Bay Area Bandwidth Coop Formed 116
Matt Hempel writes "Is there anything cooler than a T1 to your house? $200 a month through the Bandwidth Coop.
" You can also get information on writing off connections on your taxes, and "how we did it". Very cool - I'd love to see more places doing this - anyone else doing stuff like this?
Re:Their conditions of service worry me. (Score:1)
If i could afford $400/mo I wouldn't care about these policies.
Re:anything cooler than T1... (Score:1)
This dose of reality brought to you by the guy your parents told you about.
Anyway...... I would love to get a mega conneciton and sell off bandwidth to my neighbors. mmmmmmmmmm bandwidth.....
jas
Man! (Score:1)
Re:T1? T-what? (Score:1)
DSL, loop costs, et al. (Score:4)
First off, thanks for the interest. Except for those who find it amusing to look for open ports in the 30000s.
DSL is a great deal, if it works well for you. That is, PacBell DSL. Covad/NorthPoint prices aren't that far away from ours, particularly at T1 speed. The website explains why we don't offer DSL: a) it's hella expensive to provide and b) the problems involved with many installations make it prohibitive to support. This is not to say we won't do it in the future, just not now. We're looking into Microwave as well.
Our facility is in Sunnyvale. The cheapest loop is about $220, it's about $350 from Fremont/San Jose and about $500 to SF. Sorry if that's unclear.
T1s are ancient, but I'd wait to call DSL king until PacBell's ATM network proves itself capable in the face of pretty serious expansion. A Coop T1 is a clean meg and a half, no questions asked (unless they've figured out how to oversubscribe DS circuits).
As for terms of service, relax, we're not out to censor you. And we're hardly moral.
Tanks
--matt
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:1)
He's talking about SDSL, not ADSL. Probably runs servers. That costs significantly more, anywhere.
---
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:2)
If you can possibly get T1, you should.
In many areas, frame relay T1 will save you money - if you're far away from the company offering a T1, Pacific Bell will sell you frame relay at a fixed price. I think it's about $ 450/month for the frame relay T1, so your cost for the co-op would be $650/month. This is in contrast with the equivalent (industrial strength business-style service) DSL for about $ 420 a month.
If I could get the deal, I'd take the money and run. Trust me on this one
If anyone offers a service like this in the Los Angeles area, please let me know. My email address is valid and on the post.
D
ISP FAQ: http://www.amazing.com/internet/
----
Re:Wow that cool. (Score:1)
DSL at 6Mbps (Score:1)
I've heard of people getting DSL at 6Mbps. This seems to be a fairly recent advance, and you have to be quite close to the CO.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Re:DSL not necessarily "far" faster (Score:1)
I thought ADSL was up to 8mbps...
the SDSL modems I have in front of me do 2.048mbps...
Re:People pining for T1's??!? (Score:1)
Oh yes, great. As long as you're close enough to the CO to get high-speed DSL, otherwise, you're screwed.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Wireless sharing of >T1 bandwidth, on the cheap (Score:1)
The main article on that site contains a link to a mailing list populated by several experimenters who are looking at using this type of link to deliver bandwidth to underserved areas in the US and various foreign countries.
Although apparently not 'nerdly' enough for a Slashdot quickie topic, the microwave link was the subject of a thread at Technocrat.net [technocrat.net], which can be found here [technocrat.net]. I'll be glad to answer any questions anyone has about this project, either here, on the mailing list, or at the email address below.
John Miles (ke5fx@qsl.net; tried to register but the /. password-mailer seems to be on strike tonight)
Re:wireless (Score:1)
----------
Re:I wonder (Score:1)
Nevertheless, it's still a miracle they finished the product.
absolutely! lots of T1s! (Score:1)
Re:The Little Garden (Score:1)
It's my opinion that with the conglomeration of internet service providers into telcos, we'll see more and more of people banding together to find alternate solutions to bandwidth problems, and trying to throw less of their money at telcos.
Re:faster one way, incoming. right? (Score:1)
The T-1 offered by the coop does not include Telco loop charges, which add another US$300 or so.
Dave
Re:Umm... DSL? (Score:1)
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:1)
The Coop's website [bandwidthcoop.com] implies that Sunnyvale is local ($220). The $350 figure is for San Jose. SF is $500.
T1's are still attractive for small biz (Score:4)
PacBell is a mess, InternetConnect is terrible, and where you do find a reputable provider with impressive peering agreements and such they only offer 1.1MBit (Covad) SDSL, not 1.4MBit. The providers that offer 1.4MBit (NorthPoint) SDSL that we have tried have had daily network downtime, with a 22 hour outage just yesterday. This is unacceptable for a business such as a (small) ecommerce site, or mail servers for small businesses where sales people require email every minute of the day or else they go completely insane.
Affordable T1's are still a good bet for those startups that require stable internet access, at least until they are able to afford collocation or a T3/DS3 connection.
People pining for T1's??!? (Score:1)
You mean people actually want those? They're only ~1.54Mbps raw, folks. Compare this to ~52Mbps over cable (shared) or the ~6Mbps down/~1Mbps up rates of ADSL, and the only attraction of a T1 is that it is usually better supported than an xDSL or Cable modem. But that support usually comes with a nasty price.
Now, an OC3 or OC12, that's where its at :-). OC3 is 155Mbps, and an OC12 622Mbps. In Wellington, New Zealand, if you live in a central enough area, you can get an OC12 for a mere ~NZ$12,000 connection fee and ~$200/month + traffic... pretty damn cheap. Then you can have bandwidth to your own machine about equivalent to the sum total of all the pipes into the country!
Not necessarily (Score:1)
Re:T1? T-what? (Score:1)
Latency also seems to be absolutely horrid on a cable modem especially for incoming traffic. Sure, theoretically there is more bandwidth depending on your provider and how much you pay but you can usually only use a portion of that bandwidth.
For a lot of people a cable modem is fine, its fine for me, but its nowhere near just as good as a T1.
Re:Not necessarily (Score:1)
Jeez. Socialists.
Re:People pining for T1's??!? (Score:2)
I believe this is, along with wireless, is the future of real connectivity. Phone lines just don't cut it, and cable, at least in New Zealand, is still too slow (and costly). Being on a localised fibre loop provides huge advantages in terms of cache sharing, ftp services (I can get a copy of the latest debian within moments off a mirror on the loop) and stability (When you have this many people on the same connection, they work damn hard to make sure it never ever goes down).
My recommendation for those businesses and big users in wellington and soon, auckland, is to drop these stupid, unstable, overpriced ADSL/Cable things and get on Citylink, my experience has been nothing but positive.
Re:slower (Score:1)
Yes, if everyone is downloading the redhat ISO at once, you will notice aggregate speed decreases, but for normal web use, even online gaming, you're not going to notice each other at all. That's the gamble that all ISPs work on. You ALWAYS sell more bandwidth than you have
- Michael T. Babcock <homepage [linuxsupportline.com]>
Re:I dont know about you guys.... (Score:1)
I've got a T1 (Frame Relay) at work, and Enhanced DSL at home (5 IP's, 128Kbps up, 1.5Mbps down)
Re:I dont know about you guys.... (Score:1)
Re:You should all consider yourselves lucky (Score:1)
I looked into getting Frame Relay with telecom recently (what is their pet name for it...Jetstream or something?), anyway, for 48-128 (CIR-PIR) and 3 GB/month, it was in excess of $900. (Excluding setup fees, etc).
Its actually quite interesting, the only reason we even looked at it is because of the 4 cent a minute charge on business calls. That really does add up when your using it 11 hours a day, 5-6 days a week (over $500 a month added to the telephone bill).
Anyway, we are sticking to dial-up for now, perhaps Frame Relay prices will go down when ADSL gets here (or is that JetStream...ugh). That should be around 2005 if we're lucky
Re:Doesn't sound like a good deal to me (Score:1)
We don't run servers at home, we run them on the CS department LANs
Umm... DSL? (Score:1)
That's Awesome! (Score:1)
anything cooler than T1... (Score:2)
yes there is !
I live in a dorm at the univerity campus and I connect to the internet via a lan.
we share the 300mbps uplink with +/- 2000 students and I can reach d/l speeds of aprox. 600-1000 Kbyte/s plus we have a 100Mbit between the student's homes.
and the cost of that, less than $7/month!
---
It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:2)
DSL is a better deal than a T1 because of the way the tariffs are written here in California, I hope they switch to DSL soon. However, I am currently paying $215/month for 768K symmetric DSL, I doubt that with the wire plus the aggregation they can beat that price by much. Still, I'd be glad to use a co-op if it became economicaly viable.
Thanks
Bruce
Re:faster one way, incoming. right? (Score:1)
which stand for Asymmetric DSL and Symmetric DSL, respectively..
I've seen SDSL available in up to 1.5 Mbps both up and down-stream.. so go figure.. but I'm not sure of the cost comparison w/ a T1 for $200/mo.
Anyone remember BITnet? (Score:1)
Other co-ops (Score:1)
Re:anything cooler than T1... (Score:1)
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:1)
--
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:2)
Re:faster one way, incoming. right? (Score:4)
ADSL is for the net.consumer who doesn't need much outbound speed because he's just sending out small HTTP requests, but does want lots of inbound speed to get the requested pr0n faster.
SDSL is symmetric -- at my house, we have 768K/768K, which is just plenty for fairly quick access in either direction.
There's also IDSL and a couple other obscure flavors, but "DSL" isn't necessarily slow on the outbound.
--
Re:A long time ago ... (Score:1)
--
Doin' the Same thing with cable (Score:1)
Not that cool. (Score:2)
I've been looking at www.sflan.com [sflan.com]. It's a shared 10Mb/s radio network in SF. And best of all Free!
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:1)
Disclaimer: I work for said telco.
Re:A long time ago ... (Score:1)
Oh wow, *yawn* (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't sound like a good deal to me (Score:1)
A T-1 is a T-1, 1.5Mbps. While a 7MB down is good for surfing. A 700k up is less than half a T-1 on the server side. We only have a moderate site, and peak at 512k several times per day.
Dave
Not-for-profit ISPs (Score:1)
DISCLAIMER: I'm associated with Chesconet, and therefore not an entirely uninterested party.
Re:wireless (Score:1)
Right now, all I've seen for high speed internet is Bell Sympatico and Rogers@Home... Roger@Home gets about the same bandwidth as a 56k modem during normal daylight hours, and HSE won't come to my house, even though it is DSL, they won't run it.
Argh, being rural stinks- so my only option is wireless. My wireless 1200 baud packet connection as VA3CSG just didn't cut it, my 56k connection via the gov't just doesn't cut it..... I want my speed. And soon.
Wireless neighbourhood networking? (Score:1)
--------
"I already have all the latest software."
Colorado Internet Coop (Score:1)
Colorado internet co-op [coop.net]
Re:People pining for T1's??!? (Score:2)
Back to the point, the only problem with Citylink is you can (AFAIK) only get it if you're in central Wellington. Ah well, it'll be a while yet before I attempt downloading any ISOs:).
Re:A long time ago (now at ompages) (Score:3)
At ompages.com we are building a public co-op style secure network. We will share bandwidth for such services as squid proxies, and IPSec connections. We are a public project so go ahead and join in.
Ompages' volunteer developers are working on such user specific applications like a secure instant messaging client/server and an easy to use web based anonymous remailer.
Other more complex projects involve the creation of web based collaboration tools that will serve as the basis for working on code for ompages' goals of a secure public network.
We need the helpe of people like you all to make our vision a reality. One thing we *really* need is global collocation. If you are interested in ompages and are located outside of the US; we need you to collocate ompages services and/or translate the website into your native language. Thank you.
T1 vs DSL (Score:1)
The problem with DSL (Score:1)
With cable, you don't get dedicated line, and static IPs seem pretty rare as well. Sure, you may get 6MB/sec in certain cases, but when your neighbor gets it cable access as well, that rate is going to be halved at peak hours, and then cut down again when the next person gets it, and so on.
I know one person that has 1.5MB DSL, but seems quite rare. You just have to be in the right place. He also only has 144k upstream. And before you say "I don't serve webpages," remember that Q3 packets go both down and upstream.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
I dont know about you guys.... (Score:1)
Re:Doin' the Same thing with cable (Score:2)
Re:DSL, loop costs, et al. (Score:1)
I have been using Pacbell DSL since the end of 1997 when they started the trial.
It's been running great at 384/384 kbps speed ever since, with my OS/2 servers at home. Pacbell no longer offers 384/384 to new customers, but they "grandfathered" the service which means I still get it until I decide to cancel it.
It's pretty unlikely that I will : it's now october 1999 and the cumulated downtime I have had over the last two years is less than a day.
BTW, I don't use PBI as my ISP - I use DNAI. In 1997 when I got my Pacbell DSL, PBI was an analog ISP only - you had to choose among 2 or 3 ISPs that partnered with Pacbell for the trial, and DNAI was one of them. DNAI has ended their partnership with Pacbell and now all their new customers must use Covad DSL. But they still provide ISP service to me through Pacbell DSL. Again, pretty unlikely that I'd cancel it given the reliability of the DNAI/Pacbell DSL combination.
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:3)
However, in a compact area, loop costs aren't going to be too bad because they're distance based (although I wonder where their T3 is located; I bet its a bitch getting across the bay).
I've been thinking that the way to do this on a _LARGE_ scale would be to use frame relay. Frame relay uses the telco's switching network to transfer data. You pay depending on your maximum data rate and your minimum guaranteed data rate, plus lease costs to the local CO, which is probably no more than a few kilometers away. It creates virtual point to point connections that are actually switched. It's also possible to set up multiple connections from any single point in the frame network to any other point so you could have redundancy and load balancing.
As with every telephony based technology, its a bitch to get it up running, but it works well, even with 0 CIRs (committed information rates). Unlike DSL of ISDN, frame is available everywhere, and service, while not great, is better than you can get with DSL or ISDN. I know one consultant who claims he can get a frame connection up anyplace in the US and most places in the world in less than three weeks.
The neat thing about frame is that the absolute geographic size of the network is relatively unimportant, so its really easy to scale. Wouldn't it be cool to create a coop of slashdot readers to buy a huge frame relay network with T1s and fractional T1s with several T3 internet feeds? How much clout would a thousand circuit account carry?
This is a RANT! Was: Re:T1? T-what? (Score:2)
That is TOO true! I was checking the routers along my path to an FTP site the other day and it turns out that the first router on my @home loops is so overloaded it can barely move between 4pm and midnight!!! They need to do something to alleviate some of that congestion! It's like having a 28.8 modem during those hours! Good thing I do most of my surfing after those hours...>:)
Kintanon
is anything cooler than T1 @ 200$ a month (Score:1)
price. for those who mostly download from
INTERNET, either xDSL or cable modem is more
appropriate choice and cheaper as well.
Re:People pining for T1's??!? (Score:1)
Auckland. And it was only Central City, at night.
Um, New Zealand is a First World country. Compare that to America as a Second World country.
Re:Umm... DSL? (Score:1)
But, you could feed 27 56k modems simultaneously with a T1. Your real bottleneck is the machine your T1 is going to and it's connection. A dozen T1s going full force to a machine with a single T3 might cause some headaches. Another plus with T1 is you can 'legally' run servers on it, and your IP should be static.
I'm getting dedicated DSL at some point soon, I'll have to see how that stacks up speedwise...
--
T1? T-what? (Score:2)
T3 coop? Hey, I'm there. Or, how about some of that Internet2 bandwidth (>100MB/sec)?? With enough people, I am certain that the price could be around $200 per person...(you'd need about 100 or more people though, but 100 people for a T3 - still damn fast).
Justin
Only viable for local connectivity (Score:3)
So, I can't imagine a CO-OP like this being viable if the have to go through the local CO in order to get to each member's demark, but for community condominiums and large apartment buildings this kind of technique is a wonderful idea for lowering cost across the board to all members. The point I'm making is that once you start reselling something (even if you're doing it non-profit) that the phone company can do with it's own equipment you are at a serious disadvantage.
One other possibility: the CO-OP could get a high speed connection in a neighborhood and then resell it via wireless... but that could turn into a regulatory nightmare.
Finally: If cablemodem companies are serious about providing "local loop" service (even if it's a completely different technology from traditional switched phone networks) then shouldn't they be regulated under the same tarrifs as the standard phone companies? Such an argument could bring demark standardization between the two carriers and foster better competition... and even lower prices -- for individuals and CO-OPs.
DSL not necessarily "far" faster (Score:1)
wireless (Score:1)
more cheap bandwidth: (Score:1)
We have been doing this in Los Feliz, Los Angeles. (Score:4)
Things have changed now - a couple of guys in the losfeliz net moved to Argentina, and I moved out of range of the radio WAN net we'd set up, but there is still friendly bandwidth sharing going on in this area if you look for it.
Re:Umm... DSL? (Score:1)
I wonder (Score:1)
The Little Garden (Score:1)
Re:Their conditions of service worry me. (Score:1)
Freedom of speech ends at inspried hatred. I would allow people to do this on my servers either.
We're putting in a network (Score:1)
Re:T1? T-what? (Score:1)
Try putting a server shelling out even 256kbps averages and see what the @home folks do. Cable doesn't support up speeds anywhere near the rate of a T-1. DSL tops out at between 1.1Mbps and 1.5Mbps, that is if you meet the loop qual and their aren't a shit load of bridge taps on the circuit.
T-1s far more flexible, reliable and available than any broadband. Cable isn't even an option for any professional business, and DSL is still limited in many areas and applications.
Dave
half duplex cable modems? Ouch (Score:1)
Re:It's actually a lot more than $200 (Score:1)
I'd say it's worth the 40 dollars CDN. They offer business services which allow you to have 5 static ip's and dns for extra as well (70 dollars extra).
----------
Doesn't sound like a good deal to me (Score:1)
Here in Pittsburgh my friends just got ADSL: $200/month for 7Mb/s downstream, 700Kb/s upstream. It's working very well.
(Best of all, the CMU CS department subsidy is paying for it all, but that's another story.)
Re:Umm... DSL? (Score:2)
For reliability and QOS, you can't beat a 'real' connection. Ever notice your DSL is strangely slow during peak hours? Well, mine is at least. For folks who were getting by with a 56k modem or other dialup-type device, yeah, DSL is an amazing step. I think it's neat for home use in that same way. But if I was doing anything mission critical (ie, trying to run a small business, or contracting from home) I'd want a T1.
For people used to dealing with real networks, DSL is kind of a nasty kludge that no one has implemented adequately, and can't really replace good reliable network connectivity. It'd be neat if it did, 'cos it is *CHEAP* -- but hey. There is NO such thing as a free lunch.
Their conditions of service worry me. (Score:3)
Here's a list of what you can't do:
Spam
Hack
PortScan other networks
Host porno
Host pyramid schemes
Defame
Start Fights
Distribute propoganda
Kick sand in other's faces
Host Nazi web sites
Additions/subtractions to this list are welcome. If you're concerned about hosting something which may cause controversy, let us know. We're cool about it as long as you're not an idiot.
The paragraph at the bottom greatly mitigates the offensiveness of that list. But I don't see why the legal activities on it should be there at all. They don't cause any problem for the network ("host porno" a possible exception, but consider a private low-volume porn site, or text-only). It seems that their only purpose is to impose some moral code of how the network is used. They of course have the right to choose who they want to do business with, for whatever reason. But do you want to do business with them?
A long time ago ... (Score:4)
We ran 25 POTS lines and a 64k ISDN line into a residence. We did our own DNS, routing, etc. and owned all our own equipment, including the co-located stuff. 24/7 connectivity, with each member getting a
We're still around, but now we're on a T1 providing 128k ISDN for about half of what it would cost from any of our local ISPs.
So welcome to the world of co-op connectivity, guys! May a thousand co-ops bloom!
And no, I ain't gonna tell you who we are. We're all too familiar with the