DSL = (D)ead, (S)low and (L)ousy?

That’s what a post over at Stop the Cap! called Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) after reviewing a report from Credit Suisse analyst Stefan Anninger. Here’s some highlights from that report:

• DSL will increasingly be seen as the “dial-up” service of the 2010s, as demand for more broadband speed moves beyond what most phone companies are willing or able to provide.
• DSL accounts sold in the United States top out at an average speed of just 4Mbps, while consumers are increasingly seeking out service at speeds of at least 7Mbps.
• A growing number of Americans understand cable and fiber-based broadband deliver the highest speeds, and consumers are increasingly dropping DSL for cable and fiber competitors. Any investments now may be a case of “too little, too late,” especially if they only incrementally improve DSL speeds.
• By 2015, cable companies will have secured 56 percent of the broadband market in the U.S. (up by 2 percent from today), phone companies will drop from 30 percent to just 15 percent, Verizon FiOS, AT&T U-verse, and wireless broadband will each control around 7 percent of the market, with the remainder split among municipal fiber, satellite, and other technologies.
• An online survey of 1,000 consumers in August found that less than half would consider going wireless only. The reasons? It’s too slow, too expensive and most plans have Internet Overcharging schemes like usage caps and speed throttles.

Regarding the FCC’s recent push for broadband reform by reclassifying broadband under Title II - Anninger suggests that Net Neutrality enforcement at the FCC is not a priority. Anninger goes on to say if action hasn’t been taken by winter or spring of next year, it’s a safe bet the Commission will never re-assert its authority.

Mobile Broadband Spectrum Demand

The Federal Communication Commission has released a really interesting report titled Mobile Broadband: The Benefits of Additional Spectrum. The report takes a detailed look at the the current use, growth and need for new wireless broadband spectrum and also estimates the value created by making new spectrum available. Here's some background:

The National Broadband Plan has recommended that the FCC make available 500 megahertz (MHz) of new spectrum available for wireless broadband, including 300 MHz for mobile flexible use within five years. In addition, back on June 28, 2010, President Obama directed in an Executive Memorandum that 500 MHz of new spectrum be made available for mobile and fixed broadband use. The report is an attempt to make some predictions and justify the need for additional spectrum using estimates of various factors affecting aggregate mobile network capacity and mobile data growth. Here's some highlights:

• Mobile data demand will outstrip available wireless capacity in the near-term
• Mobile data demand is expected to grow between 25 and 50 times current levels within 5 years.
• Analysis suggests that the broadband spectrum deficit is likely to approach 300 MHz by 2014.
• Making available additional spectrum for mobile broadband would create value in excess of $100B in the next five years through avoidance of unnecessary costs.
• Making new spectrum available has historically taken between six and thirteen years

The report claims the $100B estimate of value creation is narrow, as it does not account for the broader social value created through mobile broadband, which some economists estimate as multiples of the private value. Here's some interesting data on how we are using current services and devices:

• 42% of consumers are estimated to own a smartphone, up from 16% three years ago.
• PC aircard users consume 1.4 gigabytes (GB) per month -- 56 times the amount of data used by a regular cell phone.
• AT&T, the exclusive US carrier of the iPhone, has seen mobile network traffic increase 5,000% over past 3 years.
• Users of Clearwire’s fourth generation (4G) WiMAX service consume 7 GB per month -- 280 times the amount of data used by a regular cell phone.
  

I like to think of broadband the way I think of garage space - you can never have too much. Be sure to check out the full FCC report linked here.

Why Broadband Service Is So Poor In The U.S.

In an October 4, 2010 editorial titled Why Broadband Service in the U.S. Is So Awful And one step that could change it, Scientific American discusses the poor condition of U.S. broadband service when compared to much of the rest of the world. Here’s a couple of key points (we’re all way too familiar with) from the piece:

• The U.S. came in dead last in a recent study that compared how quickly 40 countries and regions have been progressing toward a knowledge-based economy over the past 10 years.
• A decade ago the U.S. ranked at or near the top of most studies of broadband price and performance.

From the top of the list to the bottom – what happened in the last 10 years? Scientific American traces the start of our problems back to 2002 when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) reclassified broadband Internet service as an “information service” rather than a “telecommunications service.” This reclassification allowed infrastructure owners (essentially telco and cable companies) to keep their infrastructure private (some would say monopolize), stifling competition.

How are places like Japan and Korea different? Countries that are beating the pants off us require infrastructure companies to wholesale access to independent providers. This means consumers in these countries have many options from companies competing on price and service. Simply said, broadband competition is good but unfortunately, we don’t have it.

Can we fix it? The Scientific American editorial also discusses the net neutrality debate. Here’s another piece:

A separate debate—over net neutrality, the principle that Internet providers must treat all data equally regardless of their origin or content—has put the broadband crisis back in the spotlight. Earlier this year a federal appeals court struck down the FCC’s plan to enforce net neutrality, saying that because the FCC classified the Internet as an information service, it does not have any more authority to ensure that Internet providers treat all content equally than it does to ensure that CNN treats all political arguments equally.

In response, the FCC announced its intention to reclassify broadband Internet as a telecommunications service. The move would give the FCC power to enforce net neutrality as well as open broadband lines up to third-party competition, enabling free markets to deliver better service for less money.

Sounds great but…. current FCC chair Genachowski has said that although he regards the Internet as a telecommunications service, he does not want to bring in third-party competition. The Scientific American editorial speculates this move may have been intended to avoid criticism from policy makers, both Republican and Democrat, who have aligned themselves with large Internet providers such as AT&T and Comcast that stand to suffer when their local monopolies are broken.

The Scientific American editorial is an excellent read along with the growing number of reader comments. Check it out.

Some Good Broadband News for the U.S.

Last July I wrote about a couple of bills that were before Congress - S. 1492, the Broadband Data Improvement Act and H.R. 3919, the Broadband Census of America Act of 2007. These bills would improve information-gathering about current broadband deployment and assist in targeting resources to areas in need of such services.

A few days ago on September 26, S.1492 passed in the Senate by unanimous consent. Today (September 29), S.1492 passed in the House of Representatives without objection.

S. 1492 was introduced by Hawaii Senator Daniel Inouye in May of 2007. The bill would require the FCC to provide users with more accurate information about the cost and capability of their broadband connection, and to better compare the deployment and penetration of broadband in the United States with other countries. It would also encourage private and public partnership efforts that identify barriers to broadband adoption on the state level. Senator Inouye is quoted on the Speed Matters blog:

If the United States is to remain a world leader in technology, we need a national broadband network that is second-to-none. The federal government has a responsibility to ensure the continued roll-out of broadband access, as well as the successful deployment of the next generation of broadband technology. But as I have said before, we cannot manage what we do not measure. This bill will give us the baseline statistics we need in order to eventually achieve the successful deployment of broadband access and services to all Americans.

S.1492 will now move to a joint conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions.

Verizon To Push Higher Bandwidth In-Home Network Equipment

An inside contact at Verizon sent along some interesting content from a Verizon corporate website post. The content describes how Verizon will start encouraging their FiOS fiber optic customers to upgrade in-home network equipment. The company will have new routers available in the third quarter of this year from Actiontec and Westell. These routers will boost in-home speeds over coaxial cable to up to 175 megabits per second (Mbps) from 75 Mbps and allow operation of multiple simultaneous Wi-Fi networks. For example, customers will be able to modify security settings on each network, allowing a Wi-Fi network for guests and visitors, one with parental controls for young users, one for computers holding secure documents, or one for teleworking only.

Here’s a list of new design features and benefits:

Higher bandwidth, offering 175 Mbps total data flow in the home.

Support for up to four Wi-Fi networks, enabling more than one Wi-Fi network to operate simultaneously. Quality of service controls to give traffic preference to critical services like voice or security devices.

Remote management of devices and services beyond the router by technicians, improving the service and support experience for customers.

Integrated dual-core processor to allow simultaneous networked data services, possibly including home security, home monitoring, network security and other applications.

Support for media sharing between home devices, such as between TVs and PCs, media servers, and other consumer electronics, using DLNA and Universal Plug and Play standards now being adopted by hardware manufacturers to support connectivity and service integration.

Enable modular expansion using a USB interface, so that shared storage servers, printers, peripherals and other devices can be added.

It makes sense to upgrade internal network devices to keep up with the fiber infrastructure.

CostQuest Study: United States Lacks National Broadband Policy

CostQuest Associates, a national telecommunications cost consulting and software company, released results today of a 50 state survey conducted earlier this year. the survey was done to try and understand individual state policies to expand high-speed Internet availability. The survey was conducted over a six week period this past spring and involved (depending on the state) public utility commissions, legislators, governor's offices and various task forces. Overall, the survey concluded although most states have undertaken broadband initiatives, there is neither a single national model nor a consensus on best practices.

Here's some highlights from the survey report:

At least 39 of the 50 states have some form of broadband initiative in place, either through legislation or through a more informal effort to increase broadband access.

Only 10 of the 50 states have undertaken a definitive broadband mapping effort.

Only a select few have looked at the cost to deploy broadband in the currently unserved areas so as to provide information to encourage private capital as well as delineating the issue to determine if state assistance is needed in uneconomic areas.

According to Jim Stegeman, president of CostQuest Associates:

Most states are searching for ‘best practices’ and those currently developing broadband initiatives have taken an ‘a la carte’ approach, selecting elements of programs from other states. Many states are still in the planning stages, but there does not seem to be a one-size-fits all approach.

Stegeman also says:

By surveying what other states are doing, we are able to give federal policy makers a snapshot of how individual states are approaching broadband deployment with limited resources.

Take a look at the two page survey summary results linked here.

OCN (オーシーエヌ) Capping Bandwidth in Japan

Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT) owned Open Computer Networks (OCN, オーシーエヌ), one of the biggest Internet service providers in Japan has announced they will begin capping daily upload bandwidth at 30 G Bytes starting August 1. In an OCN press release dated 6/25/08, Tei Gordon, an NTT spokesman in Tokyo is quoted saying the 30 G Byte limit corresponds to about 7 full-length movies per day. Here's another quote from that same press release:

Although OCN has continued to expand its network bandwidth to accommodate increasing data traffic, a small number of individual users have been monopolizing substantial network resources by uploading massive amounts of data, which can slow the speed of the network and lower communication quality for other users.

The provider, which has about 7 million customers in Japan, will first warn customers who exceed the 30 GB upload daily limit. If warned customers do not back off, network access will be cutoff and the company may terminate their service contract.

I find it interesting that OCN is not capping download traffic - but - if you think about it they really cannot if they want to start selling things like movies and other large file products and services. I also cannot imagine what 100 MB must be like and cannot believe customers are only paying a $46 a month for the service. We've got a ways to go in the U.S.

You can bet all providers in the United States will be watching this closely.

Bandwidth Hogs and the iPhone 3G

A couple of weeks ago I purchased an AT&T USBCONNECT 881 3G card and have been doing spot bandwidth tests where 3G is available. The 3G iPhone will use the same network so these spot tests will be a good indicator of the kinds of bandwidths we can expect. You can see my speed test results by location linked here. Coverage and bandwidth has been good so far in areas where I spend time including out on Cape Cod in North Truro, MA.
On the left is a screen shot (click to enlarge) sample - 1324 Kbps downstream and 334 Kbps upstream in the wilds of the Cape Cod National Seashore - pretty good for a PC and would be very nice on a new 3G iPhone!

A recent piece on Gigaom titled Is 3G Ready for the iPhone Stress Test? is an interesting read. Here's a quote from the post:

The original iPhone runs on the 2G networks using a technology called EDGE. Despite the slower speeds, the data usage on AT&T’s mobile network ballooned due to the original iPhone. According to Chetan Sharma, our favorite mobile data guru, iPhone users used nearly five times the data used by average AT&T subscribers, and nearly twice as much as other smart phone owners. About 55 percent of the data was carried on Wi-Fi networks, while the rest was on EDGE.

3G bandwidth on a small handheld device..... sounds very nice especially for YouTube and other mobile video applications. YouTube does run on the original iPhone over the EDGE network but it is slow. As a result, most are only watching YouTube videos on their iPhones when they are within WiFi range. If users can now watch elsewhere - will mobile video become a 3G bandwidth hog? I think so.

I'm also interested in how AT&T will handle the inevitable BitTorrent iPhone file-sharing applications (these are much bigger bandwidth hogs) that will be rolling out this summer. The AT&T 3G service I purchased for my PC card has a monthly 5 Giga-Byte (GB) data "soft cap". Will users get cutoff for the month when the 5 GB cap is hit?

It's not just AT&T that's going to have to deal with these issues - they'll just likely have to face them first with the 3G iPhone.....Verizon and Sprint also have similar caps in their 3G wireless contracts.

Run a Speed Test and Support Broadband Reform in the U. S.

I've written here frequently about the broadband divide in the United States - poor availability, low relative (to much of the rest of the world) speeds where you can get it and high cost. A recent post by Mike Q referencing a piece from E-Business titled The Sad State of the United States Broadband Industry describes broadband services in our country:

Although the Internet was started here, the U.S. can't seem to catch up with other developed nations when it comes to giving citizens access to high-speed connections.

For the second year running, the U.S. ranked 15th among the 30 members of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development in terms of broadband availability. Denmark ranked first again in the annual OECD survey, followed by a host of European and Asian nations. Indeed, while the number of Americans with access to broadband service rose 20 percent last year, to nearly 70 million people, the most in the OECD, that amounted to just 23 of every 100 residents. By contrast, the top five countries in the OECD ranking all sport per-capita penetration rates of better than 30 percent.

Lack of modern definition and policy by the FCC, the antiquated Telecommunications Act of 1996, politics, business decisions...... lots of variables have resulted in many of our global competitors like Korea, Sweden, and Japan passing us by. FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps recently admitted:

America's record in expanding broadband communication is so poor that it should be viewed as an outrage by every consumer and businessperson in the country.

So..... what can we as individuals do? Last year SpeedMatters.org published the first-ever state-by-state report on Internet connection speed [PDF] and they are currently collecting data for a 2008 report. You can help by running a short (< 60 seconds) speed test - your data will be included in the SpeedMatters 2008 report. Here's a link to the test:



I'll be writing more about this over the summer.

Google's Trans-Pacific Fiber Optic Cable Project

Last week, on February 26, Google and 5 other international companies announced the Unity consortium. This group has agreed to run a 5 pair, 10,000 kilometer fiber optic communications cable connecting the United States and Japan. According to a Google press release, each fiber pair will be capable of handling up to 960 Gigabits pers second (Gbps) and the cable system will allow expansion up to eight fiber pairs.

At 5 pairs: (5 pairs)*(960 Gbps/pair) = (5 pairs)*(960x10⁹ bps) = 4.8 x 10¹² bps = 4.8 Terabits per second (Tbps)

At 8 pairs: (8 pairs)*(960 Gbps/pair) = (8 pairs)*(960x10⁹ bps) = 7.68 x 10¹² bps = 7.68 Terabits per second (Tbps)

The Unity consortium companies are:

Bharti Airtel - India's leading integrated telecommunications services provider.

Global Transit - A South Asian IP Transit network provider

Google - You know who they are!

KDDI - A Japanese information and communications company offering all communications services, from fixed to mobile.

Pacnet - An Asian company that owns and operates EAC-C2C, Asia's largest privately-owned submarine cable network at 36,800 km with design capacity of 10.24 Tbps.

SingTel - Asia's leading communications group providing a portfolio of services including voice and data services over fixed, wireless and Internet platforms.

By partnering with the providers, Google will be extending it's reach into the Asian markets - combined Bharti Airtel and SingTel have over 232 million mobile and landline customers. In addition, the system will connect into other Asian cable systems and reach more customers. Here's more from the google press release:

According to the TeleGeography Global Bandwidth Report, 2007, Trans-Pacific bandwidth demand has grown at a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 63.7 percent between 2002 and 2007. It is expected to continue to grow strongly from 2008 to 2013, with total demand for capacity doubling roughly every two years.

It's interesting to see competing Asian market providers partnering in a system within a system, with each having ownership and management of individual fiber pairs - a testament to the power and influence Google has.

NEC Corporation and Tyco Telecommunications will build and install the system with completion by the first quarter of 2010.

Tiered Internet Services Coming?

On January 18, Business Week published an interesting article about a trial Time Warner’s cable division will be running in Texas later this year. Here’s a quote from the article:

Time Warner Cable plans to test a multi-tiered price system for high-speed broadband service later this year. New customers in the trial area of Beaumont, Texas, will be charged different rates based on the amount of data consumed in a month, much like a cell-phone plan charges based on minutes used.

Right now Time Warner is saying they will offer plans priced for up to 5, 10, 20, and 40 gigabytes per month, with middle-tiered plans running roughly the same amount average users currently pay (around $30 per month) for high-speed connections. The company also says they will allow customers to go over their limit but they will be billed for the extra.

This actually makes some sense from both a business and a consumer perspective – the ISP’s have always said 5% of users consume as much as 50% of network capacity downloading vast numbers of large files, such as movies, videos, and songs. I think of my parents who use little bandwidth to check email and occasionally surf the web and compare them to our house where my teenagers are often watching and uploading videos on YouTube, uploading to Flickr, downloading Mike Q and my podcasts , etc. I’m certainly not putting my kids in that top 5% but you get the idea – why are my parents paying just as much as us when we’re using a lot more bandwidth?

Companies looking to sell audio and video products on the web (NetFlix, Apple, Amazon, etc) are the ones who could ultimately get hurt. If I’ve used up my 20 gigabytes this month I’m not going to download that movie I wanted to watch on Friday night……… Here’s another piece from the article:

Another unintended consequence of tiered pricing is that it could discourage some companies from launching new services that require large bandwidth, consumer advocates say. The plans could also penalize early adopters whose heavy use of new services helps developers come up with refinements that use up less bandwidth……

According to the Business Week article, Comcast is considering a similar plan. Right now, Verizon does not appear to be.

I’ve written in the past about the Amazon Kindle eBook reader. The Kindle uses a cellular network connection to deliver books purchased by users. The cost of cellular service is bundled into the price of the book by Amazon - users do not need a cellular contract to make purchases on their Kindle. Perhaps the ISP’s should consider similar arrangements with companies selling audio and video products on the web.

Broadband Divide: People and Businesses Moving for Bandwidth?

Ars Technica has an interesting post titled FiOS tops satisfaction survey; worth moving for? The post discusses a recent issue of Consumer Reports that rated Internet Service Providers (ISPs). In the Consumer Reports article Verizon's fiber optic FiOS service was declared to be best of breed. The Ars Technica post then goes on to highlight a couple of people who's recent moves were, at least in part, due to Verizon FiOS availability. Here's a quote describing Andru Edwards' relocation:

Andru Edwards of Gear Live tells Ars that he's one of those willing to relocate for the promise of fiber optic goodness. "I moved 10 minutes north of Seattle specifically for FiOS service," he tells Ars. "We push a lot of video to the web, and Comcast's 768k upload wasn't cutting it. Gear Live now has a 30 megabit down/15 megabit up connection. While customer service is horrendous (even ignoring possible security flaws that can result in easy identity theft), the FiOS connection is a Godsend for us."

And another quote describing Ars Technica's Editor in Chief' Ken Fisher's move:

"We're in a region where everybody is getting FiOS within six months, so it didn't really influence our exact location," he said. "We've had FiOS for almost four months and there hasn't been a single outage. It's always fast, it's so reliable that when you see performance problems online you can assume it's something other than your connection. In fact, some people will be disappointed when they get it and realize that it can't make Yahoo serve to you any faster."

I'm sure Yahoo (and others) will catch up in serving these high bandwidth areas so I'm not too worried about that. This is also not new news - Realtors have recognized over the past year or so that high bandwidth (like FiOS) availability can be used as a marketing/selling point - much like a 3 car garage or bonus room!

I'm also sure we'll see the cable companies going in with competing DOCSIS 3.0 based services in areas of high bandwidth availability. My concern continues to be the under served areas and, over the past year, my definition of an under served area has expanded to places where ADSL is offered. Sure ADSL is faster than dialup (if that is all you have) but when you compare it to FiOS type bandwidths.... it crawls. And........... don't forget, the "A" in ADSL stands for "Asymmetrical" - I've written in the past about the shift to symmetrical services.

Here's a few questions I've been asking myself:

• Will people start moving out of areas where high bandwidth is not available?
• What will happen to property values in these under served areas?
• Will businesses want to move into areas where high bandwidth is not available for the business and their employees?
• What kinds of academic issues will these communities face?

The Speed Matters blog has a post titled To candidates: How will we get high speed Internet?
Sounds like a pretty good question to me.

Verizon Demonstrates 100 Gbps FiOS TV Connection Between Tampa and Miami

In a press release today Verizon announced they have completed a 100 Gbps optical communications test between Tampa and Miami, FL. The two cities are 312 miles apart. Here's a couple of quotes from the press release:

Verizon has successfully concluded the industry's first field test of 100 gigabits per second (Gbps) optical transmission, on a live, in-service 312-mile (504 kilometer) network route between Tampa, Fla., and Miami.

The test, which utilized a live video feed from Verizon's national FiOS TV network as the "payload," was successfully completed Friday (Nov. 16). The 100 Gbps transmission was conducted on a Verizon Business ultra long-haul optical system carrying other live traffic at 10 Gbps. The test demonstrated that by deploying advanced electronics, an existing network system can easily and quickly be upgraded to 100Gbps.

The test was done using existing fiber that had been installed for 10 Gbps service. Here's a couple more quotes from the press release:

Unlike other trials that used 10 separate 10 Gbps wavelengths to carry 100 Gbps, the Verizon test utilized a 100 Gbps signal on a single wavelength, demonstrating Verizon's drive to promote "true" 100 Gbps in a serial fashion on just one transmission wavelength.

Like the equipment in the company's 40 Gbps trial in June 2004, the 100 Gbps equipment used in the field trial was implemented with a "plug and play" approach. This is a key objective for future commercial implementation, and means the technology was used without any changes to the fiber, amplifiers and other embedded equipment.

Amazing bandwidth obtained using existing fiber - the trial only swapped electronics using, according to the press release, Alcatel-Lucent's 1625 LambdaXtreme Transport system.

Uber-Bandwidth: Verizon Testing 400Mbps Service

Last month I wrote about Verizon's 20 Mbps symmetrical FiOS service - if you haven't had a chance to read that entry follow this link - there is a good description of asymmetrical and symmetrical services along with a quick video at the end demonstrating the differences between the two types of services.

A few days ago Gizmodo posted an interesting piece titled Next Up for Verizon FiOS: Invading Manhattan, Japan-Like Uber-Bandwidth. Gizmodo describes a Pennsylvania trial Verizon is running - in the trial they are seeing peak rates of 400Mbps downstream and sustained rates of 200Mbps upstream. Incredible bandwidth that, according to Gizmodo, is enough to make even the most hardened Tokyo resident jealous with their measly 100Mbps downstream fiber service. Yes - this is incredible bandwidth and we can only imagine the voice, video, data, entertainment and communications possibilities.

Let's back up a bit and take a look at the way Verizon is delivering services using the FiOS Fiber to the Home (FTTH) system. Verizon currently uses the Broadband Passive Optical Network (BPON) standard, which has limits of 622 Mbps downstream and 155 Mbps upstream for each Optical Line Terminal (OLT). OLT's are also referred to as service provider endpoints and one Verizon OLT will connect 32 homes with fiber.

Verizon is also currently using BPON OLTs to service their 20 Mbps symmetrical service which may or may not be a problem. Let's do some math:

Downstream Bandwidth
32 homes at 20 Mbps/home downstream require: (32 homes)*(20 Mbps/home) = 640 Mbps

Upstream Bandwidth
32 homes at 20 Mbps/home upstream require: (32 homes)*(20 Mbps/home) = 640 Mbps

You may think a fully loaded (32 home) BPON OLT running symmetrical 20 Mbps service does not provide enough bandwidth and you may or may not be right. It comes close in the downstream direction (622 Mbps available and 640 Mbps required) but is not even close in the upstream direction (155 Mbps available and 640 Mbps required). It turns out this may or not be that big of a deal - for now. Telephone company traffic engineers have always calculated voice switch connections using units called Erlangs. Erlangs are dimensionless units used as a statistical measure of the volume of telecommunications traffic. Brian Whitton, Verizon's Executive Director of Broadband Access Technologies is quoted in the Gizmodo piece on this topic as follows:

Of course 32 households couldn't run 20/20 full blast all at once but simultaneous peak usage on that scale is such a remote possibility it's not really an issue. Yet.

I always like to describe Erlangs and switch connection calculations using an example - have you ever got a fast busy signal when you tried to make a call? Perhaps on Mother's Day around 11 AM - a time when many of us are calling our Moms! The fast busy means there are no voice switch connections available. Why? Because the voice switch has has been configured more lines coming in to it than available connections. Most times and days of the year this is not a problem because we are not all trying to use the phone at the same time - it's only when call volume goes way up that we typically have problems - days like Mother's Day!

Right now Verizon is calculating that BPON will be ok for 20 Mbps symmetrical service - the chances of all 32 homes on a BPON OLT all purchasing 20 Mbps symmetrical service are slim and it's even more slim that everyone subscribing to a 20 Mbps symmetrical service will all be requiring maximum bandwidth at exactly the same time - today.

So how is Verizon delivering 400 Mbps downstream and 200 Mbps upstream? BPON only supports 622 Mbps downstream and 155 Mbps upstream - there is not enough upstream bandwidth for one customer with BPON and two customers at 400 Mbps is not possible. The answer is Gigabit Passive Optical Network (GPON) technology - an evolution of the BPON standard that supports higher bandwidths. GPON provides a maximum of 2.48 Gbps downstream and 1.244 Gbps upstream - enough, using the statistical methods described above, for Verizon to be seeing peak rates of 400Mbps down and sustained rates of 200Mbps in the Pennsylvania trial.

The Gizmodo piece continues:

"Virtually" every network hub built after January will be GPON-based, says Verizon. It has the network set up for easy upgrading, so to bump current hubs to GPON, technicians just have to swap out the boxes on each end of the fiber cable they've already laid. Not too much of a hassle, in other words. As each current hub hits its bandwidth limit, it too will be updated to super-fast GPON.

For those of us that can get it [ I can't :( ] we are just seeing the beginning of these Uber-Bandwidths!

700Mz Goldmine

The FCC will soon be auctioning off 62MHz of spectrum in the upper 700MHz band. Yesterday the FCC moved forward by approving some new rules that will give wireless users more choices in this country.The spectrum to be auctioned is being freed up based on a Congressional mandate as U.S. television broadcasters move from analog to digital broadcasts. There is an incredible amount of interest in this peice of spectrum because of its ability to be communicate over long distances and pass through walls and other obstructions.

Of the 62 MHz, 22 MHz will be considered "open access" spectrum with another 10MHz dedicated to public safety networks used by first responders - firefighters, police, etc.The "open access" rule was heavily debated and pushed hard by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin and others at the FCC. Providing "open access" will allow consumers to use any device and software they want in the open access spectrum range.

It looks like Google is happy with the open content provision but Google was hoping another provision would be approved. This provision, if it had been approved, would require the spectrum licensee to sell network access at a wholesale rate to other service providers including direct competition. Google had dangled a minimum bid of $4.6 Billion which many (including Verizon and At&T) believe was an attempt by Google to keep the price down - basically low-ball the auction and picking up broadband spectrum at a bargain price. Kevin Martin was especially concerned this would seriously lower the bidding price and the provision was not included in the rules. As a result, it does not look like Google will participate in the auction at this time.

The spectrum will be auctioned off no later that January 28. 2008 and I've read auction predictions of anywhere from $10 Billion to $30 Billion will be bid for the spectrum.

Regardless of who gets it and how much money is spent by the licensee - in the end it will mean more choice, bandwidth and lower cost to the consumer.