Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Closing In On 1Gbps Using DSL

timothy posted about 4 years ago | from the dsl-fuel dept.

Networking 230

angry tapir writes "DSL vendors are using a variety of methods, such as bonding several copper lines, creating virtual ones, and using advanced noise cancellation to increase broadband over copper to several hundred megabits per second. At the Broadband World Forum in Paris, Nokia Siemens Networks became the latest vendor to brag about its copper prowess. It can now transmit speeds of up to 825M bps over a distance of 400 meters."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

400M ? (5, Insightful)

ak_hepcat (468765) | about 4 years ago | (#34032798)

Um. great, how many people are within 2 city blocks of the local wire center?

They need to be working on extending the speeds out past 15,000 feet (5,000M) if they want folks to get excited.

Re:400M ? (2, Informative)

urikkiru (801560) | about 4 years ago | (#34032890)

Me. I've just had vsdl service installed, which utilizes QWest's FTTN(Fiber To The Node) service. The DSLAM is about 2 blocks away from my house. I'm getting 20mbit down/5 mbit up. It's awesome. I see it as the future of DSL, simply bridging the last mile problem from fiber nodes.

Re:400M ? (3, Informative)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033378)

Me. I've just had vsdl service installed, which utilizes QWest's FTTN(Fiber To The Node) service. The DSLAM is about 2 blocks away from my house. I'm getting 20mbit down/5 mbit up. It's awesome. I see it as the future of DSL, simply bridging the last mile problem from fiber nodes.

I'm on U-Verse, and have been very pleased with it. U-Verse is also VDSL, and while it's no gigabit connection it works very well. Somewhat ironically (well, irritatingly) there's an AT&T VRAD right across the street from my house, not fifty feet away. But I'm not connected to it: I'm running from a box down on the main drag, maybe a mile away. I'm currently on the 12 mbit/sec plan (saved a few bucks) but I get about 15 which is fine for me, and when I first got it I was rated at 18 mbit/sec, and was getting a solid 22. Not bad for phone wiring. Plus which AT&T gives me a 2 mbit/sec backchannel, which I find very useful (compared to the 30 or 40 kbit/sec up I got from Comcast, when I was on their 20 mbit/sec plan!) And it's consistent, usable bandwidth in both directions.

Re:400M ? (2, Informative)

berwiki (989827) | about 4 years ago | (#34033442)

I like to bash Comcast as much as the next guy, but 30-40 kbit/sec....exactly when did you switch??
I've had Comcast for over 8 years in 2 different cities and have always maintained faster upload rates than that. By a number of multiples!!

Re:400M ? (1)

berwiki (989827) | about 4 years ago | (#34033496)

**replying to myself. just ran speedtest.net and got 15 mbit down, and 2.6mbit up. I am on the standard internet plan.

30-40kbit, comeon...lets try to be somewhat accurate on this website please.

I can also attest to pulling torrents down at similar speeds, so I do find SpeedTest.net to be an accurate indicator of bandwidth.

Re:400M ? (4, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033736)

**replying to myself. just ran speedtest.net and got 15 mbit down, and 2.6mbit up. I am on the standard internet plan. 30-40kbit, comeon...lets try to be somewhat accurate on this website please. I can also attest to pulling torrents down at similar speeds, so I do find SpeedTest.net to be an accurate indicator of bandwidth.

I am being accurate. And I ran any number of bandwidth checks, even ran them periodically and logged them so I could try to reason with their tech support people. They wouldn't believe me, claiming it was my problem. Not that it mattered: it was like trying to argue semantics with chimpanzees, but it cost them a good customer when U-Verse rolled around (oh, they screwed with me in other areas as well.) I once asked a tech if I was some kind of a test case to see just how much a customer could or would tolerate. He just shrugged. Actually, their on-site guys were pretty sharp, and always tried to give me what I was paying for. It was the phone support and provisioning people that gave me the most grief.

Re:400M ? (1)

Saint Stephen (19450) | about 4 years ago | (#34033764)

Time Warner Cable, Road Runner, payed for the Turbo Package.

30 MB down / 0.5 MB up. I wish I had faster up, can't complain about the down :)

Re:400M ? (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | about 4 years ago | (#34033832)

FIOS... 30/30 :) Join us....

Re:400M ? (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033712)

I like to bash Comcast as much as the next guy, but 30-40 kbit/sec....exactly when did you switch?? I've had Comcast for over 8 years in 2 different cities and have always maintained faster upload rates than that. By a number of multiples!!

Not where I am. This was a few years ago. Then U-Verse moved in, and now I understand that Comcast has improved considerably. This was during the height of their anti-torrent "network management" madness too. Not only was I getting hit with fake RSTs, but they cut the backchannel too, presumably for the same purpose (slowing down torrents.)

Re:400M ? (5, Informative)

Thorfinn.au (1140205) | about 4 years ago | (#34033124)

That means a mini DSLAM in a street pillar connected by fibre to the exchange, this gets the speed they need for the connection without the need to replace that last "mile". Still a significant cost to put in but saves about 80% on a full fibre retro-fit to the house/business

Re:400M ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033152)

This is a typical scenario for VDSL, where the "other" DSL modem is located in some box outside in the street. In Germany, 25% of the households can get 25 or 50 MBit/s connections via VDSL. This new technology could extend the speeds by quite some margin...

Re:400M ? (1)

realityimpaired (1668397) | about 4 years ago | (#34033180)

You'd be surprised how many customers can be covered by that, as others have pointed out.

Personally, I'd be more interested in finding out what they can push to 900m though... that's the limit that my DSL provider seems to be using for deciding who they can sell IPTV to (think ATT's uVerse), and those customers are on a 27mbit VDSL2 profile. Their network seems to be designed to limit distance to the DSLAM to 1km or less whenever possible.

Re:400M ? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033246)

My driveway is more than four hundred meters.

Re:400M ? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 4 years ago | (#34033390)

In places like Korea and China, probably quite a few people.

Re:400M ? (2, Insightful)

Rod Beauvex (832040) | about 4 years ago | (#34033472)

In places like Korea and China, this isn't an issues, as they left behind speeds like this a decade ago.

Re:400M ? (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | about 4 years ago | (#34034010)

>>>how many people are within 2 city blocks of the local wire center?

Most of the Japanese nation, apparently. Japan uses almost nothing but DSL, and they are the world's second fastest country (average net speed). Just because DSL may not work in the mostly-rural US/Canada, doesn't mean it can't work for other cultures.

Too slow (1)

spazdor (902907) | about 4 years ago | (#34032804)

I was going to be the first to comment but I'm more than 500 meters away from my phone company's nearest DSLAM, so I have to wait for them to build another one halfway in between.

Re:Too slow (1)

dattaway (3088) | about 4 years ago | (#34032830)

AT&T puts those boxes on every block in our neighborhoods. Uverse currently runs at 8.5MHz over flat pair here.

Re:Too slow (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 4 years ago | (#34033510)

AT&T puts those boxes on every block in our neighborhoods. Uverse currently runs at 8.5MHz over flat pair here.

Maybe they could twist some speed out of it.

Re:Too slow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34032878)

Thank you for keeping us updated on your present distance to DSLAM condition.

all these... work arounds. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34032812)

just so fat telco's don't have to spend real dollar to upgrade infrastructure.

worthless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34032818)

just replace copper with fiber and stop pushing dead horses. no one is located 400m from a CO. all this technology is worthless for the real world. ADSL2+ cant even do 24Mbps in the real world as its supposed to.

And yet, I'm stuck (4, Insightful)

Night Goat (18437) | about 4 years ago | (#34032820)

Unfortunately, I still find myself with a 2 Mbps download speed tops. This technology needs to be actually utilized! It's killing me to read this stuff and then never see it in action.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1)

angry tapir (1463043) | about 4 years ago | (#34032892)

In Oz we're getting a national fibre network with 1Gbps [idg.com.au] :-) (though there is political argy-bargy about it)

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (5, Funny)

corbettw (214229) | about 4 years ago | (#34032946)

though there is political argy-bargy about it

I think there's something wrong with your new, high-speed network. It seems to be getting lots of line noise coming across as random characters on your Slashdot posts.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (2, Informative)

angry tapir (1463043) | about 4 years ago | (#34032974)

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (4, Funny)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | about 4 years ago | (#34033586)

Interesting.

ABC.net.au huh. That's what, the gold version of ABC radio?

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (2, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 4 years ago | (#34033420)

though there is political argy-bargy about it

I think there's something wrong with your new, high-speed network. It seems to be getting lots of line noise coming across as random characters on your Slashdot posts.

Can't you read Australian? Its not like we speak English here you know.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1)

Eskarel (565631) | about 4 years ago | (#34033204)

I keep hoping this will actually get through, it might give us some sort of future after we run out of stuff to dig out of the ground. Tragically, the opposition, having an obsession with having zero debt and no actual policy of any significance(mind you the government doesn't have an awful lot of policy either) has decided that the NBN is going to be their issue of differentiation. If the current mob don't hold on long enough or make the cancellation policies in the contracts sufficiently horrendous, we probably won't see it in more than a few areas.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1)

jonwil (467024) | about 4 years ago | (#34033730)

The opposition seems not just opposed to the NBN but to anything at all that weakens the near monopoly of Telstra on fixed-line communications (there are a few places where alternatives such as Optus Cable exist but for most of this country, if you want fixed-line phone or internet, you need to go wtih Telstra)

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 4 years ago | (#34033406)

Yeah and cable is being pulled in Brunswick, Victoria only a few k from my home. I know a guy who lives a bit closer to the test area who has been invited to participate in tests.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1, Interesting)

AbRASiON (589899) | about 4 years ago | (#34033440)

Yeah it's costing us FORTY THREE BILLION FUCKING DOLLARS.
We have a water crises, housing crises, we are making all our money from a mineral boom in the west which eventually end and then what?
Seriously, fix this housing issue - I don't give a fuck if it's a 'states' problem - this is vastly more important than having fibre internet.
Yes we need to ditch the copper network but do we need to do it right now? for forty three billion dollars?
How much sustainable energy is currently being produced by this country.

Argh - and no before you say it, I'm not a liberal, not even bloody close.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1)

Falconhell (1289630) | about 4 years ago | (#34033590)

Yep, we do and as far as I am concerned it is money well spent, regardless of other priorities.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033594)

Nobody gives a fuck about your shitty desert country. Keep sucking on the fat kid's cock.

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033654)

Seriously, fix this housing issue - I don't give a fuck if it's a 'states' problem - this is vastly more important than having fibre internet.

Mate, I can build a house for myself, but I cannot drag a working fiber to my home.
This is to say: I don't give a dam' about the housing problem (because I can take care), fix the internet access in outback and I will move there (because I can telecommute).

Re:And yet, I'm stuck (1)

froggymana (1896008) | about 4 years ago | (#34033648)

I wish I had that. Right now I'm stuck with a terrible connection to frontier (was on Verizon DSL) and its the worst service I have ever had. I get a 1mbit down, 384kbits up and I'm usually stuck with a 600-700ms latency.

And here in the US (0)

TheOddOne (208550) | about 4 years ago | (#34032826)

We still have to bend over, take it, and say thank you to our local (well, heck... AT&T) phone companies for the PRIVILEGE of having 8megabit/s downstream....
Competition anyone? or are we just such mindless sheep that "it's good enough, 'cause my granddaddy only had the pony express"

Argh....

Re:And here in the US (1)

countSudoku() (1047544) | about 4 years ago | (#34032872)

It gets even better. For about $40/month I'm getting a 10Mbps DSL. So, for 825Mbps I'm looking at paying $3300.00/month. What a fucking value! Suddenly, paying $.10 for a text message seems reasonable. I won't pay it, but more reasonable for sure.

Re:And here in the US (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34032900)

And with a 25 GB cap, you'll get several seconds on full-on internet!

Re:And here in the US (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033032)

Actually, in the US you can get DSL from a variety of providers, not just the company that owns the last mile.

You typically pay a little rent to the owner of the last mile, but otherwise you don't use verizon or AT&T or whoever your local phone co is.

Re:And here in the US (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033456)

We still have to bend over, take it, and say thank you to our local (well, heck... AT&T) phone companies for the PRIVILEGE of having 8megabit/s downstream.... Competition anyone? or are we just such mindless sheep that "it's good enough, 'cause my granddaddy only had the pony express"

Argh....

I guess I'm one of the lucky ones. I have both Comcast (blecch!), U-Verse and SBC DSL in my area. Consequently (having tried the others and suffered) I have U-Verse running at 12-mbit/sec for $45/month. I could add a few bucks and go back up to the 18 mbit tier, but this is sufficient for my needs (the occasional torrent and a girlfriend who loves streaming movies.)

So yeah, I certainly agree with you. Competition is good. I used to use that when I had Comcast: when dealing with their (ahem!) "customer service" I would bring up the dreaded "A" or "S" words in order to get a better level of support. Just threaten to switch and you get escalated fast, I found. Not that, at the time, I could actually get SBC DSL or U-Verse, but I figured what they didn't know might actually get me what I was paying for. They still managed to jerk me around on a number of different levels anyway. So far I've no complaints about U-Verse. I admit though, if I were in a U-Verse-only area I might be singing a different tune. But that's all the more reason to let these outfits slug it out for our money.

400m! (1)

garcia (6573) | about 4 years ago | (#34032838)

The distance between my house and the nearest telco connection for DSL is about 500m. There is only one housing development closer and they were built long after my home went up. My speeds were twice the advertised rates due to this close distance as they were ramping up bandwidth so as to hit the minimum by the end of the line. That advertised rate? 2000/256.

Hey, I mean it's great an all that they are doing research to come up with faster DSL usage. Unfortunately while the speeds can be theoretically (or even practically) possible, we're still bottlenecked by price and desire of the telcos to push speeds out that fast.

After inquiring about business class and faster speeds, I wanted 768k upstream at least, and being told they don't offer anything that fast nor did they plan on it at any time in the near future I had to go to business class cable. While the business class cable is rocking fast, the downtimes are more frequent and the latency is unpredictable (well, it's predictably going to be poor during peak use times).

How about we first pass some legislation which forces the telcos and cable companies to give back to the consumers what they took when they built out their infrastructure all those years ago to give us wicked fast speeds we have yet to see--and no, 50mbit "speed boost" for 15 seconds doesn't count.

Only 825 Mbps? (1)

the_humeister (922869) | about 4 years ago | (#34032840)

I can do better with my carload of 3 TB hard drives! Latency's a little slower, but no asked about that.

Re:Only 825 Mbps? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033114)

Carload?

Heck, you could run with a single 3TB harddrive in your pocket and still beat that DSL thingie.

Re:Only 825 Mbps? (2, Funny)

froggymana (1896008) | about 4 years ago | (#34033660)

Never underestimate the bandwidth of SSDs on ostriches..

how exactly does 'creating virtual ones' work? (2, Interesting)

Surt (22457) | about 4 years ago | (#34032852)

Someone please explain how this works. Is this some bizarre artifact of the signaling protocol, such that the only way to overcome a design flaw is to use some incomprehensible technique treating physical wires as virtual wires? How can that possibly be better than just natively signaling faster on the wires?

Re:how exactly does 'creating virtual ones' work? (3, Funny)

Dan East (318230) | about 4 years ago | (#34032954)

They can do this using two or more pairs. Most likely it has to do with harmonics, impedance, alloys and compositions and things with molecular structures that my primitive intellect cannot understand.

DSL Phantom Mode (1)

rsborg (111459) | about 4 years ago | (#34032966)

Yes, very interesting and realistically just a way for the big telcos to not have to upgrade the wire and instead upgrade the modem and equip at the CO. Take a look at the graphic here [gigaom.com] .

Looks like today's announcement is the extension of existing work last year, but using 4 copper wires (ie, 2 phone lines).

What's interesting is noone mentions latency, and whether this actually will increase responsiveness or just throughput.

Direct link to graphic (5, Informative)

rsborg (111459) | about 4 years ago | (#34032984)

Re:Direct link to graphic (1)

TerranFury (726743) | about 4 years ago | (#34033802)

Thanks; that was interesting.

Re:DSL Phantom Mode (1)

Surt (22457) | about 4 years ago | (#34033080)

Interesting. 4 wires to 3 pairs worth of bandwidth. It seems like it should be possible to signal at 4C2 = 6 pair worth of bandwidth if you were signaling optimally.

Re:DSL Phantom Mode (1)

TerranFury (726743) | about 4 years ago | (#34033796)

I think the way to look at it is this (linear algebra): Your input to the four wires, at each time, is a 4-vector. The common mode is another 4-vector, (1,1,1,1); that picks up a lot of noise. Nevertheless, you have the whole orthogonal complement to (1,1,1,1) to work with. The vectors (1-1,0,0), (0,0,1,-1), and (1,1,-1,1) -- the two pairs and the "virtual pair," respectively -- form an orthogonal basis for this subspace. So you represent all data as linear combinations of those three vectors.

You might notice, though, that there's nothing really special about this basis; any isometry (rotation/reflection) and/or scaling of these three vectors would also work. For instance, the vectors (1,-1,1,-1), (1,-1,-1,1), (1,1,-1,-1) (which, together with the common mode (1,1,1,1), is the Hadamard basis [wikipedia.org] in R^4), or a DCT basis [wikipedia.org] , both work.

Re:how exactly does 'creating virtual ones' work? (2, Funny)

BulletMagnet (600525) | about 4 years ago | (#34033030)

Someone please explain how this works. Is this some bizarre artifact of the signaling protocol, such that the only way to overcome a design flaw is to use some incomprehensible technique treating physical wires as virtual wires? How can that possibly be better than just natively signaling faster on the wires?

Think of it as HyperThreading for the Tubez....

Re:how exactly does 'creating virtual ones' work? (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | about 4 years ago | (#34033090)

trunking?

Noise (3, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about 4 years ago | (#34032854)

"advanced noise cancellation"

So that rules out most of the internet and email then, eh?

Re:Noise (1)

corbettw (214229) | about 4 years ago | (#34032958)

No, but good luck reaching idle [slashdot.org] .

Re:Noise (1)

T Murphy (1054674) | about 4 years ago | (#34033474)

So that rules out most of the internet and email then, eh?

RTFA- this was in Paris, not Canada.

Re:Noise (2, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | about 4 years ago | (#34033616)

It can be both [google.com] .

Re:Noise (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 4 years ago | (#34033936)

Maybe not that drastic, but you probably won't see the comment section under Youtube videos any more.

4 pairs (4, Interesting)

Dan East (318230) | about 4 years ago | (#34032924)

They are using 4 pairs to achieve that 825 Mbps speed.

Note that 1000BASE-T also uses 4 pairs to achieve 1000Mbit over a shorter 100 meters. I'm curious what maximum range 1000BASE-T will actually work at (100m is guaranteed), and if it were to work at 400m, what the bandwidth would be.

Re:4 pairs (2, Insightful)

Starteck81 (917280) | about 4 years ago | (#34033040)

They are using 4 pairs to achieve that 825 Mbps speed.

Note that 1000BASE-T also uses 4 pairs to achieve 1000Mbit over a shorter 100 meters. I'm curious what maximum range 1000BASE-T will actually work at (100m is guaranteed), and if it were to work at 400m, what the bandwidth would be.

Yes they're using 4 pairs but it's not the same thing. You're forgetting that they are working with cat 3 copper cabling not cat 5 or 6.

Re:4 pairs (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033164)

The post your replying to never indicated they were the same thing other than they both used 4 pairs. Are you a bully or can't you read?

Re:4 pairs (0)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033498)

The post your replying to never indicated they were the same thing other than they both used 4 pairs. Are you a bully or can't you read?

I dunno, I thought Starteck81 was making a reasonable point. And it's worse than that, even ... in older installations you can be lucky if you have Cat 3.

Re:4 pairs (3, Informative)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about 4 years ago | (#34033344)

I doubt most of the copper POTS wiring out there is cat 3. The phone wire used in most homes is the old 4 conductor cable that did not have twisted pairs. Nowadays I believe most of the four conductor phone cable is indeed twisted and meets CAT 3 standards. I bought some at home depot not too long ago and it was 4 conductor CAT 3 twisted pair with RED/GREEN and BLACK/YELLOW pairs. The non twisted pair might still be sold so no guarantee there.

And that is just the home wiring. Who knows what crusty old non twisted pair cable lurks between homes and the central office.

And getting back to the grand parent poster:
1000BT is an IEEE 802.3-2008 standard. It not only defines the data layer (how the bits are transmitted) but also the physical link which defines the electrical interface.
DSL is different than the 802.3 standard both at the data link layer and the physical layer. So its an apples to oranges comparison. Gigabit is Ethernet and DSL and other broadband technologies are completely different.

Re:4 pairs (1)

CyprusBlue113 (1294000) | about 4 years ago | (#34033446)

I'll answer that, its called untwisted pulp in the boonies. Good luck running *SL of any variant over it

Re:4 pairs (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 4 years ago | (#34033962)

And you just hit that nail RIGHT on the head as to why this stuff ultimately sucks, thanks. The people in the dead center of most towns they have choices while everyone else? Lucky if they can get anything at all. Ultimately all the phone crap that much of which is older than Elvis needs to go, instead of this stretching and beating that dead horse for every last inch. Otherwise we are gonna end up with another IPV4 situation where by the time we realize we need to get on the ball everything is gonna be so far behind it'll cost 20 times more and be a giant mess.

While this is great for those right by the hub, there is a HELL of the USA out there, and most of it is frankly falling apart with seriously old junk lines. Sooner or later we are gonna have to accept we need a nationwide broadband plan or fall behind the rest of the world even further. All those connections is worth a hell of a lot more than just for watching youtube. There is eCommerce, new markets and new businesses, eLearning and a thousand other uses. But to compete we are gonna have to step up to the plate and realize something this big needs actual planning and execution, not just hoping AT&T or one of the other providers will actually build all this for us.

Great... (2, Funny)

BulletMagnet (600525) | about 4 years ago | (#34032936)

825Mbs @ 400m ... I'd rather not live INSIDE the CO, thanks....

Re:Great... (2, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033506)

825Mbs @ 400m ... I'd rather not live INSIDE the CO, thanks....

Well, the heat coming off the racks of DSLAMs and other equipment will save on your winter heating bill.

Does. Not. Mean. Shit. (1)

blair1q (305137) | about 4 years ago | (#34032968)

I have the same piece of copper that they gave my house when it was built 20 years ago.

They are not willing to dig just to upgrade it to give me gigabit DSL. If they were, they'd just drop in fiber and get the massive headroom that the barely-utilized bandwidth of glass wires gives you, coupled to easily-upgradable yet current state-of-the-art lasery bits on the end.

So I'm using the TV cable for 30 mbps broadband right now, and wishing that the Corporation Commission would use its power to dissolve the LATA's monopoly so another can walk into the neighborhood and string that glass.

As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (2, Insightful)

blahbooboo (839709) | about 4 years ago | (#34033024)

I briefly had ADSL and it was crap compared to cable modem. People forget the ASYMMETRIC part of DSL. In my usage I really felt this when using the net. Lots of lags etc. I switched to a cable modem and it was night and day better in my usage. Granted this was many years ago so perhaps it's better now?

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (4, Insightful)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 4 years ago | (#34033100)

most cable connections are asymmetric too, and my experience has been that around here the warez monkeys love their cable modems, so i get consistently better gaming latency out of my 1.5 / .75 ADSL than my brother gets at my parent's house on a 20 something / whatever cable connection. sure he can download a game in the time it takes to microwave some dinner, but online play is worse, and less predictable. i am within 10ms of the same latencies every day

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 4 years ago | (#34033464)

His ISP just needs a beating. I'm on cable, and just checked the ping time to a big local newspaper.

rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.762/7.914/14.891/2.623 ms

That I can reach another server in less than 5ms means it's not the cable tech that is the problem, it's overloaded or oversold systems somewhere else.

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | about 4 years ago | (#34033622)

So, your brother that lives with your parents and downloads games ... does he by any chance live in the basement? And what's his Slashdot user name?

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033248)

Looks like somebody doesn't know what asymmetric means. Almost all residential service is Asymmetrical.

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (2, Informative)

realityimpaired (1668397) | about 4 years ago | (#34033316)

An ADSL line is divided up into multiple 4KHz bands, each one carrying either 33.6kbit up, or 33.6kbit down. That's what the "Asymmetric" means: each band is either upload or download, but not both. Cable is exactly the same. On a normal ADSL1 connection, the bottom portion of the frequencies will be set aside for upload, and the top will be set aside for download, and you can definitely upload at the same time as download. Usually you can't get nearly as fat a pipe as you can with cable (though in some areas, DSL actually offers faster speeds), but for most use of the Internet you're limited by latency, not bandwidth, because the first 82kb of any file you download on the 'net is transmitted during the TCP Slow Start phase of the connection, and most of the files on the 'net are smaller than 82kb.

Despite the added overhead of using an ATM frame to encapsulate your ethernet packets, DSL usually offers much lower latency than cable, because of differences in the way the information is encoded end to end. The difference... for casual surfing and online gaming, DSL is better. For downloading large files, Cable is better. Of course, your latency on ADSL depends a lot on the type of error correction your ISP is using... whether you're on an interleave, a partial interleave, or a fast weave.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-start [wikipedia.org]

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | about 4 years ago | (#34033372)

Asymmetric != Asynchronous

Re:As long as it's Adsl I don't want it (3, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | about 4 years ago | (#34033520)

I briefly had ADSL and it was crap compared to cable modem. People forget the ASYMMETRIC part of DSL. In my usage I really felt this when using the net. Lots of lags etc. I switched to a cable modem and it was night and day better in my usage. Granted this was many years ago so perhaps it's better now?

Interesting. You'll find that most gamers MUCH prefer DSL over cable, since you're heading into a central hub and get right on to the fiber, rather than sharing a typically oversubscribed local node.

I currently have VDSL, fiber to the VRAD, and it's the best I've ever had for gaming. That kinda surprises me, actually.

This is Frick'n great.. (1)

thestudio_bob (894258) | about 4 years ago | (#34033066)

And yet with AT&T's awesome service, I can only get 768Kbps. Thank goodness they have great customer support... [sarcasm]

Docsis 3 (3, Interesting)

papasui (567265) | about 4 years ago | (#34033094)

I'm deploying docsis 3.0 networks today that can reach 200 mbit today. Only real limitation is the money to upgrade the gear and shifting around tv channels to free frequencies. Expect to see major pushes in 2011 by all carriers.

Re:Docsis 3 (2, Insightful)

misexistentialist (1537887) | about 4 years ago | (#34033176)

Very expensively priced bandwidth tiers should fix the funding problem!

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

korean.ian (1264578) | about 4 years ago | (#34033886)

It hasn't done so yet....:)

Re:Docsis 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033212)

What's the upstream on that?

I have 7/1 ADSL and I'm quite happy with it, but the latency to the first ISP hop is ~30ms which is a bummer. I really just want more upstream bandwidth. DSL is near the only choice if you want a static IP as well.

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

ndogg (158021) | about 4 years ago | (#34033364)

Most cable companies will sell you a static IP on a business account. A lot of telcos have the same policy.

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 4 years ago | (#34033490)

Most cable companies will sell you a static IP on a business account. A lot of telcos have the same policy.

I tried that with Optus in Australia. It was no-go. They weren't interested in giving me a static IP so I moved to ADSL from comcen.

Re:Docsis 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033458)

On Comcast in the boonies, I'm currently reading 18.84 Mbps down / 4.40 Mbps up, 25 ms ping and though it is a dynamic IP, I do host some services on it utilizing a dynamic DNS provider, and it has not changed since March. Having a dynamic IP is not the issue it used to be since the root DNS servers were updated to propagate changes within 5 minutes.

My best reading was 35.32/11.05 with 12 ms ping.

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

rekenner (849871) | about 4 years ago | (#34033934)

You're confusing bandwidth and the actual *time* it takes to get from point A to point B. While bandwidth *can* matter, it's the intermediary router bandwidth, not your connection's bandwidth. Even if your pipe had upgraded bandwidth, it wouldn't change the latency. (Hell, if nothing changed in the intermediary hardware, and everyone got an upgraded connection, latency would *increase*)

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

frozentier (1542099) | about 4 years ago | (#34033534)

On my own cable system (Time Warner), I'd much rather get rid of many of the "junk" channels and dedicate the freed-up bandwidth to internet.

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

jasonwc (939262) | about 4 years ago | (#34033606)

I'm currently signed up for Comcast's new 50/10 Docsis 3.0 connection. I get a constant 50 Mbit on Bittorrent with bursts up to 70 Mbit. Upload bursts to 20 Mbit and provides reliable 10 Mbit speeds. Not bad for cable. I am told that there are no data caps in my area but I won't know for sure for a few months :P.

However, FiOS still has better upload speeds and no download caps. Verizon offers 35/35 (around 43/35 in practice) in most of its service areas for $100/mo. or $115 with its ultimate HD package.

Re:Docsis 3 (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | about 4 years ago | (#34033784)

Comcast is moving towards caps of 250GB/month in all markets. At least I get a snazzy meter in my Comcast account page to see how much of my quota I've used.

It seems that.... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033238)

Telcos are trying to speed up their bandwidth to provide what cable the company already provides - video. Cable companies are trying to decrease the bandwidth needed to provide video so they can provide faster internet. Either way, I would prefer an internet connection over video service. Whatever technology is in place, I don't think it will be very long before TVs get content from a Cat-5 (or 6, or whatnot) connection over a coax one.

Multiple phonelines (1)

munky99999 (781012) | about 4 years ago | (#34033262)

Their methodology requires multiple phone lines bonded and being used with parity in order obtain these speeds. Most houses dont have multiple phone lines. Which means they have to send techs out to install said extra wires. WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU BE SO STUPID?? Send the techs to install fiber. Now you are future proofed to 10g speeds AT LEAST. Verizon's gpon can deliver 10g right to your house. I'm sure in a decade when gigabit becomes a sluggish speed... 10g can EASILY be deployed. The next step after that is also just as easy to deploy.

Re:Multiple phonelines (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 4 years ago | (#34033508)

Their methodology requires multiple phone lines bonded and being used with parity in order obtain these speeds.

Most houses dont have multiple phone lines

Actually every house I have been in (this is in Australia) has had at least two pairs. My current house has two separate cables, each with two pair. Though that doesn't mean the infrastructure can deliver two pairs end to end.

Re:Multiple phonelines (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about 4 years ago | (#34033922)

2 pairs with one crushed or in use or shared or so far from the exchange or on a rim. Two pairs sounds great, but how much is of use for this in real life?
Best to roll out optical.

Great... (2, Funny)

FridayBob (619244) | about 4 years ago | (#34033318)

That means I'll soon have 825M bps down and 1M bps up to look forward to.

Sigh. (1)

debrain (29228) | about 4 years ago | (#34033576)

I'm now living in a major urban metropolis and I've got the same crappy DSL internet that I had in rural Canada in 1995. 5mbps. On that basis I conclude that whatever the powers-that-be are doing to stimulate innovation, it's been a failure. Utterly. Sigh.

Re:Sigh. (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | about 4 years ago | (#34033628)

And I'm in a rural area in the middle of nowhere and we have 5mbps over cable. Sigh.

Get rid of copper! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033592)

All this sounds like an argument Tony Abbott and his crew will use against the NBN [smh.com.au] in Australia. If it were up to them we'd all be using the "reliable" 3G network here for our internets...

http://nerdsforallcom.socialgo.com/home.html (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033602)

http://nerdsforallcom.socialgo.com/home.html

The we can exceed the AUP in just a few minutes. (1)

ydrol (626558) | about 4 years ago | (#34033804)

Most ISPs like to sell speed and hope that you dont use it much.

Well, that's nice.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#34033980)

People who live within slingshot range of the telco can get faster speeds...how about better tech to get any sort of half ass decent DSL further than a couple of miles? There are millions of us out here who don't live in the wilds of alaska or anything like that, just normal rural areas or suburbia, who can't get jack shit for any sort of broadband except really flaky pseudo "broadband" from various fail wireless schemes like satellite and "wifi" type stuff. The only other option is a restricted telco "data plan" with ridiculous caps and "tethering" is banned and so on..

Yes, I read the article, faster speeds at still dismal ranges on copper. I mean, WTF, nations over yonder in euro land can provide it way out in the sticks, and still "make profit", but for some reason it "won't work" here. Effen telco cartels...

How about "no food for YOU" if you live more than two thousand meters from a real farm? I bet we'd get broadband the next day with a similar arrangement.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?