[DC3] A Community-Run ISP Is the Highest Rated Broadband Company in America

sivasubramanian muthusamy 6.internet at gmail.com
Mon Sep 3 11:43:43 UTC 2018


Dear Leonardo,
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 5:06 PM sivasubramanian muthusamy <
6.internet at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Leandro,
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 4:10 PM Leandro Navarro <leandro at pangea.org> wrote:
>
>> Some replies inline.
>> On 16/8/18 20:59, Sivasubramanian M wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:41 PM Leandro Navarro <leandro at pangea.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi !
>>>
>>> Yes, the commons model is superior. CNs need to learn how to make their
>>> implementations work on a millions scale.
>>>
>>
>>
>>> At B4RN they say they give the best connectivity in the UK because they
>>> dedicate all their resources to that, and they don't have to pay others.
>>>
>> That is what is needed to build an independant community network. Basing
>> a Community Network on a 100 Mbps or a GBPS or two from an ISP or a Telecom
>> company makes it a good start, but the Network is an effect a
>> sub-distribution operation for a Telecom / ISP in terms of its dependance.
>>
>> I agree, there are communities that have started like that. Sharing a
>> transit connection is a good way to reduce the entry barrier. One good case
>> is RemIX in Scotland:
>> http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~mmf/res/pubs/gaia16_remix.pdf
>>
>
> The above link is broken, and also the link to remix architecture from the
> page
> https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/good-practice-remix-distributed-internet-exchange-remote-and-rural-networks-scotland
>
>

The ec website has a brief article on remix, featuring a link to the remix
architecture pdf, which also leads to a page that shows the link broken
(screenshot attached). However an earlier ec blog post on remix led me to
hubs net, and from its member pages -- >  tegola net how to pages, I landed
on the specification for P2P and edge equipments, and found some
interesting information such as on
https://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/airfiber/airFiber_5XHD_DS.pdf  If you have a
copy of the remix architecture pdf, please share the file.

Thank you.

> Several community networks, as they grow, aggregate more traffic, buy more
>> capacity from different carriers, get connected to IXPs (e.g. Ninux,
>> Freifunk, guifi, B4RN ... cases we have studied in Europe) which allow them
>> to exchange traffic with many other networks, which results in better
>> quality traffic for everyone involved.
>>
>> In the case of guifi.net they also rent optical regional circuits thanks
>> to its cost-sharing model to aggregate capacity (the
>> sub-distribute/aggregate traffic you mention) from multiple individual or
>> local participating retail ISPs that are part of guifi.net. Therefore
>> they bridge the gap from retail capacity required by participants to
>> wholesale open-access fiber networks.
>>
>
> All these are good examples to follow.   The goals of good community
> networks such as guifi.net's goal of "promoting advanced research in the
> filed of open networks and infrastructures, and that of generating
> collaboration platforms between stakeholders" worth expanded attention.
> There could be a concerted effort for advanced research, and there could be
> a globally unified platform for collaboration on Community Networks. The
> Internet Society could help build one, using voluteer effort and open
> source technologies.
>
>
>> Just to understand, do submarine networks offer commercial arrangements
>> for transport on a minimal scale ( 1GB / 10 GBPS )?
>>
>> I'd say this is the role of global carriers and top tier ISPs that offer
>> these rates in many points-of-presence globally.
>>
>
>
>> Submarine networks that are at a higher scale of aggregation.
>>
>
> It would be helpful to understand what this 'higher scale' is (For
> example, See-Me-We 4 has a design capacity of 4.6 TBPS / s . Would it be
> too insignificant for this network to provide a strand of 100 GBPS/s ? for
> we will eventually get there, and surpass this scale (one or two new
> Community Networks with higher aspirations could even start at the beach
> front)
>
> What is the typical cost of a 1GB / 10 GBPS switch at an IXP? Do IXPs
>> everywhere offer supernodes to Community Networks?
>>
>> CNs can participate in IXPs just like any other member org. The price of
>> ports in IXP I understand depend on the size and specific infra costs of
>> that IXP (size is really diverse). Many IXPs are also distributed (PoP in
>> multiple locations). These are from our local IXP:
>> http://www.catnix.net/en/taxes/
>>
>> In addition, the transport/peering costs in the IXP vary depending on the
>> symmetry of traffic. For instance, I remember talking to Freifunk in Berlin
>> 1-2 years ago, and they were paying net 0 for traffic (without entering
>> into details) as they have a very symmetric traffic (a good balance between
>> content they deliver and they request, the so called "eyeballs").
>>
>> Would be helpful if any of the submarine networks or its partners and
>> IXPs share their pricing roughly.
>>
>> Many of these prices can be collected or guessed from diverse sources. If
>> you investigate that it would be useful to share the results.
>>
>> Kind regards, Leandro.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sivasubramanian M
>>
>>
>>> They're not the only ones. In
>>> https://www.measurementlab.net/publications/2015-Braem-et-al.pdf with
>>> independent data from M-Lab, you can see that 3 CNs are among the best
>>> operators in their countries in quality (e.g. section 4.2 pg 5, Figure 10
>>> pg 6). We say: "The three networks are among the top eight ISPs in
>>> download speed. guifi.net is ranked first in Spain both in median
>>> upload speed and best median latency; Ninux (FusoLab) is ranked second in
>>> upload, and fourth in best latency; AWMN (part of LANCOM) is first in
>>> upload speed, 8th in best latency. In the area of Barcelona, where
>>> guifi.net has its connections to Internet carriers, the results are
>>> excellent: first in upload speed (guifi.net 7.82 Mbps, the Academic
>>> network 4.23 and Cableuropa ONO 3.31), third in download speed
>>> (Cableuropa-ONO 18.1 Mbps, the Academic network 9.8, guifi.net 9.79)
>>> and first in best latency (guifi.net 14 ms, Vodafone 25, Cableuropa-ONO
>>> 35)".
>>>
>>> That is something known in the world of free software. There are free
>>> implementations that are superior to commercial ones (Android is based on
>>> GNU/Linux, let's see when Movistar is based on the infrastructure of
>>> guifi.net...). All commercial software products are built from free
>>> software, built openly and cooperatively (as commons), because that seems
>>> to be the only way to have robust enough software infrastructures/libraries
>>> at a reasonable cost/quality to build stable products on top.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Leandro.
>>> On 16/8/18 17:27, Sarbani Banerjee Belur wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Sivasubramanian,
>>>
>>> Community networks does exist in India and it is a sustainable initiative.
>>> Gram Marg at IIT Bombay has set up one spanning 10 villages in Palghar,
>>> Maharashtra, Digital Empowerment Foundation has set up some as well. There
>>> are more going to be set up in this year and the next. These CNs are set
>>> up in locations that have no mobile connectivity and are usually in
>>> remote, rural villages of India.
>>> Local ISPs have come to the rescue and provide bandwidth in such locations.
>>>
>>> With regards,
>>> Sarbani
>>>
>>>
>>> In Chennai, India, I spoke to someone in an educational institution about
>>> starting a Community Network. He argued that access is no longer a problem
>>> as Telecom companies offer 3G and 4G services everywhere. He wouldn't
>>> listen to arguments concerning the cost and clever pricing models of
>>> access
>>> that indiscernably amass huge sums by microscopic extraction,  wouldn't
>>> listen to arguments about nominal and actual bandwidth.  He and some
>>> others
>>> take the position that a case does not exist for Community Networks here.
>>>
>>> Happens to be an iconic opinion. It is a challenge to present arguments,
>>> articles such as this are of ample help.
>>>
>>> Sivasubramanian M
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 5:20 PM Marco Zennaro <mzennaro at ictp.it> <mzennaro at ictp.it> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting news:
>>>
>>> https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ne5k5m/consumer-reports-broadband-company-ratings
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Marco
>>>
>>> Marco Zennaro, PhD // Research Officer // T/ICT4D Lab // ICTP //wireless.ictp.it
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DC3 mailing listDC3 at listas.altermundi.nethttps://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DC3 mailing listDC3 at listas.altermundi.nethttps://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DC3 mailing list
>>> DC3 at listas.altermundi.net
>>> https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sivasubramanian M
>> Please send all replies to 6.Internet at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> DC3 mailing listDC3 at listas.altermundi.nethttps://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.altermundi.net/pipermail/dc3/attachments/20180903/0b412b66/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: remix architecture error.png
Type: image/png
Size: 348585 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listas.altermundi.net/pipermail/dc3/attachments/20180903/0b412b66/attachment-0001.png>


More information about the DC3 mailing list