Why dont we get 1:1 connection?

[xserver]

[color=rgb(40,40,40);font-family:'Droid Sans', helvetica, arial, sans-serif;]1:1 is for leased business lines i.e no one but you is connected on the network. MTNL provides it and its dam expensive since only one user is there and no sharing is taking place.[/color]
in unleased lines all people connected to it will go offline if anything happens to it. it is 1:10 or 1:20 in crappy ISPs it even higher.

Its the other way around . 1:1 Lease Line is a Dedicated Bandwidth which is Dedicated to you whether you use it or not. In case you are not using it , the Bandwidth sits idle in your bucket. The irony being is that the Bandwidth which sits in your Bucket will anyway go waste if you are not using it , so today's generation ISP do utilize the bandwidth allocated to you not with the motive of cheating but with the motive of bringing your ownership cost down.
However this is unnoticeable due to the fact that Telco does it on a very large bucket of bandwidth. The one thing which you will notice that there is a fine print which says "Speed is Upto ISP Node Only"

 

[mgcarley]

I have never mentioned the term "GPON" and if you pulled up GPON then there are both symmetric and asymmetric versions available.

Really. Do enlighten me, oh wise one (oh, and you're only allowed to include versions which are commercially available). And notice I said GPON, and not APON, BPON or EPON because the latter aren't deployed in India.

I am quite sure that till last year Beam , You, ACT were on simple FTTB network none of which is "GPON".

Really. One of the former GMs at Beam who I speak to on a reasonably frequent basis would beg to differ.

When i talk about 1:1 , it doesn't mean that the line rate should be 1:1 but i meant that the upload should not kill the downstream as it usually happens in wireless network used by numerous ISP / Local Cable Operators to transport the back haul bandwidth.

Unfortunately this is a limitation of wireless technology, not a fault of the provider, necessarily. As far as wired stuff I usually only see upstream kill downstream speeds when someone stupidly sets a port to half-duplex. I've caught cablewalas doing this numerous times, and it annoys the crap outta me - they do it to force the connection to be slightly more fault tolerant (instead of spending even 1000 on a new switch or 200 on a fresh cable).But still, almost all technologies used to reach consumers are asynchronous - doesn't matter if we're talking DOCSIS, DSL or FTTX. The only time I've seen it be truely different is when the fibre uplink is active rather than passive, but given the cost of active, it's rare to see in India BUT no matter which technology is used, the customer never sees any limitation anyway simply because his downstream speeds are also quite low. If everyone on the network was using an 100mbit/s service, the upstream limitation becomes much more obvious (you'll have to see it to believe it).

 

[xserver]

Really. Do enlighten me, oh wise one (oh, and you're only allowed to include versions which are commercially available). And notice I said GPON, and not APON, BPON or EPON because the latter aren't deployed in India.

Now next you will ask then only discuss the version which are deployed in your back yard. You challenged FTTH cannot be symmetric , I answered to you that indeed it can be symmetric. EPON is FTTH and therefore you cannot skip the existence.

Really. One of the former GMs at Beam who I speak to on a reasonably frequent basis would beg to differ.

Speaking and seeing yourself are again an entirely different approach. Have you ever visited Beam NOC ? Let me know how many Nortel Fiber Switch and GPON OLT you will find there.

Unfortunately this is a limitation of wireless technology, not a fault of the provider, necessarily. As far as wired stuff I usually only see upstream kill downstream speeds when someone stupidly sets a port to half-duplex. I've caught cablewalas doing this numerous times, and it annoys the crap outta me - they do it to force the connection to be slightly more fault tolerant (instead of spending even 1000 on a new switch or 200 on a fresh cable).But still, almost all technologies used to reach consumers are asynchronous - doesn't matter if we're talking DOCSIS, DSL or FTTX. The only time I've seen it be truely different is when the fibre uplink is active rather than passive, but given the cost of active, it's rare to see in India BUT no matter which technology is used, the customer never sees any limitation anyway simply because his downstream speeds are also quite low. If everyone on the network was using an 100mbit/s service, the upstream limitation becomes much more obvious (you'll have to see it to believe it).

I have never said that its the fault of the provider. I had clearly mentioned that each technology has its own caveats and if technology permits then provider should not restrict the upload speed. Asynchronous has nothing to do with limiting the upload speed because most of the technology except half duplex medium will support a good upload speed and subscriber will never feel the need of extra upload speed if the provider does allow it.

 

[mgcarley]

Now next you will ask then only discuss the version which are deployed in your back yard. You challenged FTTH cannot be symmetric , I answered to you that indeed it can be symmetric. EPON is FTTH and therefore you cannot skip the existence.

No, I specifically referred to GPON, and that which is currently commercially available. A manned mission to mars is also in the pipeline sometime this century (probably) but nobody has done it yet so you can't really say it's there and working.Now, while you are *technically correct* that EPON is symmetric, there are two issues that prevent it from actually being relevent:1. EPON is rarely deployed in an actual FTTH situation, EPON is usually used in HFC scenarios. HFC networks are inherently limited in their upstream bandwidth, meaning that even if the backhaul is symmetrical, the technology that reaches the end user does not allow for it.2. There are differences between what's actually implemented in the field and what is/was available on the market - I'd struggle to find EPON equipment for sale in any of the catalogues I get sent every other month. Don't take everything you read on Wikipedia as gospel.

Speaking and seeing yourself are again an entirely different approach. Have you ever visited Beam NOC ? Let me know how many Nortel Fiber Switch and GPON OLT you will find there.

Well, 2 reasons for this. Firstly, I'm inclined to believe the guy who actually runs the network as opposed to some random person, and secondly, Nortel went bankrupt years ago, so I'd hope they don't have much Nortel equipment left - if anything.As such, you won't find many OLTs in the NOC since the typical distribution mechanism is *not* to distribute GPON from the Central Office. The reason for this is the inherent distance limitations of PON.Do I need to tell you the exact model routers they're using for backhaul/distribution/accounting before you'll believe me (especially considering it's not my network, I don't know it as thoroughly as I would if it were), or are you just trying to present this as an argument as you try to fish for information as to how a live ISP network works and what it contains? If you're just fishing for knowledge, just say so, I don't mind sharing some information.

I have never said that its the fault of the provider. I had clearly mentioned that each technology has its own caveats and if technology permits then provider should not restrict the upload speed. Asynchronous has nothing to do with limiting the upload speed because most of the technology except half duplex medium will support a good upload speed and subscriber will never feel the need of extra upload speed if the provider does allow it.

Which technologies would they be? ADSL? 1mbit/s (well, 1.3 technically). Even ADSL2+ only does 1mbit/s up even though technically it should do 3.5 (but it doesn't because no provider ever uses the profile required to offer those speeds). VDSL? Similar story. DOCSIS? Forget about it. WiFi? 3G? LTE? No, no and no.And with the vast majority of FTTH installations not just in India but around the world for the last 5-ish years being deployed with GPON, there comes a point there where the upload speeds of even that are somewhat limited simply by the nature of the technology - but it's only really noticeable once the download speeds start exceeding a certain amount (about 35-40mbit/s).Interestingly, it becomes less noticeable when you get to the much higher speeds (well above 100mbit/s) because the congestion in either direction on the network goes down and I've observed it getting to the point where users actually get a *higher* upload speed because fewer people are actually using the upload (say, on Google Fiber).This, however, doesn't change the simple fact that if everyone were saturating their connections, the mathematics would win (about 78mbit/s down and 38 up on a typical GPON network, or less if there's several subscribers connected to the same ONT as I've seen in some FTTB installs).

 

[xserver]

I never referred to GPON in the first case . I referred FTTH which you twisted as per your interest.
You think that the GM of Beam Runs the Network ? Do you have any idea where and How Beam Started ? They started off as a Cable Operator in Banjara Hills .. End of Story.
Nortel went bankrupt doesn't mean that all Norton gears were thrown away in the trash.
NOC or POP both are the same ( used for Distribution ).
You need not have to tell met the exact model of Routers ( Why the Heck someone is going to use a Router over a GPON network for Distribution / Backhaul / Last Mile :nono: )
Beam has been using active fiber and switches mainly from Volktek. I might have a few snaps of their Termination Box which doesn't looked like ONU to me and for billing they use Magnasoft. Recently they have been converting their network with GPON but that doesn't change the fact they they are still on active fiber in most parts.
When did you read that i was referring ADSL technology for symmetric ? I was referring to FTTH which offers symmetric but even its asymmetric people can get more upload speed. At the end of the day its all upto the provider to make up their mind.

 

[mgcarley]

I never referred to GPON in the first case . I referred FTTH which you twisted as per your interest.

Le sigh. Yes. There's a good reason for that: it's the primary method of FTTH deployment in India, which is what is relevant to this discussion.

You think that the GM of Beam Runs the Network ? Do you have any idea where and How Beam Started ? They started off as a Cable Operator in Banjara Hills .. End of Story.

Official title: CTO. So yes, I do think that. As it happens, that's how most ISPs in India seemed to start.

Nortel went bankrupt doesn't mean that all Norton gears were thrown away in the trash.

Except that Beam has grown rather significantly since that time and as such even if Nortel gear was *just* being installed in their network 4 years ago, it's well past EOL now.

NOC or POP both are the same ( used for Distribution ).

Not really. NOC = Network Operations Centre. It's generally considered that the NOC is the "central" part of the network. POP = Point of presence, generally serving the local area.A NOC could catch on fire and take out the operations for half the country (as happened to Airtel in 2011). A POP could catch fire and take out operations for only that local area.

You need not have to tell met the exact model of Routers ( Why the Heck someone is going to use a Router over a GPON network for Distribution / Backhaul / Last Mile :nono: )

When I say "router", I'm not talking your little Rs2k piece of plastic that you went to Croma and purchased. I'm talking about a proper router. Whether a Juniper MX series or a custom-built Mikrotik box, it's still a router. So yes, they are going to use that to distribute bandwidth from the CO to the PoP (AND NOT OVER GPON, YOU'LL NOTICE I MADE A DISTINCTION).

Beam has been using active fiber and switches mainly from Volktek. I might have a few snaps of their Termination Box which doesn't looked like ONU to me and for billing they use Magnasoft. Recently they have been converting their network with GPON but that doesn't change the fact they they are still on active fiber in most parts.

Up until quite recently, Hyderabad was like Mumbai and all the stuff you as a user could have seen would have been owned by the cablewala, however Beam has been doing what we want to do and slowly getting rid of them by buying them out or whatever. The parts of the network which haven't been standardized yet use a hodgepodge of different equipment from different vendors and those same parts would not have been built by Beam itself - basically, if it's a cablewala network, Beam wouldn't have had any control over it and it would have been [name of cablewala] installing active fiber instead of GPON. As far as what Beam itself has builts though, that's been PON.As for their internals, I'm well aware of the majority of their systems, thanks - I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by rattling off the names of the billing system they use (considering it's reasonably well documented) and stuff like who manufactured the switch in the box you checked out that day.

When did you read that i was referring ADSL technology for symmetric ? I was referring to FTTH which offers symmetric but even its asymmetric people can get more upload speed. At the end of the day its all upto the provider to make up their mind.

I didn't, but you said "most of the technology except half duplex medium will support a good upload speed", so I was asking you a question - as denoted by the presence of a question mark at the end of the sentence - as to which technologies in real life would be truly symmetrical - and yes, I'm talking about consumer, not enterprise. In short, none of the commonly deployed technologies that end users see is really symmetrical. The next version of PON will be more so, but that's still a while away.Yes, you *can* get symmetrical access on many technologies under the right circumstances BUT this will give you some serious limitations - that is to say, on ADSL you'd be restricted to 1mbit/s download as well. Or VDSL 10. Or FTTH below 35 and above ~200. And excepting FTTH, allowing the maximum upload speed while limiting the download speed would kind of miss the point and, in a lot of cases, make things worse.

 

---

[xserver]

You do think but till now you didn't had any idea about how Beam started. Ask Mr. K* - CTO and maybe he will be able to tell you more about it.
Beam grew significantly due to rapid acquisition of customer base under many commitments which are yet to be fulfilled none of which you are aware of.
I have multiple NOC and every NOC is actually a NOC and if one NOC catches fire it doesn't disrupt my entire operation. In my language i call it a Distributed Setup rather than Centralized.
Seems like some is purchasing their Router from Croma. I don't give a damn to shiny metals called Juniper , they are oversold for the performance they carry. Mikrotik on the other hand is awarded with crappy hardware.
You have no idea what Hyderabad was like .. I assume that you haven't even spent more than a week over there trying to understand the network. You might be just sitting with CTO over a long Cofee Break where he would have been storytelling you of all accomplishment Beam has made over the year and made Hyderabad a Digital Age Paradise for the whole country.
Wrong Again , Beam initially worked completely on Active Network. How many witness you need who can vouch about it ? I can bring countless network engineer who can testify the same.
It was you who said in your last mail " Do you want me to tell you the exact Router Model which they are using " . I am unaware of what they are using now but i have informed about what they used to use. I am rattling because i have the correct knowledge and FYI the Billing Application is not documentation anywhere.
Anyway i see that this discussion is getting into an argument which has no end to it . So i am better off these nonsense discussion.

 

[mgcarley]

You do think but till now you didn't had any idea about how Beam started. Ask Mr. K* - CTO and maybe he will be able to tell you more about it.Beam grew significantly due to rapid acquisition of customer base under many commitments which are yet to be fulfilled none of which you are aware of.

Congratulations, you searched Google and/or Linkedin. Well done you.I'm well aware of how Beam started - as I already mentioned, many ISPs in India have started out the exact same way - but it's not relevant to this discussion and I'm not sure why you're bringing it up, especially since nobody was asking. I'm also not sure why you think I should care about commitments they're not fulfilling. I'm not involved in the company, I have my own to worry about, and that's a big enough worry by itself.

I have multiple NOC and every NOC is actually a NOC and if one NOC catches fire it doesn't disrupt my entire operation. In my language i call it a Distributed Setup rather than Centralized.

Oh you do, do you? Which company is this for again? Let's see some credentials: your name, and photo (preferably one that proves it's you and not just something you take from Google Images).

Seems like some is purchasing their Router from Croma. I don't give a damn to shiny metals called Juniper , they are oversold for the performance they carry. Mikrotik on the other hand is awarded with crappy hardware.

And attacking the 2 vendors (of many) that I chose to name for whatever reason has what relevance to this discussion? Which manufacturer would you prefer I name next time? Which is your favourite? Go on, tell me.

You have no idea what Hyderabad was like .. I assume that you haven't even spent more than a week over there trying to understand the network. You might be just sitting with CTO over a long Cofee Break where he would have been storytelling you of all accomplishment Beam has made over the year and made Hyderabad a Digital Age Paradise for the whole country.

No, not really. You assume too much.

Wrong Again , Beam initially worked completely on Active Network. How many witness you need who can vouch about it ? I can bring countless network engineer who can testify the same.

Again, I'm not denying that there is/was active fiber in parts of the network however these are in parts of the network that Beam did not build and which is being replaced. If it was acquired - you even agreed to that in one of your previous statements - so it wasn't Beam's. Please re-read what I wrote.

It was you who said in your last mail " Do you want me to tell you the exact Router Model which they are using ".

The complete question provides the context - please re-read.

I am unaware of what they are using now but i have informed about what they used to use. I am rattling because i have the correct knowledge

OK, I'm going to let you re-read what you just wrote in this same sentence: "I'm unaware what they're using now [...] I have the correct knowledge".What they used in the past is not particularly relevant to now considering Beam in particular is vastly different now to how it was 2, 3, 4 years ago.

FYI the Billing Application is not documentation anywhere.

Apart from the fact that Magnaquest made a press releases about how Beam switched to them which was distributed throughout publications concerning the business, rather conveniently, at a time when we were looking at our first billing system.

Anyway i see that this discussion is getting into an argument which has no end to it . So i am better off these nonsense discussion.

I'm not the one getting hoity.

 

[tyrannosaurhex]

Its a technological constraint with ADSL. One cannot get 1:1 speed on DSL. If you want 1:1, pay up and buy a ILP/ILC.

 

[xserver]

You can easily get 1Mbps 1:1 over ADSL. If you are calculating the Line rate as 1:1 then it's possible but not yet feasible. Someone once said in the forum that *GEPON* is asymmetric so may I ask "How ISP over GEPON is able to provide 10Mbps/10Mbps" . Is it the line rate which is limiting or the ISP side which is limiting ?