pnptnetworks.com - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: "Mike" Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 9:30 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay. > There is absolutely no way, with my raw bandwidth costs, that I can > ONLY oversubscribe 4 or 6 to 1! Isn't DSL normal oversubscription > 20:1? Your bandwidth expenses must be really low. Mine are really high. > > Mike > > > At 03:09 PM 11/12/2009, you wrote: >>I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly >>because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which >>is, >>to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to >>use >>these, and have them work fine. >> >>Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which puts >>video ahead of surfing, etc. >> >>I'm just talking about how we're going to keep up with the future... In >>2004 when I started, we used between 1 and and 1.5 gigs of data per >>customer >>per month. The last time I measured it, which was a year ago, we were >>up to more than 7. >> >>We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near >>future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. I'm nowhere near >>as leveraged as some of my competitors in terms of oversubscription, but >>that's not an excuse. >> >>I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per customer, >>oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. >> >>What is everyone else planning? >> >> >> >> >> >> >>WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >>Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I've got some extra rocket5M's & rocket dishes if anybody is interested, I'll send them out at cost. The firmware has improved quite a bit over time on these things, they will do 100 mbit fine at 20mhz (airmax off for ptp, 5.0.2 firmware, 10 streams). Regards Michael Baird > I think it's something about 2x2 rocketM that is better. The only > bullets I really like are Wolf Match Target in .22LR; they are almost as > hard find in stock in any quantity. > > This is a 13 mile link using dual polarity dishes, a 2' on one end, 3' > on the other, going over water. One end has multiple Alvarion 5.8 links > and a trango 5.8 link on the same tower. The other ends has 2 Alvarion > 5.8 sectors, and a Trango tlink45 link. > > The dual polarities / diversity do help reduce tidal fluctuation over > water in comparison to other 5.8 non-N systems, based on my rssi graphs. > > Haven't tried it yet where we actually overlap frequencies with other > backhauls. I do that at a couple of sites with other non-N gear. > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:43:40PM -0600, Matt wrote: > >>> I've found the rocket5m to work pretty good with 2' dishes for ptp >>> links. The speed is real and it runs well. It does needs a minor work >>> around in that the automatic distance setting does not work, you need to >>> manually set it, plus 15%. I can get 100mbit no problem with 20mhz >>> spectrum. >>> >> I am just amazed you are getting 100mbit in 20mhz even if using both >> polarities. I tried the Bullet5m's and had mostly bad results on a 12 >> mile link with 2 foot dishes. Tried many tweaks on modems with no >> results. I am in the pressence of alot of other 5.8ghz gear though. >> Am looking at a PTP500 to replace it for alot more money. They are >> supposed to be much more tolerent of interference I hear. >> >> Matt >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I think it's something about 2x2 rocketM that is better. The only bullets I really like are Wolf Match Target in .22LR; they are almost as hard find in stock in any quantity. This is a 13 mile link using dual polarity dishes, a 2' on one end, 3' on the other, going over water. One end has multiple Alvarion 5.8 links and a trango 5.8 link on the same tower. The other ends has 2 Alvarion 5.8 sectors, and a Trango tlink45 link. The dual polarities / diversity do help reduce tidal fluctuation over water in comparison to other 5.8 non-N systems, based on my rssi graphs. Haven't tried it yet where we actually overlap frequencies with other backhauls. I do that at a couple of sites with other non-N gear. On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:43:40PM -0600, Matt wrote: > > I've found the rocket5m to work pretty good with 2' dishes for ptp > > links. The speed is real and it runs well. It does needs a minor work > > around in that the automatic distance setting does not work, you need to > > manually set it, plus 15%. I can get 100mbit no problem with 20mhz > > spectrum. > > I am just amazed you are getting 100mbit in 20mhz even if using both > polarities. I tried the Bullet5m's and had mostly bad results on a 12 > mile link with 2 foot dishes. Tried many tweaks on modems with no > results. I am in the pressence of alot of other 5.8ghz gear though. > Am looking at a PTP500 to replace it for alot more money. They are > supposed to be much more tolerent of interference I hear. > > Matt > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- /* Jason Philbrook | Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL KB1IOJ| Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting http://f64.nu/ | for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/ */ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
Surely you mean 20MHz with "extension channel" thus making it about 40MHz. On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Matt wrote: > > I've found the rocket5m to work pretty good with 2' dishes for ptp > > links. The speed is real and it runs well. It does needs a minor work > > around in that the automatic distance setting does not work, you need to > > manually set it, plus 15%. I can get 100mbit no problem with 20mhz > > spectrum. > > I am just amazed you are getting 100mbit in 20mhz even if using both > polarities. I tried the Bullet5m's and had mostly bad results on a 12 > mile link with 2 foot dishes. Tried many tweaks on modems with no > results. I am in the pressence of alot of other 5.8ghz gear though. > Am looking at a PTP500 to replace it for alot more money. They are > supposed to be much more tolerent of interference I hear. > > Matt > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
The truth of the matter is this: We are all selling bandwidth for a living. The more I sale - the more I make. I don't want to short anyone and I like the "hogs" on my service and cater to these folks since I make more money per month off these folks. If you aren't "metering" and charging by the gig - - you will miss the boat since you must actually have an all you can eat buffet for $35.00 - - - Good luck! Mac > -Original Message- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of MDK > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 3:09 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data > delivery is here to stay. > > I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly > because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which > is, > to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want > to use > these, and have them work fine. > > Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which > puts > video ahead of surfing, etc. > > I'm just talking about how we're going to keep up with the future... > In > 2004 when I started, we used between 1 and and 1.5 gigs of data per > customer > per month. The last time I measured it, which was a year ago, we > were > up to more than 7. > > We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near > future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. I'm nowhere > near > as leveraged as some of my competitors in terms of oversubscription, > but > that's not an excuse. > > I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per > customer, > oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > > What is everyone else planning? > > > > > > --- > - > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > --- > - > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.61/2498 - Release Date: > 11/12/09 07:38:00 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
> I've found the rocket5m to work pretty good with 2' dishes for ptp > links. The speed is real and it runs well. It does needs a minor work > around in that the automatic distance setting does not work, you need to > manually set it, plus 15%. I can get 100mbit no problem with 20mhz > spectrum. I am just amazed you are getting 100mbit in 20mhz even if using both polarities. I tried the Bullet5m's and had mostly bad results on a 12 mile link with 2 foot dishes. Tried many tweaks on modems with no results. I am in the pressence of alot of other 5.8ghz gear though. Am looking at a PTP500 to replace it for alot more money. They are supposed to be much more tolerent of interference I hear. Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 09:17:58AM -0800, MDK wrote: > I guess you could call me "lucky" in that I have access to darn good rates. > > I'm currently at $60/mbit and working to see if my provider will give me a > break for doubling my commit. Continued business with you should be important. If you offer to pay the same and get more bandwidth, that should work for everyone. > We're also looking at deploying either Ubnt's M based equipment or someone > else's if anyone ever comes up with something workable and affordable, as an > addition to our already deployed network. I've found the rocket5m to work pretty good with 2' dishes for ptp links. The speed is real and it runs well. It does needs a minor work around in that the automatic distance setting does not work, you need to manually set it, plus 15%. I can get 100mbit no problem with 20mhz spectrum. This is serious praise, as I generally prefer midrange or higher end stuff like Alvarion, Trango, and I generally have serious reservations about the cheap stuff for honest calculated reasons. > We initially had a bandwidth cost of of about $6/customer, it reached a low > of about $3.3 a year or two after starting, and now it's back up to a little > less than $5 / customer. We've raised our rates 50 cents, cut our > administrative costs by $.70 for most customers by changing to EFT payments, > and now we're trying to figure out how to keep up with our expected 3X use > of data transfer and still keep our bandwidth costs within our planned > maximum of $8 over the next 3 years. I've never raised rates in 15 years and use that as a differentiator between us and the standard practices of the duopoly cable/telephone competition. (We keep rates a little higher to begin with) > We have some strategies to help with this, one of them is to offer a premium > service to residences that has higher than cable or dsl speeds for around > $225-250 / mo, and it appears we can deliver this to over 90% of our service > area at a moderate investment. > > Also, we're liscensing up big time for deploying 3.65 in a PtMP scheme over > a sizeable area, as well. > > About a year ago, my biggest competitor began deploying stuff that looks > identical to mine, though I know that it's Mikrotik inside instead of > Star-OS. It's time to make that big step up and be ahead again for a > while. > > > > ---------------------- > From: "Butch Evans" > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:44 PM > To: "WISPA General List" > Subject: Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data > delivery is here to stay. > > >> At 03:09 PM 11/12/2009, you wrote: > >> >I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly > >> >because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which > >> >is, > >> >to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to > >> >use > >> >these, and have them work fine. > >> > > >> >Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which > >> >puts > >> >video ahead of surfing, etc. > > > > This is a good point. The fact is, that a GOOD bandwidth manager will > > allow traffic to flow as fast as possible. One thing to bear in mind, > > with regard to my QOS system, is that I don't speed limit ANYTHING. I > > simply prioritize traffic so that the time sensitive stuff gets out > > first. There is no reason to limit even P2P if there is available > > bandwidth. Every class that I give that covers QOS, I restate this one > > maxim: "QOS is not simply LIMITING bandwidth. Rather, QOS is about > > MANAGING the available bandwidth resources." There is an important > > distinction there that your comments don't take into account. > > > >> >We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near > >> >future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. > > > > Even with sufficient bandwidth available, there are links and network > > infrastructure where a good QOS mechanism will benefit the network. > > > >> >I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per > >> >customer, > >> >oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > > > > For many, 4:1 would mean out of business. Even at 10:1, many would not > > survive. There are places in this country where bandwidth is still > > quite expensive ($200/Meg would sound GOOD to some people). Even at >
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I guess you could call me "lucky" in that I have access to darn good rates. I'm currently at $60/mbit and working to see if my provider will give me a break for doubling my commit. Currently, my commit is 10m and I'm paying overages each month, but they're still reasonably small.This is on the "95th percentile" scheme of measuring bandwidth use. I'm burstable to the limit of the 100M ethernet feed, and could get gig E if I needed it. My backhaul tops out at about 2600KB, so we're splitting our load between two, and raising the main one to around 60Mbit backhaul.Hoping to have an aggregate of about 110 mbit from the provider to me. We're also looking at deploying either Ubnt's M based equipment or someone else's if anyone ever comes up with something workable and affordable, as an addition to our already deployed network. We initially had a bandwidth cost of of about $6/customer, it reached a low of about $3.3 a year or two after starting, and now it's back up to a little less than $5 / customer. We've raised our rates 50 cents, cut our administrative costs by $.70 for most customers by changing to EFT payments, and now we're trying to figure out how to keep up with our expected 3X use of data transfer and still keep our bandwidth costs within our planned maximum of $8 over the next 3 years. We have some strategies to help with this, one of them is to offer a premium service to residences that has higher than cable or dsl speeds for around $225-250 / mo, and it appears we can deliver this to over 90% of our service area at a moderate investment. Also, we're liscensing up big time for deploying 3.65 in a PtMP scheme over a sizeable area, as well. About a year ago, my biggest competitor began deploying stuff that looks identical to mine, though I know that it's Mikrotik inside instead of Star-OS. It's time to make that big step up and be ahead again for a while. -- From: "Butch Evans" Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:44 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay. >> At 03:09 PM 11/12/2009, you wrote: >> >I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly >> >because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which >> >is, >> >to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to >> >use >> >these, and have them work fine. >> > >> >Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which >> >puts >> >video ahead of surfing, etc. > > This is a good point. The fact is, that a GOOD bandwidth manager will > allow traffic to flow as fast as possible. One thing to bear in mind, > with regard to my QOS system, is that I don't speed limit ANYTHING. I > simply prioritize traffic so that the time sensitive stuff gets out > first. There is no reason to limit even P2P if there is available > bandwidth. Every class that I give that covers QOS, I restate this one > maxim: "QOS is not simply LIMITING bandwidth. Rather, QOS is about > MANAGING the available bandwidth resources." There is an important > distinction there that your comments don't take into account. > >> >We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near >> >future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. > > Even with sufficient bandwidth available, there are links and network > infrastructure where a good QOS mechanism will benefit the network. > >> >I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per >> >customer, >> >oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > > For many, 4:1 would mean out of business. Even at 10:1, many would not > survive. There are places in this country where bandwidth is still > quite expensive ($200/Meg would sound GOOD to some people). Even at > that price, a 4:1 ratio is $50/customer before you add in ANY costs. > Even 10:1 is to high. It would be NICE if the price for wholesale BW > came down, but too many folks do not have the benefit of reasonable > bandwidth. > -- > > * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* > * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * > * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * > * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * > > > &
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I am very interested in your OS. What will be the minimum horsepower router on which it will run? If it would run on say a MT 450G, and the price was right, you'd sell a bunch! I'd buy several for my network. An agnostic approach to bandwidth management is MY preferred way to deal with network congestion. If the pipe is getting clogged, look for long duration threads and delay those packets in deference to those short duration network transactions. Let the web pages load fast, let users retrieve email fast, but if there is congestion, take the headroom away from the bandwidth hogs until the congestion frees up. Addressing congestion in this manner, instead of spending hours and hours adjusting your network for the latest P2P or identifying the latest video delivery codec, will keep you out of trouble with any net police who might accuse you of targeting streams from a particular provider, or streams of a particular genre. All connections, from all users, to all sources will be treated with the same fairness rules. We currently have such a device running on our network that has made a dramatic difference in the dynamics of how our network operates. The device already exists. It's called a NetEqualizer. There are a couple things about the NetEq your OS will no doubt fix and add value to a net op. First, the NetEq is a core device. It examines connections, bandwidth usage and congestion. It polices the cumulative bandwidth, compares it to what you've set as the maximum pipe size, and does it's thing. The traffic still has to transit the wireless network to reach the core device. A separate appliance at every AP or cluster accomplishing the same thing would be a thing of beauty. There is no way we could afford a NetEq at every such point in the network, but if your OS will run on a lower cost device, I WOULD but one it at several points and actually keep on-air traffic managed better. The second place your OS would correct a shortcoming of NetEq is again moving it away from the core. At the core, every connection from a separate subnet, say from a distant tower deployment will look like they come from a single IP instead of from the many who might be using the tower. NetEq will still identify each thread as unique, UNLESS multiple users happen to be connected to the same distant IP address like Google, or MSN, or others. If the appliance were to be moved to the remote tower site, it could do its own "agnostic" conditioning of bandwidth BEFORE it gets on the backbone. So Butch, if there is good value in the system; its affordable, and will run on affordable hardware, and works well, count me in for several of them. I think, with those caveats addressed, you will sell scads of them on this list alone. As a rural WISP, with very high wholesale bandwidth expenses, placement of such devices on our network would indeed take us over the next hurdle which is no doubt coming. God Speed in your development and keep me posted. I'd even be a beta tester on a select repeater site. Regards, Mike At 10:44 PM 11/12/2009, Butch wrote: >... The fact is, that a GOOD bandwidth manager will >allow traffic to flow as fast as possible. One thing to bear in mind, >with regard to my QOS system, is that I don't speed limit ANYTHING. I >simply prioritize traffic so that the time sensitive stuff gets out >first. There is no reason to limit even P2P if there is available >bandwidth. Every class that I give that covers QOS, I restate this one >maxim: "QOS is not simply LIMITING bandwidth. Rather, QOS is about >MANAGING the available bandwidth resources." There is an important >distinction there that your comments don't take into account. > > > >We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near > > >future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. > >Even with sufficient bandwidth available, there are links and network >infrastructure where a good QOS mechanism will benefit the network. > > > >I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per customer, > > >oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > >For many, 4:1 would mean out of business. Even at 10:1, many would not >survive. There are places in this country where bandwidth is still >quite expensive ($200/Meg would sound GOOD to some people). Even at >that price, a 4:1 ratio is $50/customer before you add in ANY costs. >Even 10:1 is to high. It would be NICE if the price for wholesale BW >came down, but too many folks do not have the benefit of reasonable >bandwidth. >-- > >* Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* >* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * >* http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * >* http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * >*
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
> At 03:09 PM 11/12/2009, you wrote: > >I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly > >because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which is, > >to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to use > >these, and have them work fine. > > > >Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which puts > >video ahead of surfing, etc. This is a good point. The fact is, that a GOOD bandwidth manager will allow traffic to flow as fast as possible. One thing to bear in mind, with regard to my QOS system, is that I don't speed limit ANYTHING. I simply prioritize traffic so that the time sensitive stuff gets out first. There is no reason to limit even P2P if there is available bandwidth. Every class that I give that covers QOS, I restate this one maxim: "QOS is not simply LIMITING bandwidth. Rather, QOS is about MANAGING the available bandwidth resources." There is an important distinction there that your comments don't take into account. > >We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near > >future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. Even with sufficient bandwidth available, there are links and network infrastructure where a good QOS mechanism will benefit the network. > >I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per customer, > >oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. For many, 4:1 would mean out of business. Even at 10:1, many would not survive. There are places in this country where bandwidth is still quite expensive ($200/Meg would sound GOOD to some people). Even at that price, a 4:1 ratio is $50/customer before you add in ANY costs. Even 10:1 is to high. It would be NICE if the price for wholesale BW came down, but too many folks do not have the benefit of reasonable bandwidth. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
There is absolutely no way, with my raw bandwidth costs, that I can ONLY oversubscribe 4 or 6 to 1! Isn't DSL normal oversubscription 20:1? Your bandwidth expenses must be really low. Mine are really high. Mike At 03:09 PM 11/12/2009, you wrote: >I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly >because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which is, >to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to use >these, and have them work fine. > >Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which puts >video ahead of surfing, etc. > >I'm just talking about how we're going to keep up with the future... In >2004 when I started, we used between 1 and and 1.5 gigs of data per customer >per month. The last time I measured it, which was a year ago, we were >up to more than 7. > >We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near >future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. I'm nowhere near >as leveraged as some of my competitors in terms of oversubscription, but >that's not an excuse. > >I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per customer, >oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > >What is everyone else planning? > > > > > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I'm counting on my customer usage to increase in step with Moore's Law, a doubling every 18-24 months. If you take a 9.6k modem connection in 1994 which was acceptable and double it every 2 years, you get 2.5 MB in 2010 - and that's what's considered acceptable broadband today. Dave Hulsebus MDK wrote: > I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly > because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which is, > to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to use > these, and have them work fine. > > Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which puts > video ahead of surfing, etc. > > I'm just talking about how we're going to keep up with the future... In > 2004 when I started, we used between 1 and and 1.5 gigs of data per customer > per month. The last time I measured it, which was a year ago, we were > up to more than 7. > > We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near > future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. I'm nowhere near > as leveraged as some of my competitors in terms of oversubscription, but > that's not an excuse. > > I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per customer, > oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. > > What is everyone else planning? > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube... increased data delivery is here to stay.
I've been watching the thread about it with great interest.Partly because I was wondering if anyone was going to try "my solution", which is, to attempt to be able to deliver the bandwidth to the people who want to use these, and have them work fine. Please understand, I'm not talking about a prioritizing scheme, which puts video ahead of surfing, etc. I'm just talking about how we're going to keep up with the future... In 2004 when I started, we used between 1 and and 1.5 gigs of data per customer per month. The last time I measured it, which was a year ago, we were up to more than 7. We're thinking about how we're going to meet the demands of the near future... not managing a shortage of bandwidth delivery. I'm nowhere near as leveraged as some of my competitors in terms of oversubscription, but that's not an excuse. I'm thinking of planning on a future delivery of 4 to 6 meg per customer, oversubscribed to around 4 to 6 to one. What is everyone else planning? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
