Slashdot Mirror


Comcast Provides Uncapped 1 Gb Service To 1 Customer -- of 22.4 Million (myajc.com)

McGruber writes: A month after it suffered a nationwide outage, Comcast announced that a Dunwoody, Georgia resident is the first customer in the nation to get Comcast's new $80/month uncapped 1-gigabit service. The service will only be available in select Atlanta neighborhoods. The company would not say how many people would be chosen for the initial roll out of its 1-gigabit service, but admitted the numbers would be small to 'ensure seamless deployment,' a spokesman said. The company claims that the service will roll out more broadly later in the year. Comcast has 22.4 million broadband customers.

134 comments

  1. First thought... by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Oh, it must be a Google Fiber city."

    Bingo.

    Remind me why competition among public utilities is bad again?

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    1. Re:First thought... by LordSkippy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Remind me why competition among public utilities is bad again?

      Because big telecom will need to cut prices to be competitive. And you know what happens then? All the C-level executives will have to cut back and get just the large Jacuzzi instead of the extra large Jacuzzi! That's one less hooker you can fit in there, you know. We can't have that, now can we?

      --
      My karma is in a nose dive
    2. Re:First thought... by CaptainLard · · Score: 2

      Seriously. WTF is taking so long? Google fiber started 4 fucking years ago. Now all the other providers suddenly realize they can also offer 1GB...but only in the ~5 towns google fiber is already in? ./ has a bunch of users that work for or run ISPs so can someone chime in and say if its really too expensive to roll out? About 10% of my neighborhood runs a business out of their house and would probably pay to run fiber through the neighborhood on their own. Is 4G just so profitable that Verizon can't be bothered? I'd also like to see a comparison of the costs to set up a 1GB network vs the cost of anti-net neutrality lobbying for a month.

    3. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      a cherry picked affluent suburb, AND.... drumroll, please...

      the home of the offices of the only major daily newspaper in the atlanta area...... surprise, surprise.

      when they offer all of atlanta proper the same service and price, THEN it will be newsworthy..

      until then, fuck off, comcast.

    4. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such competition is hazardous to your councilman's wallet.

    5. Re:First thought... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 5, Informative

      I live near Tempe, Arizona, a city that Google had just legislatively cleared to officially make one of their Fiber cities. Just after that happened, Cox sued the city to prevent it from happening.

      Meanwhile, guess what's currently going on? Just about every neighborhood in that city has signs near it saying that Cox is beginning a fiber rollout. That city, and that city alone, and none of the surrounding ones. There were already a few deployments in the more affluent areas in neighboring towns, however in Tempe it seems every neighborhood is getting it.

      My guess is that this is one of Cox's cash cow markets and they dare not risk losing it, so they use the courts to make sure that they get ahead of the game.

    6. Re:First thought... by mishehu · · Score: 1

      Ma Bell has signs about Gigafiber in select neighborhoods of the general 4 Points area (a rather affluent area) in Austin now. Guess who else is in town, just at the other end, right now? You-know-who...

    7. Re:First thought... by phizi0n · · Score: 2

      Part of it is that Google is cherry-picking the easiest locations to deploy fiber in because they already have the infrastructure (underground conduit, possibly with dark fiber already in it) ready to go and a local government that isn't bound by contracts to the existing monopolies. The conditions that make it easy for Google to deploy fiber also make it easy for other ISP's to as well but the existing ISP only do it when they are threatened with the loss of business that Google Fiber presents.

      Sonic.net is an independent ISP that has been slowly rolling out fiber to the SF Bay Area even before Google Fiber started but it has been incredibly slow because they only do it to areas where they have high customer density AND all the other ideal conditions. It's difficult to tell how much of it depends on existing infrastructure VS regulatory red tape VS existing customer base.

    8. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Isn't that newspaper owned by Cox Media?

    9. Re:First thought... by ouachiski · · Score: 1

      umm because I only get 200mbps down for the same price rite outside of a municipal fiber area.....

      --
      sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
    10. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in Raleigh,NC, Time Warner had the same "upgraded" broadband tiers for years. 20, 30 and 50 Mb/s. Google Fiber selects Raleigh and suddenly they roll out new tiers at 100, 200 and 300 Mb/s.Go figure.

    11. Re:First thought... by smallfries · · Score: 1

      Less hookers, less trickle-down?

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    12. Re:First thought... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Remind me why competition among public utilities is bad again?

      Don't confuse giants competing over monopoly rent with healthy competition. Pre-fiber it was a near-monopoly. Post-fiber it'll be a near-monopoly. Short term they're willing to do almost anything including service upgrades and price dumping to keep you, because they know long term they got you over a barrel. Nobody's going to run a second fiber network after the first one is hooked up, they're going to make back what they lost and more and it's coming out of your hide. That's why we arrange natural monopolies as public utilities, nobody's going to lay down new water or sewage pipes if 99% in that area already get service from somebody else. Fiber will be the same, enjoy the honeymoon but it won't last very long.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    13. Re:First thought... by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      So they really are "select" neighbourhoods as the summary calls them... That sort of language is most often used by the companies themselves to lend an air of exclusivity to the word "some".

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    14. Re:First thought... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Sure, but those conditions existed BEFORE Google picked the city but none of the incumbents (humor, spell checker suggested encumbrances) were interested until after Google announced.

    15. Re:First thought... by GNious · · Score: 1

      That's actually awesome - Google doesn't have to provide the infrastructure for their fiber-upgrade-plan-things, just get clearance to install, and Cox does the work for them!

    16. Re:First thought... by tburkhol · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sonic.net is an independent ISP that has been slowly rolling out fiber to the SF Bay Area even before Google Fiber started but it has been incredibly slow because they only do it to areas where they have high customer density AND all the other ideal conditions.

      This is exactly what's wrong with capitalism in the presence of natural monopolies. Any company making a good profit has no reason to take a big risk on improving or upgrading, because they already have a guaranteed profit and their customers already tolerate their current service. Any company thinking about taking that big capital risk can be sure that the incumbent will slash prices to the point where they're cash-flow positive, leaving no room for capital recovery.

      If we want to see competition in the ISP market, we have to separate ownership and maintenance of the physical infrastructure from delivery of service, in the same way as electricity, gas, and POTS.

    17. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in far NW Austin, up near 183 and 620, and I don't expect Google to show up anytime soon. On their first map, I was as far away from the NW corner of their initial planned service areas as the initial area was across. No Gigafiber ads here. But at least I got a T-shirt from Google. I'm moving back to San Antonio, also now a GF city, and also will probably never reach me in any time scale that matters, though at least I'm going to a neighborhood with alleys and utility poles.

    18. Re:First thought... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      They were not interested until after Google stepped in. But Google started buying up dark fiber at the end of the dot com era (right before the bust was actually called the bust) so they have been sitting on it somewhat too.

      Of course speculation was that they were using it for data centers and such which might be true. But they own a lot of dark fiber now.

    19. Re:First thought... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Nobody's going to run a second fiber network after the first one is hooked up

      Except Google is doing it, and others have tried only to be stopped by lobbying of local telecom and cable companies.

      TWC ALREADY has fiber on my street, its fiber to the node, not the home, but considering in this case the node is literally in my front yard, it doesn't really matter for anyone anywhere in my neighborhood ... they effectively have fiber ... and in a few months, we'll have Google Fiber.

      Lots of places want to have competition, they just aren't allowed to.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    20. Re:First thought... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Less hookers, less trickle-down?

      That's a hundred dollars extra.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AT&T is doing the same thing in Louisville, Kentucky (suing the city to stop Google Fiber). This when parts of the city can't even get Uverse and the maximum DSL speed in those areas is 768 kbps. What a bunch of asshats.

    22. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Google isn't a special fairy. If and when they have monopoly status as an ISP you can bet they will institute tiered pricing or data caps. It makes financial sense.

    23. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cuts into profits, trickle-down effect dries up, poor people suffer (or something like this...)

    24. Re:First thought... by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey, don't knock Comcast. They offer every one of their customers speeds of up to 1Gbps.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    25. Re:First thought... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Comcast has been doing this nation-wide for a few years now. Their "Blast!" service (as in, "Blast! It's out again!", although that seems to happen a lot at 2 in the morning...) has stepped up from 50Mbit/s to 80Mbit/s to 110Mbit/s to now 150Mbit/s; the day Blast! got re-labeled to 150Mbit/s, it was clocking in real speeds of 179Mbit/s. The price has been $79/month plus like $11 in taxes and fees (because it wouldn't be Comcast without horse shit) for nearly a decade.

      People have been talking about overbuilt Internet infrastructure and dark fiber for years. Comcast and Verizon are suddenly rolling out all this high-speed service. They realized they're not monetizing any of this shit anyway, and they're having a PR arms race as the equipment to actually use it becomes cheaper--that is: the arms race has become sustainable for the long term, so they're not risking a costly upgrade or an embarrassing PR fumble by doing this now.

    26. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like tiered pricing and caps on their other services?

      There wont be any caps, google wants you to use MORE internet. See MORE adds, gather MORE data. I see only speed increases and increased nosiness into your traffic, but not caps lol.

    27. Re:First thought... by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      They'll just have to swap the one $200 hooker for 200 $1 hookers. I'm sure they'll manage.

    28. Re:First thought... by sabbede · · Score: 1

      As a matter of fact, it is! Well, Atlanta is, and Dunwoody is part of Atlanta. Technically it's own municipality, but "inside the perimeter" of I-285, so it's part of the greater metro area. Also, there's this: https://fiber.google.com/citie...

    29. Re:First thought... by sabbede · · Score: 1
      Well, Google has Fiber in parts of Atlanta, but hasn't rolled it out in Dunwoody (part of Atlanta) yet. See the link for the "coming soon"

      https://fiber.google.com/citie...

    30. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh, it must be a Google Fiber city."

      Bingo.

      And I have no doubt that this service will only be available in areas of those cities where google fiber is available.

    31. Re:First thought... by The-Ixian · · Score: 0

      This one actually looks like a legit grievance on AT&T's part

      http://androidandme.com/2016/0...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    32. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can they call it uncapped if it's 1Gb.
      Once you use your 1Gb what then?

    33. Re:First thought... by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Previously the incumbents were comparing the cost of rolling out a fiber network for homes and small buisnesses to the extra revenue they would get from offering faster speeds. They may also have been worrying about the faster "broadband" services canabalising their dedicated fiber services.

      Once Gooogle gets involved in an area the incumbents are comparing the cost of rolling out a fiber based network to the cost of losing customers to Google en-masse. While they are trying to put up legal barriers in Google's way they know that Google is not just some small operation that they can roll right over, so they need to mitigate the damger when Google wins.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    34. Re:First thought... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      They have nearly a natural monopoly, so it's in their best interest to invest the minimum amount required to keep customers from canceling their service and milk the cash cow forever.

      The truth is that the payback for a fiber rollout is probably under two years in areas where they have a high number of subscribers - and in areas where they don't have a high number of subscribers, a fiber rollout probably still pays for itself quickly because they'll get more subscribers due to the better speeds.

    35. Re:First thought... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Google averages on the order of $55 in ad revenue per user, per year. Google Fiber, last I checked, is $70 per month. So if they're the only internet service provider, it does financially benefit them to screw you on internet price even if it reduces your usage.

    36. Re:First thought... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      I have Comcast, and I can buy 1Gbps from them - but it's $299 per month, not $80. I couldn't talk my wife into it, though.

    37. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it really Ma Bell anymore? SBC, a Baby Bell, ate/merged with the others then bought out ATT, but then changed their name to ATT.

    38. Re: First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they meant 1Gbps. This is slashdot, where the editors write like 5 year olds.

    39. Re:First thought... by sjames · · Score: 1

      In other words, the markets were far too unhealthy to provide any benefits since even where there were two choices, they tacitly agreed not to compete very hard.

    40. Re:First thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >That's why we arrange natural monopolies as public utilities, nobody's going to lay down new water or sewage pipes if 99% in that area already get service from somebody else.

      Correct a mundo, and I'd like to add that there is a common way businesses 'get in the game' despite no new infrastructure being dug. By creating a new business that uses the infrastructure instead. Goes like this: biz set themselves up as a not-for-profit and places themselves inbetween the product provider & the customer, then resells it to the customer.

      This is what I experience with our local 'water conservation district' a funny name for what in any other area would be your public water company- The city used to maintain & sell water, but this company became an in-be-tweener and now buys it from the city to resell to residents. Genius in a weird way... guess I'll start something similar but for our office parking lot. I'll call it Forced Valet Service.

    41. Re:First thought... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IF you look at the last mile as the Monopoly, and solve THAT problem, then Competition can exist and bring better service.

      Think of it this way, ROADS aren't paid for by UPS and only UPS trucks are allowed. We have local roads that can be used by UPS, FEDEX, DHL and just about anyone else.

      We should do the same with Fiber, where the Municipality owns / maintains the Fiber, and provides access to providers such as ATT, Comcast, Verizon etc... Providing real competition where it counts, without the need for Franchise Agreements between cities and the monopolies.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    42. Re:First thought... by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Fiber to the node is 40% more expensive than fiber to the home. Nodes are very expensive. They're already talking about 25Tb/s fiber giving each customer 100Gb/100Gb of dedicated bandwidth. How long do you think it will be before they have copper nodes with a 25Tb/s upllink and able to handle 100Gb/s over your copper connection?

    43. Re:First thought... by doccus · · Score: 1

      But... But.. they NEED the "Xtra Large" jacuzzi because they're carrying all the fat they've scraped off the bones of their subscribers...

    44. Re:First thought... by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      At that point why would you even allow the greedy middleman into the equation? Just let the local government handle it.

    45. Re:First thought... by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

      Google has no interest in becoming an ISP. The only reason GF exists is to serve as a threat to ISPs so they don't hit Google with increased peerage/backhaul/QoS/other fees. It is Google's own Sword of Damocles.

      --
      This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
  2. Meanwhile in Australia.... by DMJC · · Score: 2

    256kbit for everyone! noone needs fibre to the home!

    1. Re:Meanwhile in Australia.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at it this way: While you're waiting for the flamethrower blueprint to download you've got time to booby trap your front porch and keep morale high. Those arachnids ain't going to kill themselves.

    2. Re:Meanwhile in Australia.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for you. Do you want a medal?

    3. Re:Meanwhile in Australia.... by shocking · · Score: 1

      I'd love to pay for fibre to my home - I was going to get it in 2014. But then we had a change of govt.... And there's no plans for my suburb in the upcoming rollout. You don't know how lucky you are.

    4. Re:Meanwhile in Australia.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for you. Do you want a medal?

      Nah. Give him a cookie.

    5. Re:Meanwhile in Australia.... by citizenr · · Score: 1

      What good is fiber to you when you have data caps on INTERNAL traffic than NEVER LEAVES national fiber network??!?

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
  3. Left unmentioned in the story... by mrsam · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... is that the mysterious resident in Comcast's CEO.

    1. Re:Left unmentioned in the story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or Ted Turner.

    2. Re:Left unmentioned in the story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fine print says:"$80/month uncapped 1-gigabit for 6 months then regular rates apply". So... 199.99 a month thereafter?

    3. Re:Left unmentioned in the story... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      In south east PA, Comcast 1Gbps service is $299 per month. I don't know what the regular rates are for it in Georgia.

  4. So you can reach your montly cap in less 1 hr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://customer.xfinity.com/help-and-support/internet/data-usage-trials/

  5. They promise 100% growth per month by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    for the next 6 months or so.

  6. Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The local-duopoly DSL provider must suck even worse.

  7. DOCSIS congestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's still DOCSIS, so you'll get 1Gbps at 3AM but continue to get 10mbps during peak hours (i.e. when you and all your neighbors are actually using it).

    1. Re:DOCSIS congestion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's still DOCSIS, so you'll get 1Gbps at 3AM but continue to get 10mbps during peak hours (i.e. when you and all your neighbors are actually using it).

      That has jack shit to do with it being DOCSIS. As long as the node is not oversubscribed, and the CMTS is not oversubscribed, you can all still get full speeds all day long.
      And the fiber to the home that Google (and Verizon, etc.) are selling is NOT a dedicated fiber pair going all the way back to the provider's core. It also uses a "local loop" type of topology which is shared among you and your neighbors, and can suffer the exact same oversubscription issues if the provider doesn't keep the equipment upgraded to meet demand.

    2. Re:DOCSIS congestion by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      That has jack shit to do with it being DOCSIS. As long as the node is not oversubscribed, and the CMTS is not oversubscribed, you can all still get full speeds all day long.

      At 1gbit per modem how many people do you think can actually pull that rate at the same time on a node? 2? 3? 4? How many on the average node? 200? 400?

      And the fiber to the home that Google (and Verizon, etc.) are selling is NOT a dedicated fiber pair going all the way back to the provider's core. It also uses

      Google is doing GPON if I remember correctly which means passive optics and no contested access.

      a "local loop" type of topology which is shared among you and your neighbors, and can suffer the exact same oversubscription issues if the provider doesn't keep the equipment upgraded to meet demand.

      Comcast's coax offers a max frequency of 1ghz. Light pipes have a max frequency in the hundreds of thz range.

    3. Re:DOCSIS congestion by klui · · Score: 1

      PON is shared.

    4. Re:DOCSIS congestion by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and GPON is like at most 64:1 I think most systems are 16:1 or 32:1 some are about 8:1.

    5. Re:DOCSIS congestion by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Google is selling dedicated 1Gb to core bandwidth. Each customer has a 1.25Gb/1.25Gb lamda of light in a shared fiber. That fiber has 32 lambdas and 32 customers for a total of 40Gb/40Gb. That is a single port in an 8 port line-card that has 640Gb/s of bandwidth into the back-plane. The backplane has something like 8 line-cards and a total backplane bandwidth of 5.2Tb and 8+ 400Gb uplinks that plug directly into the core.

      Google Fiber actually says you plug "directly" into the core. They call their GPON fiber chassis a "fiber aggregator" because it's really just a mostly dumb Layer 2+ whose sole job is to connection the customer into the core with dedicated bandwidth.

      My ISP does a similar thing. A senior network admin said they could literally handle 100% of customers fully saturating all of their connections without issue in their core. They do not over-provision at all in the last-mile or core. They only thing they need to worry about is the trunk, which has at least 3x 95th percentile and 6x if they load-balance to their failover, which they have done when under a DDOS.

    6. Re:DOCSIS congestion by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Not all PON is shared. Google Fiber uses WDM-PON, which is dedicated per lambda. NG-PON2 will eventually share 25Tb/s of bandwidth down the one fiber. At what point do you stop caring that it's "shared"? When a single fiber has more than 10% of the entire Internet's bandwidth, I don't see the issue. PON typically has great scheduling. You can set guaranteed minimum bandwidth along with maximum ping, also independently of each other. There are PONs that can guarantee that your ping will never go above 0.5ms under any situation, even if you swing from 1Gb/s to 10Mb/s. Of course that's a scheduling guarantee, not a bufferbloat guarantee.

      Of course the lower you guarantee the latency, the less efficient the scheduler is at maximizing overall bandwidth. You might only be able to reach 85% peak bandwidth with 0.5ms, but 95% with 2.5ms.

  8. OK, so...? by no-body · · Score: 1

    they still are too big and therefore they suck!

  9. Or just pay more for no cap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/03/comcasts-gigabit-cable-has-a-data-cap-unless-you-sign-3-year-contract/

  10. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it is in the south east, I'll guess the dsl provider is AT&T. Cable has always had better speed, which makes the reliability but lower speed of dsl look bad for marketing. If AT&T cared, they could have used the slacking of Comcast, to upgrade their systems to a faster speed, but even with their U-Verse rollout, they just worked to make par.

    It could also be Verizon, but they are dropping landline work for more mobile connections. That is going to work out "great" for them as an ISP.

  11. The one redeeming Comcast virtue by swb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Business class. It's kind of a ripoff from a pure speed perspective, but it was really easy to get a /29 and they will set PTR records for you. None of the fiber options that I can get -- CenturyLink or US Internet have an equivalent service they will sell to residential addresses.

    I did have a crazy idea, though -- run pfsense as a cloud VM, IPSec to my home network and present my public facing network via the cloud hosted pfsense static IP. It would crimp my style, but I could get by with 2 or maybe even 1 public IP address. Mostly what I access is fairly non-interactive like file syncs or email, so the added latency or reduced throughput of the IPSec session shouldn't be too burdensome.

    I can make it work in a virtual lab setup (I wasn't sure if pfsense could port forward for IPSec tunnel remote networks, but it can).

    I figure this way I could indulge in the goodness of gig Internet and enjoy the benefits of a static IP via the cloud.

    My only complaints so far are that AWS has no pfesnse images except for a "rental" that's outrageously expensive and has other drawbacks (like no updating; the authors have to release an updated image). I found another host that supports FreeBSD and will let you boot your own ISO installers, but I'm skeptical they have the network that Amazon does and the pricing is less transparent than Amazon.

    1. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I may be misunderstanding your requirements but DigitalOcean supports FreeBSD (as well as booting into your own ISO installer) and is transparent about pricing. I would definitely take a look at them. They take their business seriously and have seen (and handled) tremendous growth lately. They're a safer long-term bet than anything you'd find on LowEndBox. They directly compete with Linode, who I also use and would recommend except they don't officially support FreeBSD although some have installed it via ISO or some other method (just search "freebsd linode"). Also Linode has suffered some significant DDoS-related outages since Jan 1st, particularly their Atlanta datacenter. So make sure to check the published uptime (or network-accessible time) of any datacenter you plan on using, if you can find that information.

    2. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Traffic in AWS become pretty expensive once you start stacking the GBs on the gbps connection. You can burn through $100 in a day.

    3. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be aware that if you're using business class, canceling your account requires contacting your rep or emailing National_Accounts_Support@cable.comcast.com
      If you call business class billing to cancel, they might not actually know to direct you to the email account. I was told my account was canceled, but ended up getting changed until I noticed it on my bill (they even charged me for the modem that I returned).

    4. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do they (Comcast) still require that Business class customers use only the provided cable modem and/or router (or combo device) that they give you? If so, that's pretty much a deal breaker for, well, a lot of tech industry people.

    5. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Linode US West is exclusively/entirely hosted in Hurricane Electric's FMT2 (Fremont) datacenter, which has had repeated networking problems and service outages (particularly power-related) throughout the years (i.e. just like FMT1). Dig through the outages.org mailing list archive (and outages-discussion) and you can get an idea of how regular they are. Here's one story in detail.

      In short: if going with Linode, pick something other than Linode US West.

    6. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by swb · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the DigitalOcean pointer. It's surprisingly hard to search for a hosting provider that supports FreeBSD and either has a pre-configured pfsense image or will let you use your own ISO.

      I'd consider direct FreeBSD support almost a requirement, as pfsense has enough weirdness built into it that getting it working in a cloud environment has some gotchas built in before you work against the grain of a hosting environment tuned for Linux.

    7. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by swb · · Score: 1

      My thought was to only route the servers with public IP service through the tunnel, and that's a vanishingly small part of my network traffic overall. Everything else would go out the fiber ISP.

      I fooled around with the AWS calculator and figured it would run something like $20-odd dollars a month, and that was using a pretty pessimistic (high) traffic volume.

    8. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Comcast hast local, national, business, and residential divisions. In my experience, they can put part of your account with different internal divisions and make everything a pain in the ass.

    9. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by somenickname · · Score: 1

      You should be able to get static IPs (I think even a /29 block) on a Centurylink residential line. That's what I'm using and the single IP I have is a few dollars extra per month. You can also set it to properly do reverse DNS, allow port 25, etc. However, my connection is just DSL and not fiber so, maybe there are further restrictions on fiber.

    10. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used FreeBSD (custom ISO -- meaning a 9.3-STABLE snapshot ISO, rather than 9.3-RELEASE) on Vultr.com for a while now -- quite reliable. I also used FreeBSD on cari.net (dedicated, expensive) as well as ARP Networks (highly recommended provider with excellent peering and networking, but disk I/O on their VPSes is abysmally slow).

      Be aware that Vultr's VPSes have HPET enabled (or "VM translated" somehow) in the BIOS, which is causing load average problems (i.e. box will show LA of 0.20 or higher when the system is doing literally nothing). This appears to be specific to FreeBSD 10.x. This can happen on both bare metal as well as a VM. Full details are in bug 173541, including a response from a kernel dev who insists nothing is wrong.

    11. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by swb · · Score: 1

      CenturyLink/Qwest's DSL was always available around here in a pick your own ISP model, so telco provided the signalling and the ISP provided the IP. I had an ISP that gave /30s then.

      But the new CL fiber doesn't provide for any static IPs as far as I know. Which isn't too far, all I've done is talk to the rent-a-sales guy who was going door to door. But he did know what I was talking about and said I wasn't the first one to ask, either.

      From what I can tell, the other fiber provider, US Internet can do statics, but only for a much pricier business account -- IIRC, it was $250 or something a month, which might be reasonable for an actual business, but is way more than I need to spend.

    12. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by swb · · Score: 1

      Vultr was another provider I found that looked to be friendly enough for FreeBSD/pfsense.

      I need to finally bite the bullet and sign up for at least one of them to at least do a proof of concept to know that it will work as I expect before I decide on a final provider and make the leap to fiber and give up my at home statics (something I've had since getting DSL in 1999).

    13. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by swb · · Score: 1

      I don't know about requirements, I just use theirs because I'm lazy and don't want to do the work to figure out what else to buy. I literally only use it as ethernet handoff to my own equipment so the make/model/features don't mean anything to me. The only thing I don't want is their POS wireless running on it, and mine doesn't have that.

      I recently had mine replaced with a newer model after experiencing some problems (which turned out to be local RF cabling issues of my own creation).

      I haven't had a reliability problem with their modems, really.

    14. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CloudAtCost is another provider offering FreeBSD as an option. I haven't used pfSense (I'm an ipfw guy myself) so I can't speak to that.

    15. Re:The one redeeming Comcast virtue by Bengie · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting problem. Googling it a bit, it seems it's an issue with HPET plus lower power CPU states. Load is relative to the current CPU speed. When my Haswell CPU clocks itself down to 200mhz, a load of 0.5 would indicate 100mhz of load. Pretty much every OS(Windows, Linux, FreeBSD) out there does this. The issue with FreeBSD is when a CPU core is put completely to sleep with 0mhz. There is a bias that when HPET interrupt occurs, it has to wake up the core, and the core has funny load characteristics when it comes out of sleep. This is exasperated by HPET waking up several cores at the same time and they're all counting each other's "load" by how responsive they are.

      I did find someone who "fixed" the issue by changing their timing source from HPET to something else, but it meant that the CPU could not go into deep sleep, because that required HPET. Their CPU went from 7watts idle to 12watts idle, but the load issue went away.

  12. IPv6 ? multicast ? by johnjones · · Score: 1

    apart from 1 Gb what else are they doing SCTP in their modern Set Top Box's or IPv6 to bettter handle the contention and streaming ?

    seriously PR stuff give us some details...

  13. BGP? by Nethead · · Score: 2

    Can he get a BGP session with them?

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    1. Re:BGP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not with an asymmetric connection with only 512 kbps upstream ...

    2. Re:BGP? by PuddleBoy · · Score: 1

      It is the general agreement among providers that they will only provide BGP (broadcasting routes) between providers if you have;

      Your own ASN number (go to ARIN for that)
      At least a /24 of IP space (good luck with that)

      Providers don't do BGP for CIDR blocks smaller than /24 because the router tables on the net would balloon in size. (OTOH, you can get iBGP within a single provider's network with a block smaller than a /24, but then you aren't getting cross-provider alternate paths)

    3. Re:BGP? by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Understood. I was at a NANOG 21 BOF discussing getting major websites an allocation when they might not be able to justify a /21 because they are just a website but still needed multi-homing. This was when Amazon was just a website. I was the one running BGP for them then. I was the one that got them their ASN and first netblock.

      My wife got flyingcroc.com an ASN and netblock the two years before, and a second netblock on the first try back in 1999. We're not new to this game.

      It was a joke, son.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    4. Re:BGP? by Nethead · · Score: 2

      But what if he was running only UUCP and was willing to wait a week for a full routing table?

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    5. Re:BGP? by PuddleBoy · · Score: 1

      Understood - didn't realize that.

      I work for a carrier and it's not the joke you might think, for some people. I argue on a regular basis with customers who don't understand why I can't set up BGP for their /28 or /29. And then there's the 'you have millions of IP addresses - you can spare a couple of /24's for me, right. What's the problem?'

      Too many people (who knew better) have waited til the last minute and stubbornly refused to embrace IPv6. They don't understand why I can't reach into my back pocket and pull out those /16's I'd been hiding for a rainy day.

    6. Re:BGP? by I4ko · · Score: 1

      Since you work for a carrier now, and I quit in '07, are the tier 1s still pulling shenanigans forcefully aggregating routes?
      IIRC Level 3 aggregated several of our very specific /24 announces (and we had a good reason to have those small and better announces, as they were on other continents, but didn't want to run GRE or other tunneling to them, as they were supporting delay sensitive application - VoIP) back into one of our big(er) /18 or /19 announcements at that time. There was no logic whatsoever at least on the BGP algorithm level, they just had the policy that the smallest announce they will accept and re-advertise was a /19 or /20 from other tier 1s. And those were direct announces we made to UUNet and Global Crossing.

      Funny thing I our AS number and the ASs numbers of a few of our peers and upsteams just popped into my mind when I went to HE's BGP looking glass. My fingers typed it without me thinking...

  14. It's me!!! I got the gigabit connection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    However, I only use the service to check email and occasionally read the news. I transferred almost 300Mb of data last month. Typing this message seems a bit hefty on the old data usage but I can afford it now.

  15. this is me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    weird, I live in east atlanta, and have this exact uncapped 1gb package from comcast. They offered it to me on a bandwidth limit exceeded popup and asked me to call a number. I don't live in Dunwoody.

  16. Backhaul by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    However their backhaul is only 500mbps.

  17. That figures... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    I was wondering who let the air out of the Intertubes.

  18. Not really true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless this article is really old, I'm in Atlanta with Comcast 1 Gb service and I know at least one other person with the service too.

    Anyway, at least now, there's more than one customer. How many, I have no idea.

  19. picked for usage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so did they choose this person specifically after checking their normal data usage to determine if they were using less than the normal cap on average anyway, to make the announcement of higher speeds basically meaningless?

  20. Like their customer service... by Etherwalk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, first they had to provide tech support to one customer and put 22 million calls on hold.

    1. Re:Like their customer service... by sabbede · · Score: 1

      HAH!

    2. Re:Like their customer service... by d3vpsaux · · Score: 1

      As the sole beta tester, I'm sure this customer will have a much better technical support experience than the average customer. Aww, who am I kidding? They'll route her support calls through the seven layers of hell just like everyone else. I'd love to see the numbers on a fiber deploy to a single household...

    3. Re:Like their customer service... by sabbede · · Score: 1
      HAH! I like your point!

      Did you know that they treat businesses in exactly the same way they treat residential customers? I just moved one of our offices, and Comcast (only option) scheduled their tech for 8am-noon. Completely insane considering how typical office hours are 9-5. It's like they think office staff will be there sipping coffee in their bathrobes, not leaving home an hour earlier to be there an hour before opening. I'm extra annoyed because it was a remote office that takes almost an hour to get to in the first place.

  21. What's it worth without gigabit routers? by imsam_in · · Score: 1

    Guess they will also start up-selling some gigabit routers!

  22. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

    Many of us don't have the luxury of a duopoly. AT&T doesn't offer DSL where I live, so it's either Comcast or Comcast.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  23. Well someone has to go first by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    I hear they're only going to offer one initial patient a full body transplant when the tech becomes available. Scandalous!

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  24. comcast units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    it's not 1 gigabit per second.. it's simply 1 gigabit (per $80).

    1. Re:comcast units by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      It probably makes me pathetic, but that got me to laugh out loud. Thanks. "We're sorry. You've transferred 125 MB of data this month. To get another gigabit, you must first send another $80 payment."

  25. will roll out more broadly later this year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have they already selected the other guy? Let me guess: if you are running a game server for your friends, you are not eligible.

  26. Can you host a Quake server? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember back in 2000, that AT&T terms of service banned all sorts of services, including hosting video game servers. Now that there is all this extra bandwidth, can I legally host a Quake server, from my house, on some computer I buy from Fry's Electronics? What about the monthly data caps? Is it still limited at 250 GB?

  27. 1 Gb per hour? Per year? Oh, per second! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So why didn't they say so? '1 gigabit' is an amount of data, and without a time reference, absolutely meaningless when talking about broadband internet...

    1. Re:1 Gb per hour? Per year? Oh, per second! by Diss+Champ · · Score: 1

      Given that this is Comcast, I wouldn't be surprised if it was all of the above.
      "We quoted you 1Gb and we gave you 1Gb. Is it our fault you used it up in the first second? Don't worry, we'll be happy to sell you another. You do have a spare kidney, don't you?"

    2. Re:1 Gb per hour? Per year? Oh, per second! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why didn't they say so? '1 gigabit' is an amount of data, and without a time reference, absolutely meaningless when talking about broadband internet...

      Throughput is measured in bits per second, storage (amounts of data) is measured in bytes. Although in this case we are talking about Comcast Marketing, so it's probably not safe to assume they are using any normal definition for either 'bit' or 'giga'. And even if they used a time reference, it wouldn't be safe to assume it was standard either.

  28. 'Smooth' rollout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Verizon 'offered' fiber lines in the town I lived to select homes as 'availability' allowed. Turned out the availability was coincidentally only to Verizon employees living there (there's some kind of switching station there). Even though for some legal reason they had to declare it was available nobody else in the town could get it despite being willing to pay, despite that there was already parallel infrastructure wired in the town (meaning just a wire from the the pole to your house would be the only investment). Been like that since the 90's. 20+ years is a long time to wait for your turn. Capitalism, how does it work?

  29. It's a trap!! by Leslie43 · · Score: 1

    Remember, this is Comcast we're talking about.

  30. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Check your State's regulations. DSL is carried over the copper and, as such, it has different protection mechanisms built into the applicable laws. Contact your PUC for more information. For example, I can use any DSL service provider that is willing to service my area and there's not a damned thing the telephone company can do about it - at one point, I was getting my service from a company that doesn't even normally service anywhere near me but can - it's just that nobody seems to know about it. Fairpoint (owner of the lines and ISP) must provide access at just about break-even and must still maintain the lines with "best-effort" service.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  31. And for $70/mo I get... by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 1

    ...30M down and whatever up.

    It's COMCASTIC!

  32. Re:It's me!!! I got the gigabit connection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good that you can afford it.
    You pay ten times what I do for uncapped gigabit Internet over here in Stockholm, Sweden.
    Although I do have it only over Gigabit Ethernet though, so technically it is not a full gigabit.

  33. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    which makes the reliability but lower speed of dsl

    Reliability?

    When I was a dsl Admin {for a big bell that shall remain nameless} one of the biggest problems we had was reliability of running dsl through ancient pots lines and it all boiled down to who was paying how much to replace those old lines, some communities would get new lines others wouldn't.

  34. "select" neighborhoods.... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Translation, only to the very rich.... Fuck you poor people.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  35. "Gigabit" yeah right - what is the upstream speed? by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    I can't find any documentation on the upstream speed.

    One of our Princeton schools has 100Mbps cable modem service, with a paltry 20Mbps upstream. This is crap for many reasons.

    When I asked about getting more upstream speed, they said for only $1000/month I could have 50Mbps upstream with their metro ethernet service.

    Comcast sucks.

  36. Re:"Gigabit" yeah right - what is the upstream spe by iggymanz · · Score: 2

    eh, that's normal for low end service to be asymmetric as it fits most consumers and there is good technical reason for it. You want a business grade symmetrical service, fine, you'll pay out big bucks. quit your whining

  37. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

    Cable has always had better speed

    This is changing with DSL speeds getting faster and faster. Which is why the cable companies are upping their speeds.

    My apt building has CentryLink fiber running to it and they use the existing telephone infrastructure and g.fast DSL to get the 1GB link to the units.

    As a matter of fact, the cable provider in my building still uses DOCSIS 1.1 and has a 10Mb cap so, in my case, DSL is MUCH faster.

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
  38. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

    I live in Pennsylvania, and I also have internet choices of Comcast or 3G (not 4G, I'm too far outside Philadelphia for 4G) wireless. I have called every DSL provider I could find in the state, none provide service to my property.

    On the other hand, I've had Comcast internet for fourteen years with three service outages total. My experience with Comcast, at least locally (north west of Philadelphia) is that if you walk into a branch office and ask for help, the people there and the service technicians will solve your problems. They can't get you lower prices, but they'll get billing and service problems fixed. The Comcast websites and especially their phone support come from the thirteenth level of hell, though.

  39. Cant beat em, join em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Work for Comcast or one of its many many subsidiaries (Comcast is much more than just cable tv) and get discounted internets. Problem solved.

  40. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    That doesn't sound that bad. My home is in Maine - I am not home currently. My mains electricity is actually my backup. (That's not a joke.) Fiber won't do me much good unless they put it in the ground - they won't. Comcast gets rated worst for customer service on a regular basis in the yearly poll thing that they do.

    I'm kind of surprised that you can't get serviced from other ISPs on DSL? The laws (in my area and NC) mean that anyone can do it - and I've found quite a few that have. I have disparate connections and have had more than one ISP at a time. (I was proving a point to my current ISP as they irked me a bit.) At one point, I had a small provider who doesn't even have any physical presence in Maine and, as near as I know, only had a few customers in Maine at all. They had an existing relationship with the telephone company in NH so they were aware of the regulations and had no problem hooking me up. Then I want with Oxford Networks (GWI) and they don't even advertise in my area and all of our communication was done by email.

    Every one of my switchovers have been seamless. The network goes out a few days after I get it set up and the outage lasts for about long enough to get a new IP address. That's it. I then double check and call to cancel the old service. As they all send out their own gear, I've never even unboxed some of it. Oddly, they've all sent out their own gear, even when i requested they not do so. I never, ever, use ISP provided gear - a mildly amusing topic for another day. Sometimes they don't even ask for it back. I buy upper-end business class gear or use my own routers, I refuse to use ISP provided gear. Yes, yes that does make them angry. I love DSL for the protections it offers me as a consumer.

    I guess, I might be getting fiber by the end of this coming fall. I'll add it but I'll be keeping DSL as my backup. Fiber won't stand up to the weather - we get dozens of trees on the line every year. Dozens... I've seen the copper lines on the ground and still had a pretty decent throughput when I got home. Fiber isn't going to stand up to that and they're not going to invest enough to sink it into the ground. Given how much the ground moves as the frost moves in and out, I'm not actually sure how well it would deal with that.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  41. Maybe back in the 90s that was acceptable by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    Our other school has a 300Mbps symmetric FIOS connection with static IP for $289/month. I could have 500Mbps if I wanted it for a couple hundred more a month, but we simply don't need that much bandwidth.

    Why can't Comcast get anywhere near that for a similar price?

    The reason is that, in many areas, Comcast is a monopoly and they see no reason to upgrade their plant. Lack of competition is hurting the advancement of broadband in this country.

    1. Re:Maybe back in the 90s that was acceptable by Bengie · · Score: 1

      A local non-profit has been providing enterprise grade 99.999% up-time 1Gb fiber for $300/m to schools, libraries, and hospitals for the past 15 years. Of course AT&T wanted to deny them right-of-way access because the non-profit was not a telcom or cable company. The state spent several million dollars in legal costs and won, by a hair, with the restriction that this non-profit could not sell to residential or private sector. The only reason the law makers allowed them access was because AT&T wanted to charge $100,000 for the exact same service, and that's ignoring all of the complaints of AT&T not fixing their network in a timely fashion. Lots of down time, even for the "enterprise" fiber connections.

  42. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

    That's awesome that you've been able to shop around for DSL options. if they're available in PA, I haven't been able to find them. I'll check again, having more options is always good. Thanks for mentioning it.

  43. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

    I checked, and the first DSL provider I contacted said I lived in an area rural enough that DSL didn't make sense. He could get me service, but nowhere near the Comcast rates in the area.

    On the other hand, he said his employer is buying the fiber that Verizon has basically abandoned in the area and building it out themselves. So in a few years, it might be Comcast vs. Frontier in my area. Competition is good.

  44. Re:Wait, What? Comcast has 22.4 Million customers? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Nice! Thanks for following up with me. Just to make sure, so that I can relay this to others in the future and do so accurately, you too can get DSL from anyone who's willing to service your area - technically, at least? And, in your case, they opted to not provision service because of 'reasons?'

    You said PA... I want to say that Fairpoint operates in PA. If they do AND if you're still interested - give Fairpoint a call. If they seem confused then, if I'm understanding you correctly, you can explain that they are able to provision service for you.

    I'm also not sure why the price would be very different. That makes no sense to me. In both Maine and North Carolina the owners of the copper MUST allow access at "reasonable" rates which translates to pretty much "at-cost." I've never had to pay any extra to have my service provided by another company. For example; When I used GWI (I'm on Fairpoint's copper) I paid the standard GWI rates that they charged for any other customer in any other area.

    Thanks for the follow-up. I'm curious as to how it plays out - if you go beyond this. You may find little tiny DSL providers who are willing to service you IF you want to look. They'll be reseller and there are a number of them out there - you just need to look and find them.

    I did a quick search and came across this small list:
    http://pennsylvania.theispguid...

    However - there's often a whole bunch of small-time resellers that own neither the copper nor any large customer base. I've found that I get pretty good service with some of them as they're genuinely happy to have the custom. They do put a level between you and the actual copper provider but that doesn't have to be a bad thing.

    Feel free to reply via email if you're interested in keeping this going.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."