Sponsored Links

Why not symetrical?

Whilst I do appear to be spiralling into silliness,
Well....yeah kinda ;)

The reality is if you really require a symmetric connection - you can simply buy an ethernet service from myriad providers, often or not on an Openreach provided tail.

The foot stompers demanding our oxygen-deprived regulators enforce symmetric connections on consumer broadband providers are probably short of their morning coffee.
 
Not read to the end, but there is a very good reason for the majority of internet connections not offering symmetrical connections. Its not needed. It is not used. An analogy. Your car comes with 6 forward gears and only 1 reverse gear. Why? Because there is no need to go to fast in reverse. No need for 6 gears in reverse and the extra cost and complication that would involve. Like wise when it comes to internet majority of traffic is download, with only a small % in upload (get requests for web pages, downloads).

So no, symmetical connections should not be the default. Not needed.
 
Pretty sure most things about ultrafast connections are 'not needed'. Doesn't mean they aren't good to have.

Most folks upload more than they think they do: OneDrive is built into Windows.
 
Pretty sure most things about ultrafast connections are 'not needed'. Doesn't mean they aren't good to have.

Most folks upload more than they think they do: OneDrive is built into
Because its a business, you don't add cost for something that's not needed. No return on that investment.
 
Because its a business, you don't add cost for something that's not needed. No return on that investment.
The infrastructure is already there, it isn't going to cost them anything apart from a technician's time to adjust the config file for the speeds.
 
Sponsored Links
The infrastructure is already there, it isn't going to cost them anything apart from a technician's time to adjust the config file for the speeds.
I'm not sure is? For a start FTTP is just the last mile, usually OR. That's usally GPON they use encryption between the OLT and the ONT. So the ONT and OLT are spec'd / forecasted for asymmetric speeds - presumably grater processing capacity going to be needed for symmetrical connections? Then within the ISP networks there's the cost of lines and the equipment that process packets. Again presume equipment has been spec'd / forecasted for asymmetic, so to do symmetric is presumably require more processing power thus cost?

As for it's just a config file change, yep assume the bearer to the propery 1Gbps? And connect back is 10Gbps+. Are we talking CIR or PIR. WIth my plusnet FTTP assume is 300Mbps PIR, and CIR is 165Mbps (as guaranteed 165, max is 300). There is still a hard stop on bandwidth through the backbone and the capacity of the devices processing the data.

So would you be happy with being able to burst up to symmetrical speeds instead of being capped, but perhaps a higher contention ratio. So download is 1:10 share 1Gbps (just guessing don't know real values) but upload is 1:100. So if there is the b/w you can burst up to same speed as you download, in my case 300Mbps, but if a lot of people uploading at same time, I'll be guaranteed 35Mbps?
 
OR does not even give that option, if we had the choice i think some people will pay a lil more for same download to upload.


CEO of Zen talks to OR CEO and askes the question why not symmetrical and he answers at 9:50 mins into the video.
9:00 "We don't think about overbuild, we just don't do that" => HAHAHA What a lie! My telegraph pole wasn't upgraded as it was defective and needed a cherry picker and Openreach couldn't be bothered even though all streets and poles around me were upgrade to FTTP. A year later Community Fibre comes and deploys their service on my pole. A week later I see not one, not two but 3 Openreach crews upgrading my telegraph pole. Coincidence? I don't think so!
 
I'm not sure is? For a start FTTP is just the last mile, usually OR. That's usally GPON they use encryption between the OLT and the ONT. So the ONT and OLT are spec'd / forecasted for asymmetric speeds - presumably grater processing capacity going to be needed for symmetrical connections? Then within the ISP networks there's the cost of lines and the equipment that process packets. Again presume equipment has been spec'd / forecasted for asymmetic, so to do symmetric is presumably require more processing power thus cost?

As for it's just a config file change, yep assume the bearer to the propery 1Gbps? And connect back is 10Gbps+. Are we talking CIR or PIR. WIth my plusnet FTTP assume is 300Mbps PIR, and CIR is 165Mbps (as guaranteed 165, max is 300). There is still a hard stop on bandwidth through the backbone and the capacity of the devices processing the data.

So would you be happy with being able to burst up to symmetrical speeds instead of being capped, but perhaps a higher contention ratio. So download is 1:10 share 1Gbps (just guessing don't know real values) but upload is 1:100. So if there is the b/w you can burst up to same speed as you download, in my case 300Mbps, but if a lot of people uploading at same time, I'll be guaranteed 35Mbps?
GPON is a shared network with all customers sharing 2.4G down, 1.2G up.

The access network is the only asymmetrical link in the chain. Everything else is symmetrical and is used more heavily in what is to customers the downstream on a standard ISP. Upload is inconsequential to resources required which is why AAISP for instance don't count it in their usage limits.

The OLT kit is specced based on the ports it has not what a single customer may use. Whether a customer has 50 or 500 up doesn't matter to the OLT: all it cares about as far as resource goes is the total load on the port.

You mentioned upload isn't used much. If that's the case there should be no issue with offering higher burst speeds. If usage is so intermittent relative to downstream offering way more upload shouldn't be a problem.

It's purely a business decision. There is no technical reason for Openreach being so asymmetrical and they could absolutely increase it, though not to fully symmetrical, with no consequence or cost in terms of capacity.
 
GPON is a shared network with all customers sharing 2.4G down, 1.2G up.

The access network is the only asymmetrical link in the chain. Everything else is symmetrical and is used more heavily in what is to customers the downstream on a standard ISP. Upload is inconsequential to resources required which is why AAISP for instance don't count it in their usage limits.

The OLT kit is specced based on the ports it has not what a single customer may use. Whether a customer has 50 or 500 up doesn't matter to the OLT: all it cares about as far as resource goes is the total load on the port.

You mentioned upload isn't used much. If that's the case there should be no issue with offering higher burst speeds. If usage is so intermittent relative to downstream offering way more upload shouldn't be a problem.

It's purely a business decision. There is no technical reason for Openreach being so asymmetrical and they could absolutely increase it, though not to fully symmetrical, with no consequence or cost in terms of capacity.
Thanks for the info (y)
I took on what you said, so did a quick google.


So would seem it is due to the technology chosen? The main reasons for that technology being cost and speed of deployment?

In a residential street, a GPON network would be a good fit.
In a business park, specifically aimed at technology companies, then the offering would probably by PTP and more costly as a result.

So it was business / legislative decision. To change the technology deployed now would be a huge cost, that would not be recouped and would go against the legislation which is to get faster, more reliable connections out to the majority of households as soon as possible,
 
Indeed. That it's asymmetric at all is a function of the technology chosen. That the ratio of asymmetry is so high is a business decision on the part of Openreach.

At some point soon Openreach will start offering XGSPON however it will be in addition to the legacy GPON services, not replacing them, and will run on the same fibres.

Openreach are, strangely, pushing GPON pretty hard in the downstream direction, testing a product that gives one user 75% of all the bandwidth.

CityFibre have a product in planning that'll give a single user 2 Gbit/s down and 1 Gbit/s up. This is similar to offers elsewhere in the world, most are pretty light users, however it will certainly not hit full speed at peak times all the time.

A general capacity planning rule of thumb on shared networks like these is to deliver the peak time average load + the maximum a single user can consume and it works pretty well most of the time as there are relatively few sharing the bandwidth and more than one maxing out for any length of time is unlikely.
 
Sponsored Links
It's an absolute joke that there are no symmetric consumer-grade FTTP options from OR.
No, it's not a joke. It's market forces in action.

If you really need (or want) symmetric 1G/1G, you can have it now: buy a leased line. Expect to pay upwards of £300 per month, depending on where you live. It's definitely available to most of the UK, from a range of providers and networks, although there may be one-time excess construction costs to pay too.

What you're really saying is: you want 1G/1G symmetric, but you want to pay much less (let's say, more like £50 per month).

There are good reasons why most commercial ISPs don't want to make that offering to you.

1. Most customers object to usage caps, more than they object to asymmetric speeds.

If they were to offer 1G/1G with no usage cap, then there would be people who would fill it 24x7. And they would have to sell such a service at a much higher price to accommodate that usage (or sell it at a loss).

If they were to offer 1G/1G with a usage cap, almost nobody would take it up - and therefore there's point providing it.

2. Download usage doesn't tend to vary much with speed.

That is: if you give someone a 1G download link instead of a 300M link, they'll likely download the same amount of data, just in a shorter amount of time. They still have to make use of that data: there are only so many games you can play in a day, or 4K UHD videos you can watch.

However, uploading tends to have a different usage pattern. If you are a P2P seed node, then you will fill your upload capacity 24x7. If you are doing regular non-incremental backups, you can fill your upload capacity. If you host your own website and it becomes popular, it can fill your upload capacity.

Therefore, limited upload speeds act as a sort of brake on abuse, without actually giving usage caps or AUP limits. A consumer ISP can probably cope with a few users each filling 100M 24x7; it's much harder to cope with the same number of users filling 1G 24x7, when they're still only paying low cost residential rates.

3. Linked to these is revenue protection. Openreach and Virgin Media both have large leased line businesses, with people paying good money for 1G/1G business grade uncontended links. Some of those would downgrade to a lower-priced 1G/1G contended service if it were available.

It's therefore in OR and VM's interests to differentiate these products, and upload speed is one key way.

Remember though that market forces are in still play. If there were many people like this who would choose the lower-priced product, then there's an opening for a new entrant to challenge the encumbants with a more attractive offering. And there are a few. In practice though, most ISPs don't want to take on this sort of customer with a high-speed, low-cost product, for the reasons listed above: there's too high a risk involved.

4. People are more cost-sensitive than you think. Given a choice of a 1G/1G product at £60 per month, or a 1G/100M product at £50 per month, the vast majority of users would take the £50 product. Given almost no customers would take the 1G/1G product, there's no incentive for it to be provided, unless it's at the same price as 1G/100M.

Of course, there are a few exceptions. Providers like Vodafone on Cityfibre are happily offering 1G/1G products on GPON (despite the fact that GPON only has 1.2Gbps of upload speed, shared between up to 32 users). That's because they are desperate to take any market share they can, and will accept the risks in return for gaining a few tech-savvy customers with heavy usage.

However as outlined above, Openreach and VM have strong reasons not to do this. Since the proportion of customers who care about upload speeds is very low, they know they will only lose a small number of customers this way. In the big picture, having better control over the remaining customers, and protecting their leased line revenue, is far more important.

As for XGS-PON: this is a technology, not a product. Even though Virgin Media is deploying it, that doesn't mean they'll ever offer symmetric residential services: that will be entirely a marketing decision.
 
I still think its mostly just business segmentation.

From an altnet perspective, there is no existing leased line revenue to protect or other similar services, and they need as many customers as possible as fast as possible so offering an attractive product is part of that.

Openreach have brand recognition, solid existing customer base, existing market segments to protect so will deploy something thats in their own interest, and as much as I hate to say it the vast majority of people dont care enough to get ultra fast upload speeds.

CF's underwhelming growth is an indicator of this.
 
Top
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £24.00 - 26.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
NOW UK ISP Logo
NOW £24.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £25.99
145Mbps
Gift: £50 Reward Card
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £17.00
200Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Youfibre UK ISP Logo
Youfibre £23.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Sponsored Links
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (6027)
  2. BT (3639)
  3. Politics (2721)
  4. Business (2440)
  5. Openreach (2405)
  6. Building Digital UK (2330)
  7. Mobile Broadband (2146)
  8. FTTC (2083)
  9. Statistics (1901)
  10. 4G (1816)
  11. Virgin Media (1764)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1582)
  13. Fibre Optic (1467)
  14. Wireless Internet (1462)
  15. 5G (1407)
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules