Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Networking The Internet News Technology

Dutch ISP Demos Symmetric 100Mbps DOCSIS3 159

Posted by timothy
from the why-in-my-day dept.
Mark.JUK writes "CAI Harderwijk, a DOCSIS 3.0 based Cable Modem operator in the Netherlands, has apparently managed to achieve a world first by demonstrating symmetric broadband internet access speeds of 100Mbps. The tiny Dutch operator is home to just over 16000 customers and was already planning a switch onto Fibre-to-the-Home (FTTH) technology, although this may now be delayed. The test itself is important because cable operators are still, perhaps unfairly, seen by some as being inferior to fully fibre optic-based broadband services. In reality, cable operators are, for the most part, continuing to keep pace."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dutch ISP Demos Symmetric 100Mbps DOCSIS3

Comments Filter:
  • Elementary (Score:3, Funny)

    by drmofe (523606) on Wednesday November 10, 2010 @03:33AM (#34183940)
    Carbon-based life-forms using silicon-based computing systems with copper-based communication lines. We need to break these bonds.
    • But using the existing copper is cheaper, because it eliminates the need to hire millions of men to dig ditches to lay fiber.

      I'm also wondering why they offered 100/100 internet. Since I don't rarely need to upload anything, I'd rather have 190/10 internet so I have a fast enough pipe to grab HD video across 4 or 5 sets.

      • by sxpert (139117)

        there's no point in digging, as that's already been done, and copper been pulled through;
        time to remove the old copper, recycle it, and pull fiber in it's stead.
        no need to hire millions...
        should take about a year for your medium-sized city

        • >>>copper been pulled through;

          Pulled through what? Almost all of it is just bare cable under the dirt.
          .

          >>>time to remove the old copper, recycle it, and pull fiber in it's stead. no need to hire millions...

          Size of United States: 3,537,441 square miles
          Number of Homes: 110 million units
          Miles of Copper connecting these homes: 2 billion miles (telephone)

          So yeah I think you WILL need millions of men to dig the copper out of the ground and then replace it with buried fiber, especially if you

          • by sznupi (719324)

            That's really how it happens at your place? At least in some (that I'm sure of) parts of the EU, I guess also Netherlands, it's basically a pipe through which stuff can be...wait for it...pulled through.

      • by tlhIngan (30335)

        I'm also wondering why they offered 100/100 internet. Since I don't rarely need to upload anything, I'd rather have 190/10 internet so I have a fast enough pipe to grab HD video across 4 or 5 sets.

        Probably because it eliminates the biggest downside to cable - that uploading kills the network. All the cable companies hates BitTorrent because uploads kill the network - once the upstream channel is flooded, everyone's service suffers. Netflix, YouTube, and anything downstream-heavy they don't care - there's pi

  • And yet no provider is going to stand for more than a couple of people actually operating at that speed more than a few hours a month. Lines are congested; transit isn't free. Internet access is being mis-sold just like everything else today: on the basis of a few upfront figures but ignoring the ongoing experience.

    (Only yesterday I was confirming once again that there is no point upgrading my 10-year-old printer and CRT, while another dead mid-range LCD gets dismantled for parts after five years of life.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Splab (574204)

      Err, not everyone lives in countries with no consumer rights.

      I can go at 40-50mbit all day both directions and not a word from my ISP (capped by my inferior linksys router, actual line speed is 60mbit) - what they have realised around here is most people wont be going "balls-out" all day on their connection, there is simply a maximum for how much information any given pira.. err user can crave.

      • So are you confirming or disagreeing with what I said? I'm also on one of the few "Unlimited" ISPs in the country which, to everyone's knowledge, has never (for those on its premium brand) kicked someone off for excessive usage, nor does it shape traffic.

        This is only possible, as staff have suggested, because pretty much everyone either transfers an insignificant amount of data or practices restraint. If even a sizeable minority were to take unrestrained advantage of the Internet's wealth of multimedia reso

        • by Kjella (173770)

          This is only possible, as staff have suggested, because pretty much everyone either transfers an insignificant amount of data or practices restraint. If even a sizeable minority were to take unrestrained advantage of the Internet's wealth of multimedia resources, as has been increasingly happening with mainstream ISPs, the ISPs end up introducing fair usage policy/caps/throttling/traffic management (sometimes not revealing this last until a few technically minded people demonstrate it).

          If the norm for what is "normal" to use on an unlimited line changes, then the company should change their oversubscription, not add more (*) conditions. This whole thing is created by having one product, even though we know the profitability varies greatly and trying to "clamp" it so the unprofitable ones can't actually use it as advertised. If you want a "Value" subscription that isn't like the "Unlimited" subscription, then go for it.

          They've tried that here, everyone went for the cap-free subscriptions s

  • This is the technology the Australian Coalition party is suggesting is equivalent/good enough compared to FTTH. If this is the first live deployment of it, I would want to know distances involved to get these speeds, and how many bonded pairs are required - and if these pairs are installed in Australian DOCSIS setups.

    Also, no-one seems to feel that a symmetrical connection is valuable, focus is on download speed and upload speed a footnote. As a business operator with off-site backups, as well as transferri

    • by xnpu (963139)

      IMHO, upload is becoming increasingly important. More and more people are stuffing things onto cloud drives, youtube's, video calls, etc.

      As for the distance in Netherlands: where I lived the TV cable divider was rarely more than 500m away. Much better than copper, which I was usually 4-6km away from.

  • Inferior to fiber (Score:4, Informative)

    by PseudonymousBraveguy (1857734) on Wednesday November 10, 2010 @04:36AM (#34184160)

    The test itself is important because cable operators are still, perhaps unfairly, seen by some as being inferior to fully fibre optic-based broadband services

    Of course cable *is* (technologically) inferior to fiber. There's no doubt about it. 100Mbps would be trivial on fiber, heck 1Gbps would be trivial on fiber. The only advantage of cable is that it's already there, whereas for FTTH the vast majority of households will have to wait for a long time until they are connected.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Kvasio (127200)

      No, there is another one. For time being, POE works way better on copper than on fibre.

      • by fgouget (925644)

        No, there is another one. For time being, POE works way better on copper than on fibre.

        How many cable ISPs provide POE? How many DSL ISPs do so for that matter? Right. None. So that point is irrelevant in this discussion.

        • by Kvasio (127200)

          unless you have to power a repeater on the long line ... of course "longer line" is different for fiber than cable, but still, it might be necessary.

    • Cable is superior in one very important way: it is already in the ground, meaning that it costs a lot less to use than newly laid fibre. That said, the quote was about cable services being seen as inferior to fibre services, and this is often not true. A 10Mb/s cable service is clearly inferior to a 1Gb/s fibre service, but a 100Mb/s cable service is not necessarily worse than a 100Mb/s fibre service.
    • It is true, that fiber has more theoretical bandwidth. Light operates up in the 100s of THz range. However making use of all that potential bandwidth isn't as easy as one might hope, particularly in a passive network. Remember that FTTH is NOT fiber like you find in a data center. It is not a point-to-point, active network. It is a passive optical network. That is a point-to-multipoint setup where you have multiple people connected using passive optical splitters and you are sharing bandwidth.

      Well this impl

    • by fgouget (925644)

      Of course cable *is* (technologically) inferior to fiber. There's no doubt about it. 100Mbps would be trivial on fiber, heck 1Gbps would be trivial on fiber.

      Correction: 1Gbps is trivial on fiber.

      In France the number one ISP, Orange [generation-nt.com], is deploying fiber using the G-PON [wikipedia.org] technology for residential service. This means 2Gbps downstream and 1Gbps upstream. Of course they don't give you access the the full bandwidth, mostly for commercial reasons. However the point is that the 'optical modem' they send you already communicates at gigabit speeds while being cheap enough to be deployed on a large scale.

  • Cable DOCSIS 3 technology can achieve 160/100 mbps to a node, which is shared between 64, 128, or even more users, depending on how cheap/small the cable company is. For comparison's sake, Verizon's FIOS uses a Passive Optical Network (PON) to share 1 or 2.4 gbps among 32 users, depending on how aged the equipment is. Currently Verizon is testing XGPON, which will allow them to deliver 10 gbps to 32 users. This will make 1 gbps connections the standard. There is no competition between cable and fiber.
    • by dingen (958134)
      How does 1 gbps make cable superior to fiber? Fiber has no trouble at all to offer that kind of bandwidth.
    • by Ksevio (865461)
      On the other hand, the typical speed provided to the consumer is 5-25 Mbps so until they start upping that dramatically, it's not going to matter.
  • by should_be_linear (779431) on Wednesday November 10, 2010 @05:15AM (#34184284)
    With high speed Internet, at one point it might be simpler to download zip with all relevant films ever made then to download it one by one. Lets assume there is 100 quality films created each year. For one movie in reasonable quality, you need 1GB. Assuming most people are interested in last 50 years of film industry and only few pieces older then that, you get something like 5TB zip file. Now, lets assume this 100Mbps line works on average with 60% avg. speed, it means 8 days to download "movie" file. So, still plenty room for improvement. We need something to download it overnight.
    • by mikael_j (106439)

      For one movie in reasonable quality, you need 1GB.

      I'm not so sure about that, with current state-of-the-art compression we're still looking at 720p movies weighing in at 2 GiB for decent quality. And for a lot of movies it makes a lot more sense to aim for 4 GiB rather than compromising quality just to save a little bandwidth.

      If you're going with 1080p you can probably expect an average file size of 5 GiB per movie or so if you want reasonable quality. That's more like 25 TiB with 50 * 100 movies (although I find that number suspiciously high, I'm usually

      • by PitaBred (632671)

        Not everyone downloads to keep. Streaming is where things are currently moving, and people are going to want consistent, high performance for that. What if I want to stream and watch a different movie than the kids or the wife? That doubles the bandwidth right there.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by fnj (64210)

        Anything less than 10GB for a movie looks like CRAP.

        • I take it you don't watch many DVDs? The limit is 8.54 (10**9)bytes (=7.95 (2**30)bytes) for a standard single-sided disc.
          • by fnj (64210)

            What makes you think I only watch single sided DVDs? And what makes you think that I am the least bit impressed by standard definition DVDs?

            • Only a handful of commercial DVDs use both sides for the same movie, requiring the watcher to manually reverse the disk part-way, and the ones that do are generally very long (over three hour) "epics" which cannot fit on one side at standard bitrates. The use of both sides, in other words, does not significantly improve the bitrate or quality compared to shorter movies which do fit on one side.

              If you think an average standard-definition DVD "looks like CRAP", particularly in the context of online streaming,

        • Anything less than 10GB for a movie looks like CRAP.

          With what codec? The inefficient MPEG1? The better, but still not that great MPEG2? Or one of the newer MPEG4 codecs?

          MPEG2 generally did 480p (720x480p, stretched to fit) in 3-5Mbps. h.264 can do 720p easily in 3-6Mbps and 1080p would be in the 4-8Mbps range (maybe as high as 10-12Mbps for really busy features).
    • For one movie in reasonable quality, you need 1GB.

      Mmmm... 720p clips in h.264 run anywhere between 1.5Mbps (tends to end up rather blocky) and as high as 7.5Mbps for more complicated clips. All depends on scene detail, how clean the source is, whether you have a lot of random elements in the background (blowing trees, ocean/lake water with lots of reflections). The middle of the range tends to be in the 3.0-4.5Mbps range for 720p and about double that for 1080p.

      So, for a 2 hour film, 1.5Mbps is about
  • by Device666 (901563) on Wednesday November 10, 2010 @05:58AM (#34184406)
    In the end we will end up with fiber, but not necessarily because of the obvious reasons. In Negroponte's book "Being Digital" he writes about the Chinese destroying the network because of theft of the copper. So the Chinese had to use fiber because copper based network became very expensive in numerous ways. I don't say the Dutch or citizens of any other country will steal the copper, but if there is so much speculation in the commodities prices might become so high fiber will become most attractive. I am Dutch. Just before the dot com boom I moved to a rented flat. This new flat had fiber everywhere and not yet cable. Then the dot com bubble exploded and neither the cabling, telephone or fiber company wanted to do further investments on their networks. I ended up living above a fiber network which wasn't finished and no cable, so I had to resort to my old 56K dailup modem, while most people had cable or adsl. I remember the price of downloading a debian iso image. My telephone cost where often around 800 euro's that time. Ofcourse I moved again shortly. But I still hear that on my old flat they don't have fiber, though they do have cable.
    • by ledow (319597)

      I'm in the UK. There are stories every other week about theft of metals like railway lines and signalling, telephone cabling, even manhole covers etc. for sale on the black market. It costs the companies involved millions each year and they have special insurance for it. This is part of the reason that BT uses as much fibre as they can now and are pushing FTTH or FTTC.

      I was stunned to see copper guttering on the outside of buildings when I visited Europe recently. There is no way that something like tha

      • Wow, that gave me a great business idea, selling fake "electrocuted" birds. You put a couple of those in front of your house along with a speaker playing a buzzing/cackling sound and you can probably scare off all but the very smart or very stupid thieves :P
  • Comcast filters 100mbps cable speed news from its customers...
  • In reality, cable operators are, for the most part, continuing to keep pace.

    Keep pace with who? Another monopoly I am unware of? I'm pretty sure my ISP would deny the existence of DOCSIS 3 if I asked them about it, let alone this strange thing you call symmetry.

  • Fixed IP addresses? (Score:5, Informative)

    by FridayBob (619244) on Wednesday November 10, 2010 @09:08AM (#34185474) Homepage
    One of the things I hate about cable Internet is that, in the Netherlands (and probably elsewhere as well), consumers always seem to be given dynamic IP addresses. So, I called up CAI Harderwijk, a non-profit organization incidentally, to ask them directly about this. Apparently, they are indeed a cable operator (not an ISP), so they said this issue was always up to the various ISPs that make use of their infrastructure. Nevertheless, I asked why, in their opinion, do cable ISPs in general not offer fixed addresses? Well, they do, apparently, since this is also possible with previous DOCSIS versions, but its a privilege that is usually reserved for business customers. Most cable ISPs consider it unnecessarily expensive to provide all customers with fixed IP addresses.

    Otherwise, CAI Harderwijk now have a thoroughly modern infrastructure. For instance, they can remotely control the availability of their services to individual clients. This is as opposed to UPC (the only available cable ISP in and around Amsterdam), who still have to arrange their client connections locally and manually. The latter method has the added disadvantage that a small percentage of cable customers will always enjoy services for which they do not pay -- something that is impossible to avoid due to the scale and the administration involved. CAI Harderwijk does not have this problem; an advantage that they can now pass on to their ISP customers.
    • Most ISPs around the world are starting to keep fixed IP addresses as an "added extra". It's nothing to do with cable/DSL/fiber.

      There's two good reasons: people will pay more for fixed IP addresses and IPv4 addresses are starting to get expensive because they're running out (dynamic IP addresses can let you cram 10%--50% more users into the same address space).

      Get a dynamic name instead -- you don't want to enter a number anyway.

A committee is a life form with six or more legs and no brain. -- Lazarus Long, "Time Enough For Love"

Working...