From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED8053B2A4 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 11:49:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hms-beagle2.lan ([79.192.253.1]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M1AIu-1g1DL63C2q-00tDVg; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:49:20 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:49:19 +0200 Cc: Ryan Mounce , Cake List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <82B8E043-75FA-4814-969C-3E3C166C94A2@gmx.de> References: <4C129A60-21D3-4B78-A764-DC8E2CD7E4DF@gmail.com> <6839ba220fe4399eba3620620515fc1dd801a509.camel@gmail.com> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:F+KMhuo86whN6VZPLpTayaglriWq8w9AyxBrWB/8GdKnkyi8XLb hKW6ADRallpYMF65ZXDdmJuQodwfZTlB5SxbdXlS6f3qYQ4ifOCD8hriebPgQje4+EXXBTP uvh42jYeoZgvKSIiaVULE+0B5ER8t6K9zbCajrlQ1fWlBaeTQpqEW07zDP5k3IS8UCgjbQv fvbyH2ivoGT13BPGVzQ9Q== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:B+QShn6YUYw=:VUUBXixHfWW1f3JWH9Q05X Tme4GmIauqJ3mvI2OqcwnYZbQlDmDtiMHzeX+riKt4d26eglCUBtfLpEgQ8hHMaB/Jhsvfvf4 NWl3izMHOS+10Rq5Bnd8+s2+ryuzpOIXNSXLyW5TLpJWBcHkmS4ISJZOPDpGs3vqkk89Qr+b6 AP+JToAAk2jnIU0q6G0MS2YSqKJSB268Xkx5OI/LOle5g66iQBQBpiRvjwJuvKXrcj68iC2wZ crX2kcH67vS7RNs6AF1xsJDsVmAE8omKj2YDhHbfNBJ3aFHtcvgbu+PN3b8t6B+C9+QA0yuPp Z172r6+wfcpGmMQ/kigFwBsW75BA9mNOWFxR5QowrsP8wbiN6qymlXQMSOQGZtyksDBbsFDFQ 5o3E20648dZtkFtdXfTEHN+azJmzLtPMe34h+HtjoowiOVVogXs9HTZgyX5DkG7QK/EJlAD/t Ao9wH96roTKou4e54j4GOin3bKfPkMYEoRTROjAM9rWR59TSsRqStRu38f8aKR1gludTTJa7G 3I7LbenU2Tqf3vE94Yfe5StRTjBp6BjOFZ1jOC5f/b2yktTzZGxtc1uz2Q7fzjQNkA15soNaF 14SM+YGu9vL4L3X9kYRuSbOpJrDn3yMl7b7rgtg43kDkv5VBoIEsYW+Orxiv+dhBMDHxjhNFz rlJGDYg9BqR6pt/RO7rMjTX2UN/LwXS5V6SOZzcYt5vpYkSTeskFg8uOFuNQ5K+WxeY2WACdm Kbf7y90Q7g17rJrw+wnrw8BuRhbulFCDhi4nlDuyeFJEyRlTTwu359+fKlE66eIX2FsBox4AL ixGm/i3 Subject: Re: [Cake] inbound cake or fq_codel shaping fails on cable on netflix reno X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 15:49:23 -0000 Hi Dave, To follow you on this tangent ;) I have come to the conclusion that the question about whether PtP is = better or GPON heavily depends on who is paying. For a local community like Amsterdam the goal probably was to be able to = accommodate as many possible network topologies as possible so that the = ISPs that were supposed rent the "dark fiber" can implement any topology = they desire. And since it is trivial to use a passive splitter in the CO = building to reduce PtP to PtMP, PtP is the way to go.=20 For an (incumbent) ISP however, especially a heavily regulated one, the = goal is slightly different: build the cheapest network allowing to sell = the desired speed-grades while makeing sharing as hard as possible. The cost of the build-out becomes more important (ISPs are typically = publicly traded and have much shorter amortization horizons than a city = government (I blame the short-sightedness of investors and the way = management pay typically is linked to short-term stock performance, but = I digress)) and I have seen numbers that show that GPON gear really is = cheaper than AON gear for the same number of customers (it also is less = capable, but that is beside the point). But the kicker, at least in Germany seems to be that the incumbent = really really wants to avoid to end in a situation where it can be = forced to hand over physical last-mile links to the competition, exactly = what is possible with a PtP set-up (the competitor puts its own fiber = ethernet switch into the CO, and the ISP that build the network only = gets a tiny fixed "rent" per month).=20 Finally the GPON standards are made by ITU and hence by the telco = community while ethernet is in the hands of the ieee and telco's have = less standing there to get their wishes, but I am not sure how important = that point really is. My conclusion is, that it seems immensely sub-optimal to have incumbent = ISPs do the local network build-out as what they will build is not = ideally suited to what the community served actually wants. This = conclusion is also backed by the number of state laws that have cropped = up over time making community-initiated and financed network build-out = as hard as possible, indicating that the telco lobbyists share my = assessment about which network ownership (and topology) actually serves = the end-customers best ;) Best Regards Sebastian > On Jul 23, 2018, at 16:56, Dave Taht wrote: >=20 > Great info, thx. Using this opportunity to rant about city-wid > networks, I'd have done something so different > than what the governments and ISPs have inflicted on us, substituting > redundancy for reliability. >=20 > I'd have used bog standard ethernet over fiber instead of gpon. The > only advantages to gpon were that it was a standard normal folk > (still) can't use, it offered encryption to the co-lo, and the gpon > splitter at the neighborhood cabinett could be unpowered, and a > telco-like design could be made telco-level reliable.Theoretically. In > reality it constrains the market and raises the price of gpon capable > gear enormously, thus creating a cost for the isp and a healthy profit > margin for the fiber vendor. >=20 > Neighborhood cabinets would be cross connected north, east, west, > south, uplink1, uplink2, thus rendering the entire network immune to > fiber cuts and other disruptions of service and allowing competition > for service from multiple isps. Fiber or copper or wireless (cell) to > the building from there. Your neighbor would be one hop away. Local > cellular or wifi would spring out of smaller towers distributed above > those cabinets. >=20 > Lest you think I'm entirely insane, that's how amsterdam's network was > built out 10+ years ago. > = https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/03/how-amsterdam-was-wired-for-op= en-access-fiber/ >=20 > I'd have avoided MPLS, and gone with something like 64xlat to deal > with the ipv4 distribution problem. There'd be a secure routing > protocol holding the city-wide network together. And there'd be > ponies. Lots of ponies. > _______________________________________________ > Cake mailing list > Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake