Slashdot Mirror
New Look at ADSL2
genrader writes "broadbandreports.com just posted a news article which had an interesting story about the new ADSL2, which should be approved in 2003. They say it should be backward compatible with current hardware. It seems pretty interesting. ISP-Planet has the featured in-depth look at it, so you might want to see if it is of any intrest to you."
Plus the ability to provide faster service to closer customers , and the ability to bond channels together to get higher bandwidth for business customers ... well heck , who needs a T-1 when you can get superior bandwidth for less ?
I for one am excited that the technology is maturing.
The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist.
I just signed up for a 12Mbit line here in Tokyo.
(I'm upgrading from 8Mbit - the 12 is actually a cheaper plan.)
Regular DSL, IIRC. Used the 30 year old wiring in my place, no problem.
Even on the 8, I've had Internet downloads stream in at better than 1500K.
A year or two ago, Japan was *way* behind in internet access - I was using ISDN (cheap here) and I was a bit of a rare case. Most people used dialup.
So what's really holding DSL back over there? I'd bet the reasons were more economic than engineering.
Just a thought,
Jim
-- My Weblog.
I mean honestly, I am sure that someone here can explain why DSL is fundamentally going to be limited as far as bandwidth and range goes. Copper is a very lossy media, and we already have better stuff out there like fiber optic, and even fiberless communications versus mutliplexed wavelengths (eg Lucent) or even things such as wireless LAN's (although with a more limited range).
The point is that what we need is something that is a complete departure from the paradigm of cable and DSL modems. That is the only thing that is going to allow us to ALL have broadband, and for the cheap, at very high speeds. I have no idea what it will be, though I think it will have to be some wireless technology. Until then, I think we are going to be stuck in this rut of a small number of broadband users who get to use a flawed and unsatisfactory system (except for those that just surf and check e-mail) due to speed constraints and whatnot.
Any ideas of a new system, or how long one might take to engineer? I'm guessing around 20-35 years.
This is as ridiculous as AMD releasing processors in 66mhz increments in the days of 2ghz+ processors. I can't get DSL because I'm about 5,000ft long of the limit. I can't get wireless without having a HUGE antenna because of the tree line, and no one is offering peer-to-peer wireless yet (if that would even help). I can't get cable because AT&T INSISTS that their services aren't available where I live, despite me receiving monthly bills from them and my neighbor 30 yards away having digital cable. The only thing I CAN get, besides 22k dialup, is 144k IDSL for $140/mo. Screw that. I don't even live in the sticks/boonies.
What the hell is going on? 50kbps and 600ft extra? And it's taken them how long to figure out a way to get that? Where's the innovation? Where's the "space-age", "21st century" technology? We can get a man to the moon and a robot to Mars, but we can't get a decent internet connection to ME!
I would imagine that telcos will start doing more of what they did for my neighborhood - install a box (looks like a large refridgerator on its side) that essentially functions as a mini Central Office. So even though we're 20,000 feet from the actual CO, we get DSL connections that are under 2,000 feet.
The telcos know they have to do something before they get their clocks cleaned by the cable companies and wireless T-1 providers (notwithstanding the limitations of those technologies - they do kick ass on price, which is all 85% of the market cares about). Expect to see more of these remote-CO things (pardon the technical description) in the future....
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
One of the problems with DSL is the cost. With the decrease of cost, you have an increase in usage and an increase of encouragement to expand coverage.
Hopefully ADSL2 may decrease cost for ADSL.
Fight Spammers!
Ha. I had that at first too, until the neighbors started yearning for the cool new thing. Now my ssh connections drop at least twice a day because there are 30 second periods where 0 packets get through. It's so annoying that I was inspired to write a graphical ping so I can see in real-time just how much my connection sucks. For instance, the connection just decided to punish me with 8 seconds of silence for complaining about it here.
Okay, so ADSL2 may double the rate, but whats so gr8 about it anyway? The ISPs get have mostly got a fiber backbone and atleast the small ones pay by data traffic rather than by time, i.e, a fixed price per month. So effectively that translates into no price cut for an average consumer. I mean how many of us are really feeling constrained by the max rate of ADSL1? How many of us use that kind of bandwidth anyway?? So, yes, this technology maybe good for the ISPs but I dont think that the average Joe will notice any change.
What's under yellowstone?
The problem isn't really in the engineering or design, but the roll out.
The most significant bit of any telco's network is 'the last mile' where the copper leaves the exchange and gets to your office or home.
There is one heck of a lot of these local loops, and replacing them with another media is no small job. So the solutions that will succeed and can be rolled out in a reasonable time and at a cost the consumers will pay has to be ones that can make the best use of the established transmission media that goes past your house.
Now this means cable modems and ADSL.
Wireless has its own set of problems if it is to become ubiqoutous - do we have the bandwidth when we are all sharing it - maybe we can have local sub exchanges that feed signal to our houses by fibre?
I don't know the answers, but anything that involves replacing the media to every customers home is going to take a long period of time and money to roll out. Replacing the local loop physical media will not in anyway make broadband cheap, more likely the opposite.
Right now you can get fast reliable connections by buying in a T1 leased line - but most people can't because you have to bear the cost of the telco installing the dedicated line yourself.
We have plenty of technologies right now that can bring mega bit levels to your home - if we were starting from scratch.
I'm not convinced that there is enough frequency spectrum to get mega bit broadband wireless to all. My money would be on a hybrid structure pushing the fibre networks further out to your house as and when networks are updated, and using local nodes and short copper runs like cable modems, or ideally push fibre into your homes in metropolitan areas, moving to wireless links where replacing physical transmission media become cost ineffective.
I for one am happy to hear any news about expanding DSL service area and raising bandwidth to the customer.
That said, it is now time for the Bob-o-Matic gripe and brag:
What is the problem, PacBell?!?
Why does it take over a month to activate a DSL line (everything was self-installed within 10 minutes of receiving the package), and cost $50 per month for 384kbps down/128kbps up service?
I am stationed in the Republic of Korea now, and my DSL service was delivered/installed/activated/tested within 3 days of my phone line activation!, less than one week after I first contacted Korea Telecom.
Here is the real kicker: My combined phone/ISP service bill here is LESS THAN MY SLOW-ASS PacBell ISP service alone!
Now, the brag: Kornet MegaPass Premium service is 8mbps down, and about 1mbps up, for (at most) 43,000 Won per month, or less than US$40. BTW I downloaded RH 8.0 from a Japanese mirror at an average of 26 minutes per iso. Also, I am known to fill the 60GB DeathStar in less than 4 days after it dies... Thanks, Kazaa-lite!
I work for a telco. We run ADSL and ADSL+. Our customers negotiate and run full speed (all the pair can handle). To control the bandwidth they use, we shape their traffic as they enter and leave the network.
As for the speeds of the two technologies . . . ADSL (G.DMT) will link at 6Kft or less and give anywhere from 60-80% of link speed. I am currently running on a 900kbps/7600kbps link and get 800kbps/6000kpbs of real throughput. ADSL+ will link at 900kbps/9000kbps or greater and will get 800kbps/8000kbps or greater. But, all these conditions are subject to proper pair qualification and distance limitations.
Pretty much anything below 6kft will be wonderful. From 6-12kft there will be a 10-20% decrease in speed. From 12-15kft there will be a 20-30% decrease in speed. From 15kft on out we would switch the customer to G.Lite (1000kbps/4000kbps) which will run out to 24kft at some proportion of the rated speed. At 24kft a costomer will likely get 256kbps/512kbps . . . which is nothing to sneeze at. We have a neighboring telco which has a G.Lite customer at 27kft of 19 ga. copper running better than 256kbps/512kbps (although I have not heard any results of throughput tests on that link).
Remember, not all telcos are created equal.