The bandwidth explosion will mean cheaper broadband for internet users

bleh69 said:
how to tell Telkom to unbundle the local loop:

step 1 : purchase (or borrow) a small/medium/large petrol generator. (the bigger the better)
step 2 : find a telkom distribution box in the area and break it open (might need some kit for this)
step 3 : once open, find the trunk lines (the ones coming in from the bottom) and cut them all off.
step 4 : this takes a while - but strip all those loose ends and twist as many together as possible.
step 5 : screw these wires (remember - as many as you can) into a standard 220v plug. Doesnt matter which goes on which side ( live or neutral )
step 6 : plug this plug into the generator and fire it up.
step 7 : stand back.
step 8 : let your setup run for about 30 seconds - then pack up and get the #$%# out of there.
step 9 : get wireless internet.
Click to expand...

LOL. I would Pay to see that.
 
Why is there not more emphasis to extend the MetroNet to more than just big business, cause that renders Telkom useless - who needs Copper when you can have Fibre ?
This is the area where all ISP's should be focussing on, forget the LLU, it ain't going to happen, lay more Fibre all over SA and connect anything with a heart-beat to it, thats what's happening in 1st world countries.

Currently the SA ADSL home user feels like a hungry patron in a glass cubicle eating peanuts (Copper Telkom line) next to Steers where some nice juice burgers are being prepared (Fibre line in road 20 meters from my home). To use this Fibre line VodaCom wants R7000 a month (for only 2Mbps - Yes, I know QoS is very good and it is 2way speed - but still not FTTH). I have a family member in Japan with a 20 Mbps Fibre line and no cap, directly to his home - and it cost them much less than my unreliable 4Mbps Telkom line.
 
Would local-loop unbundling help with the cable theft problem? much of the last-mile infrastructure has been destroyed by cable thieves and telkom themselves aren't doing much to repair the situation. Surely if that last-mile potential could be shared by most ISP's in the country, then greater initiative can be taken in ensuring that this important part stays functional ?
 
ave said:
nice one- very interesting...
Click to expand...

Eassy has landed which has a little bit more bandwidth than seacom but the big boy is WACS. That one is going to make a huge difference in bandwidth availabilty.

Now if the fat cats would just pass it on....
 
I have one question though. Whats going to happen to the current long term seacom contracts holders when cable competition drives the price down? Will they have to pay the higher original pricing for the duration of their contracts?

I've always wondered about this, because it might partially explain the kinda slow seacom take up.

Any ideas Rpm?
 
Joe Average said:
Why is there not more emphasis to extend the MetroNet to more than just big business, cause that renders Telkom useless - who needs Copper when you can have Fibre ?
This is the area where all ISP's should be focussing on, forget the LLU, it ain't going to happen, lay more Fibre all over SA and connect anything with a heart-beat to it, thats what's happening in 1st world countries.
Click to expand...

+1

Sounds completely reasonable to me. What restrictions are there for any business to provide FTTH to private consumers? It's its own entity separate from any Local Loop legislation, no? And considering how aggressive someone like DFA is in rolling out fibre to corporates, shouldn't it be feasible to get the currently much smaller home user base hooked up?

If it costs R7000 to provision a dedicated 2 Mbps fibre line from Vodacom, then surely given contention ratios, that pipe could serve say 10-15 users with a price range of say R700 per user. And then if volumes pick up, that price will go South quickly and one should be able to provide more bandwidth at even less cost thus making it lucrative.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but why does this sound so reasonable and nobody seems to be tackling it?

And fibre has no intrinsic value unlike copper, so it's theft proof AFAIK.
 
Last edited:
KampfGherkin said:
+1

Sounds completely reasonable to me. What restrictions are there for any business to provide FTTH to private consumers? It's its own entity separate from any Local Loop legislation, no? And considering how aggressive someone like DFA is in rolling out fibre to corporates, shouldn't it be feasible to get the currently much smaller home user base hooked up?

If it costs R7000 to provision a dedicated 2 Mbps fibre line from Vodacom, then surely given contention ratios, that pipe could serve say 10-15 users with a price range of say R700 per user. And then if volumes pick up, that price will go South quickly and one should be able to provide more bandwidth at even less cost thus making it lucrative.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but why does this sound so reasonable and nobody seems to be tackling it?

And fibre has no intrinsic value unlike copper, so it's theft proof AFAIK.
Click to expand...

Oh, thank you !!! There are more brains out there asking the same questions - ignore Telkom, they will be redundant in 5 years if the independent Fibre Network is in place and ISP's compete on it. Think big, very, very big ! ;)
 
Firstly, great article. Really informative and kept me interested all the way through. :)

Seacom's total capacity is 1.27Tbps, but only 10Gbps was provisioned to South Africa.
Click to expand...

...only 10Gbps was provisioned to us. Okay, unless I have got the tail by the cat again, that really was a surprise. I was under the impression we were going to get a lot more?

So how much is "provisioned" for South Africa from EASSy and WACS?

Ironically, despite the lack of interest in Seacom capacity at launch, the entire allocation of capacity has been sold out. Neotel's executive head of technology Angus Hay confirms that the operator is in discussions with Seacom to have more capacity lit up.
Click to expand...

Makes sense, as there would have been a lot of uncertainty around their arrival, run off of contracts with Telkom, etc. But nice to see that capacity is all taken up. At least the SA market has supported their venture.

If you've driven down to Durban from Gauteng recently, you'll have seen the trenching.
Click to expand...

Thought as much. Was wondering what all the trenches were for. And all that cable lying unguarded on the side of the roads? That's taking a huge risk, is it not? Or is there no value there? :D

By the end of next year we'll be awash in bandwidth. The problem is Telkom still remains in control of the local loop - the so-called last mile from an exchange to your home/business. There have been continuous delays in the freeing up of access to that infrastructure (local-loop unbundling).
Click to expand...

Such a great article to be spoilt in its conclusion. But I guess that it is the reality, is it not.

Eish! :(
 
Price/capacity mismatch ???

Donsy said:
Here is a visual picture of what is going on
http://manypossibilities.net/african-undersea-cables/
Click to expand...

OK, so ...
Seacom cost $650m for 1.28Tb/s := 1Tb/s cost $508m (Active)
EASSy cost $265m for 1.4Tb/s :=1Tb/s cost $180 (2010 Q2)
WACS cost $600m for 3.84Tb/s :=1Tb/s cost $157m (2011 Q2)

What's up with that disparity?
Will the capital cost have a big impact on the wholesale price of bandwith?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X