Slashdot Mirror
Why Are T1 Lines Still Expensive?
badfrog asks: "Over the last 10 years, DSL and cable modem has upped its speed (although in some instances only slightly) and dropped its price. However, the price of a T1 has stayed almost exactly the same. If you had asked me 10 years ago, I would have predicted any geek that wanted to would have fiber or their own T1 line to the house by now. What is with this sad state of affairs that a 'business class' 1.544Mbit connection is hundreds of dollars more than a 6Mbit cable connection? Is it a legitimate case that a high upload rate should increase cost so significantly?"
Why do you even ask this question?
The difference is clear. A T1 guarantees you your bandwidth. Both DSL and Cable do not. You usually get it, but that is only because others only use a fraction of what they are "allowed" to. Look in your TOS, you'll see that they do not guarantee the speeds, they are "averages". So essentialy, your ISP pays for 100Mbps and sells 5000Mbps to 1000 customers (Each 5Mbps, but in reality they get only 0.1Mbps). (Numbers pulled out of my you know what). If everyone would start downloading like crazy at the same time you'd get congestions. The fact is that it's not the bandwith that is interesting with DSL/Cable but the fact that it is always-on.
When DSL started here, it was only 256kbps/64kbps for quite a lot of money. We made the calculation compared to our average ISDN Internet usage (that was per minute) and the price would be the same or slightly higher. Sure, the higher speed was appealing, but the fact that we knew we payed a flat-fee for unlimited interet usage and always-on made it more attractive. That was why we were early adopters, not because it was faster. After all the ISDN 64kbps was plenty of fast back then. It did change our internet habits though: checking the email in business hours was a no-no. We started to check our mail after waking up ;-)
I heared that in Italy you can get a T1 for cheap, but I'm sure it comes with no guarantee.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
It's not the speed.
With a cable modem or ADSL line you'll have no SLA. It'll be "if it breaks, we'll fix it when we get around to it, possibly within three working days". With a T1 or similar line you'll get a service level agreement for a guaranteed rapid fix. If you get DOSsed, you won't just get thrown off the service, they'll work with you to stop the DOS attack etc.
Also, contention - with ADSL or cable you'll be sharing that bandwidth with perhaps as many as 50 other users. A T1 will be uncontended.
It's also expected that T1 users will be heavy bandwidth users, which is reflected in the price.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Well, maybe not guaranteed, but for some security requirements, point-to-point physical security is important. In those cases, business class DSL can't make such a claim, since there are many points along the way where it goes through a CO or somesuch thing. That's what the up-front cost is for: to run a wire from your network location to the main trunk without going through anything else. Admittedly, they don't need to charge so much for the actual network service once the line is run. I don't think that there's really much additional work to support the T1 line once the connection to the trunk is made; it's straight TCP/IP from there on out.
"Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully
Most people in the US are stunned to realize that broadband access is often cheaper and faster in "foreign countries" with greater penetration. Most of my fellow Americans don't realize that compared to not just the UK, France, and Japan, but places like South Korea, we're getting rooked.
Leave the gun, take the cannoli -- Clemenza, The Godfather
I have a few customers with T1s, and they're paying about six times what they'd pay for my company's wireless service (which would be a faster connection to boot). Part of that is the fact that I have to pay the telco for that T1, obviously, but even without that they're still paying a LOT more than they would otherwise.
However, it's a dedicated connection from us to them. It's not a shared connection at any point (as most cable modem and wireless networks, and some weird DSL networks, are). Until it leaves my network entirely, I do my darnedest to ensure their traffic gets high priority within my network (with QOS and other similar voodoo). There's a dedicated router here, just for them, with a spare ready to be swapped over in about five minutes if the hardware should fail. (Cisco 2500s are down to about twenty bucks on eBay, why NOT have spares?)
As an aside, every T1 comes with my cell number, which means you get pretty much the best service I'm able to provide. Because I really don't want to be bugged after hours.
It's not the upload capacity, at least for my customers; they follow normal "small-business" traffic patterns where uploads are about 10% or so of their traffic.
Maybe some of it is just the novelty/prestige of saying "I have a T1," which sounds impressive because, hey, a lot of folks don't even know what that means. But most of it, I'd wager, is the fact that it's a dedicated, reliable connection (my customers' T1s have about two hours of downtime in the last four years), and sometimes that extra nine is worth it.
The T1 I purchased in 1996 was $2000 roughly from Sprint. Of that $600 was GTE/Verizon's charge for the loop (2 pair). In 1999 I upgraded to a pair of T1 circuits (bonded) the cost was $2300 total, with $300 per loop to Verizon roughly. Then we split our connection and the Sprint T1 of 2002 cost $975 with $180 of that for the Verizon local loop. So the T1 cost has been dropping. But now the product is not in as much demand. In 2005 when we were moving our ISP to a place where bandwidth was cheap (10-60 USD per megabit/sec depending on the provider we'd chose, we reneted space plus got bandwidth and lost the overhead for the redundant power and HVAC (bundled with the space)), then Sprint offered $655 for a T1.
So T1s have been steadily dropping in price. The local loop charges however are moving upwards as clean copper is getting scarcer in some regions and the install of the box to take fiber and supply a T1 has to be accounted for in the local loop charges now. I have seen deals for $395 all in on the web however. And in the case of Sprint with had a committed information rate of the full T1. The CIR clause will cost a bit on your contract as well.
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
Saying that T1 prices haven't changed is crazy. Of course they have changed! 7 years ago my company was paying over $1000 per month for half a t1 (before broadband was really available). Since then we've gone to full T1 for $800 and now a dual bonded T1 at 3mb up and down is at that price. Speakeasy has full T1 for $300 per month. Of course its more expensive as its a guaranteed service , a loop must be brought to your location, and equipment like the dsu is spendy. But saying that the price hasn't changed is ridiculous. The price has changed more than broadband prices in my opinion.
Is that DS-1s are highly flexible. You can provision a DS-1 a number of different ways. For example you could do 4 channels for data (256k) 12 for voice, and 6 as a private link to another office. Well, the hardware on the back end for all that costs money. That's there regardless of if you want it or not. If not, it's not a DS-1 line. Same reason ISDN is expensive. It's not the exact same and isn't as many channels, but it is a similar technology. Even if all you want an ISDN line for is 128k Internet, you are still getting everything else that one implies, which is quite a lot (a BRI ISDN line is two digital phone lines with all the features).
The old circuit switched digital phone shit is expensive. That's the reason we are moving to all packet switched technologies like VoIP. Much less is needed to run voice, net, video, and VPN over a single link if it is all done over IP. However DS-1 allows all that stuff, but can do it at a lower level. You can break out individual channels and use them for different things.
If that sounds like it's kinda useless, well, it is these days. It's legacy technology more or less. In 50 years, we'll probably see very little if any of it left. Everything will come over an IP connection, and the lower level will be a simply point-to-point with an ISP. However at this point, if you get DS-1, you are paying for all the other shit. Better to find another technology for the physical and datalink.
Vacuum tubes are expensive because its hard to make a vacuum tube that has any degree of reliability. The fact that transistors do the same job and cost dirt has little impact on the difficulty or cost of making vacuum tubes.
So that's why just about every American house had a vacuum tube radio or three before they were obsoleted by transistors? Vacuum tubes were not expensive.
T1s are expensive for the same reason. The 15 meg FiOS service at my house actually costs Verizon a lot less to build and maintain than the multiply repeated 1.5 meg T1 that preceeded it.
A false reason and analogy is as good as any for Verizon and friends. They've already spent $200,000,000 of your money without delivering what they promissed.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
It is a Simpson's reference, I believe. Too bad the ComicBookGuy user didn't post it though.
When I bought my first T1 back in '99, it was about $1200 per month. It was from Shore.Net (now Primus), and it replaced a more expensive 256k circuit from UUnet. In 2001, I bought a second T1 from Sprint for about $950. Nowadays, I buy them for my clients (usually from Speakeasy) for around $400 or less. I'd say that's a pretty big price drop. A dual bonded T1 (as another poster mentioned) is under $800 - well lower than a single T1 cost a few years ago.
Sure, DSL is cheaper, but you get what you pay for to a certain point. Most importantly, ADSL is typically restricted to 768k max upload speed (I can get commercial cable Internet with 1.1 upload around here) unless you get SDSL (much pricier), and then you basically have a T1 without the service guarantees.
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
The point of this forum is to generate advertising clicks/views for the owners of this forum.
Learn to love Alaska
As others have noted, it's common to have an SLA for the full bandwidth of the T1.
It's also common to have a good SLA WRT uptime and response time for incidents.
This company originally had a T1 through Alternet/UUnet. If we rebooted the router, they called to check on us. There were times they called to check on things when we weren't even aware we'd had a glitch. They got bought. As far as I could tell, nothing changed. Then they merged or got bought again. If it changed, it sure wasn't much. They were still pricy, but well worth it. Then they got bought/merged/whatever the last time. And suddenly it was all quite random. We could be down an hour and might not get a call. (Until this last merger we'd never been down more than a couple of minutes, and those were precious few.) If we called about something, it was 50/50 whether we'd get a helpful, knowledgeable tech or someone either clueless or who just didn't care. Numerous emails and calls to our sales rep were not returned over a several week period.
So we switched to CoreNAP (local to Austin). Cheaper, and the class of service we were used to. fast responses. Savvy techs. Sales reps who cared. Life is good again.
We did eventually hear from a new sales rep at our former T1 provider, but it was too late. he was quite helpful in shutting down the old account, as was their support group, so maybe the escalated email informing them we were switching providers got someone's attention. I wish them well; it's depressing to see one of the best rotting away.
Meanwhile, we have two bonded T1s here. 3Mb/sec. We have about 90 people here using this, with 10 people remote. In the evening, we might have 20-30 engineers remotely working through those measly two T1s. And I still see better performance than I do at home with 4.5Mb/sec cable modem in the daytime, much less evenings and weekends.
So it's both real world performance and real world support.
Cable and DSL are full-duplex. Look up the specs.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Umm yeah, having worked for an ISP, just like everything else you oversubscribe a T1. Yes, your local is is a guaranteed T1. However if you as an ISP have a T3 worth of upstream (45 megs) coming in you could easily sell 45 (60 megs) T1's off it an no one would notice. The local ISP gets treated the same way from the Tier 1 provider.
I've had modems, dsl, frame relay, and now T1. At my house, the T1 is more reliable than the electricity, and I can use the full bandwidth in both directions all the time, with low latency. That was not the case with anything else.
The service is great too. After this last storm (no phones for 40 hours), we got dial tone and T1 back long before we got long distance calling back, and even before we got electricity back. This is in addition to the ISP monitoring the line and calling me when something happens to it.
(and for the record, mine is the four-wire true T1 type, which bonds locally to a channel on a T3 the ISP owns, for transport to their main office)
I agree. What an excellent post!
Also I have to say, I had 5/2 FIOS, which got upgraded to 10/2, because I was an old DSL subscriber yada.. yada.. yada.. .
Then they wanted all my phone service (for two lines) and I said yes so they threw in 20/5 FIOS as a bonus. All it took was a provisioning command. Did it increase the amount of traffic that they actually carry each month? No. Did it increase their cost of business at all? Probably not. Do my down loads scream? Absolutely. Do photo uploads to the print service go faster? You bet. Would I trade it all for a T1? No thanks.
As a previous poster stated, T1 had a purpose back in circuit switched days, and that purpose has pretty well run its course. Packet networks need packet carriers.
First, a technical detail. T1 lines send their digital signals over lines with high-current, constant DC power. Without a correspondingly high load resistance, the net effect can send hundreds of DC volts through whatever gets plugged in. Don't believe me? Feel free to stop by my data center, lick your finger, and run it across some T1 cross-connects. That's how a lot of old phone company techs look for vacant pairs on trunk lines. It's a lot faster than busting out a multi-tester.
Meanwhile, the equipment that phone companies use for T1 lines is, as someone said, expensive. It's also on a 30-year depreciation cycle. Until that cycle is up, don't expect prices to come down much. Some companies, like MCI, have already gone through a bankruptcy and written off a big chunk of that depreciation, so they might be able to do better, but only if they own the gear they're using. Any telco buying capacity from a baby Bell is going to have to pay (and charge you) the going rate.
Which brings me to the biggest reason for high T1 costs. The price is regulated. T1 lines get billed based on tariff schedules maintained by each state's public utilities commission. That way, small telcos (competitive local exchange carriers, to use the technical term) can theoretically compete with the big guys by selling you comparable service at a comparable price, often by reselling services actually being provided by the baby Bell, with them simply acting as a middle-man.
For the most part, the price isn't the result of supply and demand, or bandwidth guarantees, or idiots who pay more than they should. It's the result of lobbying by the telco industry. And, being regulated by the government, the price is unlikely to ever go down much. The only real competitive pressure on price is coming from MCI and other telcos that are able to give you a heftier discount because of owning their own infrastructure and having a lower cost burden. The tariff schedules are the same for every T1 within any given geography, regardless of who sells it to you, but some telcos can offer bigger discounts off of the tariffed rate if they have lower overhead costs. The effect of that lower cost structure is most noticeable in "lit" buildings, where telcos have large, SONET multiplexer units inside office buildings aggregating all of the data and voice traffic onto fiber and ensuring it stays on their own network rather than a competitor's. In those locations, the equipment is new, with much more capacity at a much lower cost than the gear used for buildouts in the 1990's. There also aren't any third parties involved insisting on a cut of the action.
All these posts are completely missing the point and not understanding at all how T1 (voice or data) pricing is determined. This is not a technical or economic issue at all (that would be too logical). It is simply tariffs. The PUC decides what LECs and CLECs can charge. CLECs can charge less (to improve competition), but your LEC has a fixed price that it *must* charge for T1 in your area. There is *no* getting around this. It really comes down to room full of old white men deciding the price.. Here is an example for at&t in California.
i les/CAPL11PLM1.pdf#page=4
http://serviceguide.att.com/tariff/business/ext/f
These are the prices *period* (few exceptions for special state contracts such as CALNET)
That depends on your location. If you are close to the central office, DSL is an alternative to T1. But the range of DSL is limited to a couple miles (varies
by type) with bandwidth dropping with distance. T1 can be run thousands of miles but at a substantial cost per mile. T1 requires expensive repeaters every 3/4 mile or so. Those repeaters are not located indoors so they have to be rated for industrial temperature range (or even military temperature grade in harsh locations). Now, that is based on traditional ways of doing things. Those repeaters need enclosures and electrical power. Theoretically, there is no reason you couldn't put repeaters on DSL lines but I think it was only in the past year or so that you could actually buy them and they are still probably rather expensive.
Normal DSL equipment, DSL modems and DSLAMs, are more of a mass market commodity item than T1 equipment. T1 equipment could be manufactured cheaply, probably
cheaper than DSL, in quantity but manufacturers and telcos are probably reluctant to make a large investment in equipment that is likely to be on its way out.
Telco's are used to amortizing equipment costs over 30 years or so. Investing in T1 equipment when you know that it probably will not be wanted for
either voice or data traffic a few years down the line doesn't have much appeal. DSL equipment probably also won't be useful for 30 years, either,
but it has more potential life than T1 equipment. Old DSL equipment may be relocated (when better options take over in the cities) to climate controlled
enclosures in rural neighborhoods that are dense enough but still far from a central office. New T1 circuits are probably reusing T1 equipment freed up when
old T1 circuits were upgraded so there isn't much of a market for mass produced T1 equipment or much of a surplus either; basically, T1 is probably a stagnant
market.
T1 prices have traditionally been compared to the cost of 24 telephone lines. And people are just used to paying more for T1.
In most places near a central office you may be better off negotiating for DSL line with a T1 level Committed Information Rate (CIR) and service level guarantees than a T1; i.e. a business class DSL. T1 makes sense in locations that are too far from the central office, particularly if it is a location where there is already T1 infrastructure, such as along a major highway that already has T1 lines (and thus enclosures in which to put repeaters) or in isolated rural business districts that have existing T1 lines. T1 may also be appropriate if you want mixed voice and data traffic and your TELCO doesn't have a VoIP based infrastructure yet.
Ethernet is not designed for exterior long haul use. Ethernet based circuits are likely to be available in districts that have SONET rings or bare fiber, and in colocation facilities and unavailable elsewhere.
Contrary to the original post, T1 circuits probably are much cheaper than they used to be in most markets. You can get a T1 line for under $400/mo in many markets.
Last time I used T1 was around ten years ago, it was $1400/mo for frame relay (i.e. less than full T1). Local loop alone was $400/mo. http://www.megapath.com/ offers 384K fractional T1 for $259 and full T1 for $359. Speakeasy $400/mo for full T1. Both include a free router (used to be $1500) and no setup costs.
I probably had one of the first two DSL lines in my city, before the local telcos adopted T1. We installed a DSLAM at the office and purchased dry pairs from
the telco and used MVL which had a distance of 2 miles (1 mile to the central office and 1 mile to our homes). My boss and I got the first lines. Cost around $14,000 in equipment but the monthly cost per line was only around $15, not including the upstream T1.
just don't bother hosting a mail server on XO, they are one of the biggest spammers in the US and heavily blacklisted.
. com
http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/listings.lasso?isp=xo
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
I pay around $57.50 per month including modem rental for optical fiber to my home.
100Mbs down
100Mbs up
Sure it's 'best effort' once it gets to the ISP, but when I've tested it I've gotten over 95Mbps, That's when I can get my home network moving as quickly as that (old computers, wireless cause bottlenecks)
Living in Tokyo sure has its advantages.
You mention South Korea as it it's some bumfuck backwards country, That may be the impression many people have, but South Korea is highly technologically advanced. See Samsung, LG, Hyundai etc. In fact South Korea has the highest number of broadband connections per capita in the world. They were only 5th in the world to hit the 30 million internet user mark, but koreans were surfing 2Mbps connections when most of Japan's 30 million 'internet users' had little more than iMode.
j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
I work for a telco, and while I'm not privy to the marketing decisions that go in to the whole thing, I can give the reasoning as I've always seen it.
T1s do an amazing job, they are rock solid, and work at distances that DSL simply can't, they have guaranteed bandwidth and service level agreements that involve penalties to the telco if they go down. For companies that truly NEED that connection they're irreplaceable.
All that said, for an awful lot of businesses our DSL packages at 4meg down and 1 meg up are plenty, and a fraction of the cost.
Now for the reasoning, T1s are a royal pain from the telco side of things, they work so well because they use such high powers to make sure that they are heard (close to 300V instead of 52 for telephone) but this causes all sorts of trouble, due to the crosstalk these things put out every T1 line that's installed reduces the number of ADSL customers we can put in the same cable, one T1 line can easily destroy the ability to carry DSL in the same binder group (25 pairs) and over longer distances or with several T1 lines can wipe out the whole cable for DSL. This is a major problem for us, so if we're going to have to work around these sorts of issues, we want it to be worth our while. that doesn't even go in to factors such as the equipment, a DSL modem costs about $50 or less these days, but a T1 "modem" is in the thousands, same deal with the equipment at the other end of the line, then you add the line conditioning that has to be done on longer lines when provisioning a T1, and the list goes on.
DSL is a great product, if you don't absolutely need a T1, then by all means take advantage of the fact that DSL lines are dirt cheap these days.
but when you need a T1 and nothing else will do, don't complain about the cost, it is after all your choice.
T1 lines send digital signals with almost NO current. This is due to the balanced encoding used on the line. There are two primary encodings used in North America (Europe has their own standard): B8ZS and AMI. These encodings ensure that the number of positive signals sent are roughly the same as number of the negative signals sent, resulting in an average DC voltage close to zero. While I don't doubt your anecdote about techs using their fingers to test if a line is live, the signal they experience has more in common with AC than DC.
The electrical specifications of a T1 show that it uses {-12, 0 12}V DC as the signaling alphabet. This is not the "hundreds of DC volts" you claim (maybe you were confused with the POTS system which uses 90V RMS ringer signal).
I don't know much about the politics of the system (I've only designed endpoint equipment and had little interaction with customers), but I know your technical details were rather specious. Do you have any evidence to back your other claims?
We had 8 t1s bonded with 70ms of latencey to the first hop the telcos response "We don't do anything unless its at 80ms", and this was
with only 3mbs being used on the connection.
We are quite happy now that we dropped our t1 connections from the telcos, and switched to a big fiber connection to the cable company.
We are connected right to their headend with a high capacity wireless link and also fiber transport from their headend to two other locations
Not to mention the Customer Service with them is way better, faster, knowledgable, and understandable (no language barrier).
I think that he was not referring to the actual T1 bandwidth itself, but the amount of upstream bandwidth in front of the T1. ISP A sells 100 T1's to 100 customers, but then only buys 50Mbits of bandwitdh from their provider...guess what, they have oversubscribed all of their T1 customers.
A closed mouth gathers no foot.
I've had a T1 going into my home for years, paying around $300/month for it. The T1 itself is guarenteed bandwidth but you usually do not terminate it at the phone company. Instead the T1 gets terminated at an ISP (which can be the phone company but is usually not). Well, ok, in REALITY the T1 is usually bundled into a T3 or fiber and THEN terminated at an ISP, but the bandwidth is still guarenteed up until the ISP. You don't go into a packet switch until you hit the ISPs network and it doesn't really matter until you hit the ISP's backhaul to the internet. At that point there is usually so much bandwidth that you get the full T1 rate 'to the internet'.
I have experimented with DSL, but it doesn't compare. For one thing, I serve out a lot of data... my T1's pipe is usually 100% full in the outgoing direction all the time. I can't afford to have hicups. I had a backup DSL line for a while but the outgoing bandwidth sucked rocks. For another, the T1 is considered a special business line and when something goes wrong, the phone company hops on it immediately (though I still have to talk to two entities.. the phone company and the ISP). Still, things get fixed fairly quickly compared to a normal phone line.
Is it worth $300/month for 1.5 MBits in both directions with guarenteed bandwidth and guarenteed quick service? It probably wouldn't be for your run of the mill power user, but for someone like me who is serving out an open source project and managing half a dozen domains, web sites, and mail for friends and family, I just can't afford to have too much downtime or unmanaged bandwidth.
I still have to research a possible cable solution. I haven't heard of the cable company having a guarenteed bandwidth service with that much uplink but who knows, maybe they've done it while I wasn't looking. I dunno about reliability, service, or ping times, though. I kinda like having a 4ms ping.
I wish there were fiber on my street. Maybe some day.
-Matt