[89716] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T: 15 Mbps Internet connections "irrelevant"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Todd Vierling)
Mon Apr 3 00:42:13 2006
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:41:45 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0604010820410.26621@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> "In the foreseeable future, having a 15 Mbps Internet capability is irrelevant
> because the backbone doesn't transport at those speeds," he told the
> conference attendees. Stephenson said that AT&T's field tests have shown "no
> discernable difference" between AT&T's 1.5 Mbps service and Comcast's 6 Mbps
> because the problem is not in the last mile but in the backbone."
Regardless of the chitter-chatter about IPTV in this thread, I can say
pretty definitively that the 6Mbps I am getting via DSL (I'll get to cable
next) is much faster in practice than 1.5Mbps DSL. I most certainly can
sustain ~4Mbps for a single stream video feed, with the remaining headroom
still mostly usable.
Now, when you get into a shared channelized medium like cable (Comcast),
there is a difference in the backing network, and congestion is a much
bigger threat. That said, I was using Comcast when they went 3Mbps, and at
the time, I could sustain 2.4Mbps downstream from an external ASN with no
problem. I still have MRTG graphs showing it.
FUD, indeed. I have no idea how to sustain 2.4Mbps on a 1.5Mbps DSL
connection, but if someone here knows how, I'm all ears!
(...The frustrating part about those figures is that I might as well have
FTTH, because my DSLAM is less than 50 feet from my premises -- it's in a
green-monster canister on the corner of the block. The modem says I *could*
attain better than 9Mbps down and 2Mbps up, were such service available to
consumer low-lifes like myself. <g>)
--
-- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>