Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 12:34:20 -0600 (MDT) From: Jawaid Bazyar <bazyar@hypermall.com> To: inet-access@earth.com Cc: inet-access@earth.com, linuxisp@friendly.jeffnet.org, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG, iap@vma.cc.nd.edu Subject: Re: US West and RADSL (fwd) Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.980606122248.20041D-100000@hypermall.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.93.980606085536.13151C-100000@sidhe.memra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 6 Jun 1998, Michael Dillon wrote: > If a DSL customer uses the telco as their ISP then the telco routes their > packets through their own Internet connection. But if the customer chooses > an alternate "DSL-enabled" ISP then the telco routes the packets through a > local connection to that ISP. This local connection is what makes the ISP > DSL-enabled. > > Note that this is different from what most ISPs want. Most ISPs want to > install their own DSLAM in the telco building and hook the customer's > copper directly to that. Or alternatively they want to be in a building > next door with reasonable low rates for access to the copper something > like zero-mile circuits that are found in colo facilities. Let's examine what ISPs *think* they want. The cheapest DSLAM setup that can host more than a single customer and scale to anything reasonable costs in excess of $10,000. Yes, you can get a onesy-twosy Pairgain modem type thing for a grand or two, but do you really want to pay $2K per port long-term? I didn't think so. Alright, the Denver metro area as an example has approximately 30 central offices. Instantly, in order to reach the whole potential customer base, you're looking at $300,000. Just in equipment. Now you have to tie all that together, in which case you're probably still looking at (minimum) 30 T1 ports into an ATM cloud, at $400 per month each, for a total of $12,000 a month. Not to mention co-location/rent fees, anywhere from a couple hundred to a couple thousand a month. And yes, you *have* to hit the entire area for this to make economic sense, because we're seeing loop qualification rates of 15% to 25%. That means that less than a quarter of the phone lines coming into the office are even capable of having DSL run over them. So, take your existing customer base, divide by two to weed out those who won't pay more than $20/mo for anything, divide by five to get the number you can reach at all with DSL, and divide by two again for those who are happy with their existing internet service. Are you *really* going to invest $300,000 cash and $12,000 to $50,000 a month so you can serve DSL to maybe 1/20th of your customer base? Exactly which "most ISPs" can afford that? Ohh, right. The *big* ones. Let the telco make this infrastructure enhancement. That's what it is. The economics of this dictate that some one single company make the investment, and since it's the telco's copper and the telco's central office, and since the telco is willing to sell the service at a very reasonable price, let the telco pay for it. For ISPs to try to get Washington DC to 'force' telcos to give them access to something that doesn't make any economic sense is a complete waste of energy. That energy should be spent on spam legislation, or fighting the comeback of Internet censorship. Force the telcos to let ISPs in, and you'll get it. But it won't be "most ISPs". In fact, forcing this may well make it impossible for small ISPs to get access, whereas only the largest ISPs can afford the "drop a DSLAM in every CO" arrangement. The above might be feasible in a small town with one or two COs. But not in any large metro area - and that's where the big money is. -- Jawaid Bazyar | Affordable WWW & Internet Solutions Interlink Advertising Svcs | for Small Business bazyar@hypermall.com | 910 16th Street, #1220 (303) 228-0070 --The Future is Now!-- | Denver, CO 80202 (303) 789-4197 fax To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.91.980606122248.20041D-100000>