Unlimited bandwidth idea

plug

Active Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2003
Messages
97
This is only a couple of thoughts.. maybe it can work..

I'm almost sure you can get satelite internet in South Africa but pay some oversea's firm for providing it. (I've seen this somewhere). Since the firm is overseas where bandwidth is cheap then it makes sense to think that it will be much cheaper than Telkom. If memory serves me correctly then all bandwidth I saw supplied were unlimited.

So let's say you are an ISP then it could make a lot of sense to get a really cool satelite connection with unlimited bandwidth. Then you just start a VPN solution for ADSL users. Latency will be crap but at least this could be an unlimited/cheap bandwidth option.
 

Goobie

Expert Member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
1,571
...on the same topic of bandwith via satellite, Sentech has the infrastructure and ability to hook up to international bandwith and bypassing SAT3, why don't they? For some of us latency is not an issue. I would gladly surf a cheaper web with high latency.
 

loosecannon

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
731
well it aint that cheap as timeslots on a satalite are pricy we were paying 150k/month for 2mb/s a while back ... that was download only there are cheaper options now ...

TTFN
 

podo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
288
Sentech just wouldn't try. Transtel did something similar for a few corporate clients, but this was quickly squashed when they got leaned on very heavily by Telkom and ICASA.

Willie Viljoen
Web Developer

Adaptive Web Development
 

armitage

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2003
Messages
1,146
Doesnt sentech's multimedia license state that they can use satellite?
cause otherwise even providing a wireless connection without telkom supplying it would be illegal

Proud South african rip offs.
 

podo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
288
armitage,

In terms of their multimedia license, they can pretty much use anything they like, they could even use powerline or laser link internet connections if they wished. They can not, however, carry international traffic. Anything that you do through Sentech still has to be routed through Telkom's network. For local bandwidth, Sentech connects directly to the ISPA's JINX peering point, for which it pays Telkom premium line rental charges. For international bandwidth, Sentech use a huge bandwidth allocation (of which MyWireless only gets about 5%) on Telkom's portion of the SAT3/WASC/SAFE cable network. For this, Telkom charges Sentech the earth.

That's why the contention ratio for MyWireless is so high, and why Sentech's VSTAR VSAT services, which have guaranteed bandwidth, are priced so high that Diginet becomes a better option. Sentech really can't do anything about it. Until legislation changes such that parties other than Telkom are allowed to carry international traffic in and out of the country, do not expect bandwidth to become any cheaper, and do not expect anybody to find a way around this without getting sued by Telkom.

Transtel's license allows them to carry international traffic over a direct satellite connection to the U.K. This is, however, restricted to internal corporate traffic for Transtel itself, and its parent company Transnet. The reason Telkom took Transtel to court was that Transtel had actually started selling bandwidth on its huge international satellite link to large corporate clients in South Africa, at prices that made Telkom's SAT3/WASC/SAFE international access options look very, very bad. The decision by Transtel to abdicate from the court battle does not bode well for the S.N.O, since Transtel is one of the major share holders in the yet to be established operator. Theoretically, we could see a situation in a few years where we have the S.N.O, providing us with slightly cheaper local and long distance national calls, but where we are still paying a premium rate for bandwidth, since the S.N.O. will probably not be allowed to carry international traffic either, which would mean, we will still be buying everything from Telkom.

The only way we will see a real reduction in bandwidth cost is complete telecommunications industry deregulation. However, in the case of a developing country like South Africa, that is a very bad idea. Deregulation would allow large foreign corporations to provide service directly to the South African market. These corporations could easily finance massive infrastructure for connections to South Africa, and could introduce international internet and voice services at prices that are much lower than any South African company would be able to muster. The problem there is that all the profits made from such a service would flow out of the country and in to the pockets of the foreign investors. That is extremely bad for a developing economy, it would simply be too great a sacrifice to make, even though we would have better connectivity. Moreover, the pricing would probably still be steap anyway, since the foreign companies would want to be payed in Dollars, and given the exchange rate, would have to price their offerings pretty high. The constant outflow of cash would also cause the currency to fluctuate, meaning further price increases, so, total deregulation simply isn't an option until our economy becomes more stable and more mature.

Willie Viljoen
Web Developer

Adaptive Web Development
 

random_seed

Active Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
31
An outside corporation might be what we need to get the ball rolling... You also have to look at it from the aspect that it will create jobs and free up the massive potential for economic growth through broadband and telecommunications services... reduced overheads, more room for growth would mean this bonzai could grow into a big oak and lay its foundations firmly into world markets...

R_S
 

random_seed

Active Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
31
In terms of Satellite, it is currently against the law to transmit via Satellite, only recveive is permitted... A company called SDN a while back did it and was providing cheep bandwidth to ISP's until Telkom shut them down... Only way is Sat in, Fiber out... The fiber is the expensive part...

R_S
 

podo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
288
random_seed,

In terms of Sentech's multimedia license, and indeed, Telkom's own license, it is not illegal to transmit to satellites. Telkom and Sentech VSAT customers actually have bi-directional satellite connections.

As for the question of globalisation and overseas companies being allowed into a deregulated market: I wish it were as simple as that. In the short term, some compettition from overseas would probably benifit those people who want massive internet connections, but in the long term, it will be bad for all of us.

Consider this nightmare future scenario:

2005: The S.N.O. is licensed and starts to do business, selling basic voice services only at around the same prices Telkom charge.

2007: The South African telecommunications industry is completely deregulated and local and overseas companies start preparing to enter the South African market. SBC sell their massive stake in Telkom, providing them with capital to construct their own infrastructure, and causing Telkom's share price to plummit, leading to job losses and price increases.

2009: SBC complete their infrastructure and start selling service directly to the South African consumer, at about 20% of the price charged by the S.N.O, and about 10% of the price charged by Telkom. Consumers flock from the S.N.O. and Telkom to the SBC, who will at that time, be considered the telecommunications Messiah. Everyone gets cheap broadband and free local calls. The exodus of customers from the S.N.O. and Telkom causes a confidence crisis amongst their remaining shareholders and both companies collapse in a spectacular Saambou bank like financial fiasco.

2010: In the wake of the collapse of the only local companies providing national service, SBC uses its buying power to buy out the infrastructure from both defunct companies, to augment its own infrastructure. It then uses its dominant position to underprice its competitors and drive them out of the market through buy-outs or bankruptcies.

2011: SBC is the only remaining telecommunications operator in South Africa. Suddenly, prices begin to rise, service levels begin to drop, infrastructure investment stops completely. Now, we find ourselves paying prices set in Dollars, which are about 5 times higher than even Telkom charged us in 2004, and to top it all off, because the industry is deregulated, both ICASA and government can do absolutely nothing about SBC ripping off the entire country for the benifit of their rich, fat American shareholders.

2020: After nine years of stiffled economic growth and the collapse of many South African businesses, due to the extortionist pricing of SBC, the only operator, the government decides to nationalise all telecommunications infrastructure, to protect South African consumers and businesses. To avoid W.T.O. and U.N. sanctions, the government must now buy the infrastructure out from SBC, at an incredible price, which is passed on to tax payers, and causes the newly resurrected government operator, iTelkom, to charge the same high prices we pay now, just to fund the infrastructure buy-back.

The scenario depicted above is not alarmist. In fact, this has happened before to many developing countries, not just in terms of telecommunications, but in terms of all business. As soon as the market is opened to large corporations from dominant foreign countries, the corporations will take advantage of their size to underprice local competitors and drive them out of the market. Then, they use their monopoly position to milk the defenceless developing country for ever last cent.

All things considered, I'd rather have the regulatory status quo, than opening up the market and exposing us to this kind of danger. Perhaps, in 20 years or so, the economy may have matured and the currency gained value to a point where local operators could compete in fair market conditions with overseas operators. When that time comes, deregulation would be healthy, as it would encourage compettition, however, at the moment, and for the immediate future, deregulation would be the dumbest move we could make.

Willie Viljoen
Web Developer

Adaptive Web Development
 

random_seed

Active Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
31
Naaaaah,

Well, who really knows. Obviously it would have to be regulated. I also doubt wether Helkom would just roll over and die. Essentially there needs to be a catylist which forces a reaction from Helkom... Helkom gets a fright, starts to become competitive, prices drop and everyone wins.

R_S
 

Nickste

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
1,083
Thanks for the post Podo, was very interesting reading ;-)
I actually had no idea that telkom were the only ones allowed to do international, i just thought Sentech had no luss to do it!

Would a solution not be to open the provision of international bandwidth market to South African companies only, thus keeping the profits in the country? Sure the local companies wouldn't have the large amount of startup capital that SBC has, to build initial infrastructure, however, it will protect us from being taken to the cleaners by foreign companies.

What do u think?

Chow, Nick

Nick Smit
broadband@nicksmit dot za dot net
 

podo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
288
Nickste,

Sadly, no South African company around today would be able to afford the costs of construction for the kind of infrastructure that would be needed to take international traffic away from Telkom. Fast satellite connections could probably be used as an interim communications medium, but the latency involved would prevent the service from being viable for businesses that need real time services, such as banks, financial institutions, foreign exchange traders, etc.

To build a second submarine cable to connect South Africa to the outside world would just not be possible without significant foreign investment, so that isn't on the cards just yet, at least not without exposing ourselves to the danger of foreign companies milking us for profits.

The only economically viable solution I to our current problem that I can think of, would be to nationalize the South African portion of the SAT3/WASC/SAFE cable system. Then, government could resell international access to local operators at more or less the cost of operation and maintenance. This would level the playing field and allow local companies to compete for customers with value added services, while bandwidth is available at prices that would allow even smaller ISPs to enter this market.

Sadly, this would come at a great cost to the South African tax payer, as the government would need to buy out the cable from Telkom, who could set virtually any price they wish.

Willie Viljoen
Web Developer

Adaptive Web Development
 

joema

Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
21
well, just a thought - what about low-orbit satellites?
word has it that the latency is minimal - sub fibre - and it is possibly not as expensive.
 

keru

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
489
Will competition or a SNO make a difference. We have three cell phone comapnies , all private. That has not made any difference to the tariffs. The only way out is to prove to govt that lower connectivity costs are beneficial to the whole nation and is not a luxury anymore.
 

podo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
288
joema,

Low earth orbit satellites aren't really an effective solution for internet access or any form of communications. The main drawback to L.E.O. satellites is that in order to stay in orbit, they have to move at blistering speed. If a satellite in L.E.O. were to attempt to "sit still", like satellites in geosynchronous orbit, or to move slowly, it would simply drop like a brick and either burn up in the atmosphere, or crash spectacularly on the surface. On average, a satellite in L.E.O. will only be visible, or trackable by receivers, for about 5 to 15 minutes at a time.

Thus, to use L.E.O. satellites for any form of communication, you need to launch enough of them to have continuous coverage. In other words, when one satellite drops below the horizon, the next must already be trackable. This drives up the cost tremendously and creates more problems. If you want to have continuous communication via L.E.O. satellites, you need a dual-dish satellite array with movable motorized dishes, where one dish will track a passing satellite, while the other points itself to where the next satellite should rise and starts to track it as it does, with the first dish reverting back to a waiting position for the next satellite, alternating every 15 minutes or so. These arrays are extremely expensive and can still not guarantee continuous communication.

Even if we could use L.E.O. satellites, they still wouldn't solve the main problem, which is international bandwidth. L.E.O. satellites can not be used to connect internationally, since they are never in the same place for more than two seconds or so, and are not high enough to have the line of site needed to relay signals to other satellites. The high latency comes in to play when traffic needs to be relayed between geosynchronous communications satellites orbiting over different locations. First, the signal must travel at least 36 000km, then, it can travel many hundreds of thousands of kilometers, bouncing between different satellites in order to reach the one which must send it back down to earth. Then, it travels at least 36 000km again to reach the surface. The overhead incurred from passing through several satellites operating under heavy loads is also significant. In fact, I'll go out on a limb and say that if it were possible to bounce a 2.4GHz wireless connection signal off the moon, the latency might have been better than with multi-hop satellite connections. Sadly, moon bounce is only possible for very low frequency radio signals, otherwise I might even have suggested we build a few large antennae and try it. [:D]

Willie Viljoen
Web Developer

Adaptive Web Development
 

reech

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
1,141
So, how about campaigning to re-nationalise the international bandwidth resources?
The UK government pulled it off with one of their railway companies (boy were those shareholders p155ed off) - I'm not saying all of telkom, just the national resource that we've all payed for. Telkom can buy bandwidth like everyone else.
 

regardtv

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
1,537
If I recall - there was recently a new moon-bounce experiment done ... must go searching ...
 

Lourens

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
450
Do anyone know what happened to the four hundred satellites that Bill Gates wanted to place in orbit around the globe specifically for Internet access - saw this on Dstv a while back.
 

Nickste

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
1,083
Was wondering...

Would it be possible for me to stick a dish on my roof and connect to a European ISP? If it would work, what would I need, and what would it cost?

Chow, Nick

Nick Smit
broadband@nicksmit dot za dot net
 

podo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
288
Nickste,

Not really. Most of the satellites used by European ISPs are the same satellites used by our own favourite co-monopolists, Telkom and Sentech. The companies operating the satellites sell "satellite time" through individual rental packages for each beam. Thus, an ISP which wants to serve Europe would buy time on the PAS7 and PAS10 "North" beams, while somebody wishing to serve Central Africa would buy time on the "equatorial" beam, and somebody wishing to serve South Africa or Australia, would buy time on the "South" beam.

The northern beams from PAS7 and PAS10, and all other major satellites in geosynchronous orbit, for that matter, can not be received anywhere South of the Sahara, so I'm afraid that's not really an option. [:(]

Willie Viljoen
Web Developer

Adaptive Web Development
 
Top