<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
I shall attempt an answer, probably to a slightly different question
to the one you are actually asking.<br>
<br>
Remember, the UK is a member state of the EU. <br>
<br>
Cable cost too much to install in the 1980s, partially causing the
demise of Nynex. Cable is routed underground here, like most
services. All cable, which covers most major cities, out as far as
here in the suburbs, is run by Virgin Media. No price competition.
Lost a lot of video content to BT and Sky. Probably price
competitive with Sky satellite TV. Tiered bandwidth offering,
comparable to fibre in speed, heavily traffic-shaped.<br>
<br>
The telecom operator BT has no state involvement.<br>
<br>
BT is comprised of two parts. One is BT Retail, which has circa 38
per cent of the retail market.<br>
<br>
The other part is the supposedly separate OpenReach, which owns and
maintains infrastructure, and sells services to 3rd parties. AFAIK,
BT Wholesale also sells telephony services to third parties on top
of OpenReach services.<br>
<br>
Because of its dominant position, the regulator, OfCom, regulates
OpenReach prices for services to third party service providers.<br>
<br>
It is currently investigating fibre prices, on the basis that these
are too high.<br>
<br>
Not all services come via BT. TalkTalk has the most separated
infrastructure. Sky uses OpenReach fibre backhaul.<br>
<br>
Local Loop Unbundling means that there are eight or so different
DSLAMs in each telephone exchange. Sky and TalkTalk in addition
have their own non OpenReach voice telephony equipment.<br>
<br>
There are two tiers of ISP.<br>
<br>
One is composed of the big players. These are BT Retail, Sky and
TalkTalk. BT Retail have 5 brands operating as separate entities,
including Plusnet, notable for carrier grade NAT and traffic
shaping. None have caps or download limits.<br>
<br>
These three are focused around content delivery, principally video.
The service is cheap, with a plug in gateway provided. Contracts are
generally for one year. Customer service is hopeless. You are paid
inducements and cashback to change provider. Whilst the ADSL price
is cheap, the cost of the phone line is steadily ratcheting up.<br>
<br>
If the price of a service increases by 10 per cent or more in a
year, the retail customer can leave the ISP, whatever the contract
says.<br>
<br>
I am obliged to pay money to a public corporation, the BBC. These
are a major online video content provider, and the main competitor
to the three main ISPs for content. These ISPs pay fees to Akamai
principally to access iPlayer, and complain about it.<br>
<br>
The others are the smaller players such as EE, and boutique
providers like Zen and AAISP.<br>
<br>
EE, or Everything Everywhere, are T-Mobile and Orange, a combined
unit in the UK providing mobile telephony, and internet services
over the BT network. BT Wholesale, I think, provide and run their
infrastructure.<br>
<br>
Zen and AAISP provide a good service over lines rented from
OpenReach or TalkTalk. They have customer dervice and respond to
faults. They cost ten times as much as the big three, because they
make their money by charging for bandwidth. There are many others in
this category. Some provide ipv6.<br>
<br>
Retail customers find deals through sites such as this<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/phones/cheap-broadband">http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/phones/cheap-broadband</a><br>
<br>
The fibre infrastrucure has been rolled out by BT. Fujitsu, and
Digital Region, a public enterprise, have pulled out or folded.<br>
<br>
Sky and TalkTalk currently use OpenReach infrastructure for fibre,
but are introducing some of their own cabinets as a joint experiment.<br>
<br>
OpenReach FTTC uses Huawei or ECI MSANs. I have fibre cabinets 200
metres in either direction along the road.<br>
<br>
CPE for ADSL is customer installed, and is generally a
TrendChip/Ralink or BroadCom based device with the usual driver
BLOBs, a 2.6 series kernel, and telnet access.<br>
<br>
CPE for VDSL/FTTC is the official network endpint for fibre, rather
than the wall plate. The boxes provided are either Huawei HG612, or
an ECI equivalent.<br>
<br>
These are cut down gateways without wireless, configured as VDSL2
'modems'. The HG 612 Is Broadcom based and has been unlocked. I have
used one on an ADSL2plus line. Source code is available, even some
Broadcom code released in error by Huawei. The ECI box is Lantiq
based, and blogic has had OpenWRT running on it. There are
configuration problems with uboot, so this not stable.<br>
<br>
This partly answers your question. Note also I have said nothing
about mobile internet.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 01/08/14 19:12, Dave Taht wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAA93jw517GqjBv09hApuQHBKexi8=17x1yEAVujo9XcBYu4eLg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>uknof list:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
There has been a long discussion on the cerowrt-devel list about
how/when/ and where to get bufferbloat related fixes into the
head ends and CPE, and it's confusing as to who can and what
sort of devices controls what,
<div>
<br>
</div>
<div>The uk seems to have a vibrant dsl based isp market all
getting stuff from BT.<br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">How does it work in Britain? I am
under the impression that there are a lot of HFSC + SFQ
based rate limiters there for various classes of service</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">See below for some open questions on
the role of the DSLAM, the BRAS, etc...<br>
<br>
Or see "the ideas on how to simplify and popularize
bufferbloat control" thread:</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2014-July/thread.html">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2014-July/thread.html</a></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:04 PM,
Sebastian Moeller <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:moeller0@gmx.de"
target="_blank">moeller0@gmx.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi MIchael,<br>
<div class=""><br>
On Aug 1, 2014, at 06:51 , Michael Richardson <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mcr@sandelman.ca">mcr@sandelman.ca</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
> Sebastian Moeller <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:moeller0@gmx.de">moeller0@gmx.de</a>>
wrote:<br>
>> No idea? How would you test this (any
command line to try). The good<br>
>> thingg with the ping is that often even the
DSLAM responds keeping<br>
>> external sources (i.e. hops further away in
the network) of variability<br>
>> out of the measurement...<br>
><br>
> With various third-party-internet-access ("TPIA"
in Canada), the DSLAM<br>
> is operated by the incumbent (monopoly) telco,
and the layer-3 first hop<br>
> is connected via PPPoE-VLAN or PPP/L2TP.<br>
<br>
</div>
So they “own” the copper lines connecting each
customer to the DSLAM? And everybody else just rents
their DSL service and resells them? Do they really
connect to the DSLAM or to the BRAS?<br>
<div class=""><br>
> The incumbent telco has significant<br>
> incentive to make the backhaul network as
congested and bufferbloated as<br>
> possible, and to mis-crimp cables so that the DSL
resyncs at different speeds<br>
</div>
> regularly…<br>
<br>
I think in Germany the incumbent has to either
rent out the copper lines to competitors (who can put
their own lines cards in DSLAMs backed by their own
back-bone) or rent “bit-stream” access that is the
incumbent handles the DSL part on both ends and passes
the traffic either in the next central office or at
specific transit points. I always assumed competitors
renting these services would get much better guarantees
than end-customers, but it seems in Canada the incumbent
has more found ways to evade efficient regulation.<br>
<div class=""><br>
> my incumbent telco's commercial LAN extension
salesperson<br>
> proudly told me how they never drop packets, even
when their links are<br>
> congested!!!<br>
<br>
</div>
I really hope this is the opinion of a sales
person and not the network operators who really operate
the gear in the “field”. On the other hand having
sufficient buffering in the DSLAM to never having to
drop a packet sounds quite manly (and a terrible waste
of otherwise fine DRAM chips) ;)<br>
<div class=""><br>
><br>
> The Third Party ISP has a large incentive to
deploy equipment that supports<br>
> whatever "bandwidth measurement" service we might
cook up.<br>
<br>
</div>
As much as I would like to think otherwise, the
only way to get a BMS in the field is if all national
regulators require it by law (well maybe if ITU would
bake it into the next xDSL standard that the DSLAM has
to report current line speeds as per SNMP? back to all
down stream devices asking for it). But I am not holding
my breath…<br>
<br>
Best Regards<br>
<span class=""><font color="#888888"> Sebastian<br>
</font></span>
<div class="im"><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Michael Richardson<br>
> -on the road-<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Cerowrt-devel mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net">Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel"
target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
Dave Täht<br>
<br>
NSFW: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article"
target="_blank">https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_indecent.article</a>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net">Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>