Simon Byrnand wrote:

> At 23:22 25/10/2005, Alastair Johnson wrote:
>
>> At my previous job (ISP, medium-large), our traffic flows were
>> certainly extremely assymetric from the DSL network. The average
>> customer uploaded very little traffic.
>
>
> <sarcasm mode on>

I hope by this you mean "Devil's Advocate".

> Yes, but is that cause or effect ? Could that perhaps be because they
> CANT upload very much traffic ? ;-)

Unlikely. Perhaps I should s/DSL Network/any access network/. The
traffic assymmetry was across pretty much all access mechanisms, with
the exception of colocation which logically was outbound heavy.

> I would suggest that the low use of upstream bandwidth "on average" is
> as much about the fact that applications that need higher upstream DONT
> WORK and therefore don't get used, leaving only the classic "email and
> browsing" type applications as usable...

This is probably true in a very small part. Again, the average user
does not use much outbound traffic. This is a very obvious trend across
all access networks.

> If the "average" use of upstream bandwidth without artificial
> restrictions really is low, then an ISP (and I know its Telecom thats
> putting the restriction in place here in the case of ADSL) has nothing
> to lose in providing faster upstream, as the "average" use will remain
> low, even though a few "power users" would make use of the upstream to
> do things they can't do now.

Network traffic explosion from uncontained P2P usage is a major risk.
Why do you think a large number of overseas telcos went from symmetrical
service (or a much better in:out ratio), anyway?

The major application that the majority of users would use is a P2P
client of some description. Most people don't, and won't, use
VoIP/Video-over-IP/etc. There is limited interest.

> From a technical point of view, providing faster upstream speeds (and
> in the case of wireless, symetrical rates) is easy, and as upstream
> bandwidth tends to be "underutilized" anyway, its effectively free to
> provide it in most cases. (Unless you also have a lot of
> webhosting/telehousing traffic to balance your in/out rates)

Again, uncontained P2P traffic growth is a major, major, risk. Various
people have already commented on what happens with bill shock when a P2P
client is left sharing a handful of files. You start doing that on a
large scale across tens of thousands of users and you might find
yourself in a sudden reversal of traffic patterns.

> The only reason for miserable upstream rates like 128kbit on a 2Mbit
> connection is to protect voice/frame/fibre from competition.

Absolutely, but this is not the ONLY reason.

aj.

-- 
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list. 
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ, 
and various documents. 
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org 
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message