Is IOL Broadband actually available?

SkepticOne

Originally posted by flav0rflav
Eh, I'll assume you're just thinking on the fly.

This is where the information you seek should be, i.e., this is the only place where details of contention is mentioned. The issue of whether one operators contention pool is shared with another should be here, and not with the document referring to another service.

spongebob

The lasty time I saw your doc it was a very early and unclear version.

I too have relied on the regulatory ofering.pdf linked by Sceptic One and not the Regional Architecture and Interconnection.pdf linked by you today.

My thanks goes equally to both of yiz for saving me a root thru that poxy website of Eircoms. The doc linked by Sceptic does not make clear where the contention ocurs while the Flavours does.....amidst the soup of acronyms.

The contention is describeed as up to 192 per 2048kBit pipe (= 48:1 on 512k) but it sez UP TO 192. There is no reason that an ISP could not offer less contention..........except have you ever tried to get Eircom to provision a 2Mb on time.

In another thread, Sloth said he got 24:1 contention on RADSL (albeit at the RA speed poor lad) . I wonder how Netsource can do that maybe they try for 24:1 contention but 'reserve' the right to up it to 48:1 if they are stuck for capacity. Mmmmmmmmm that would be nice of them, now to tell Louise how to answer her PM's

Hmmmm

M

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Muck
The contention is describeed as up to 192 per 2048kBit pipe (= 48:1 on 512k) but it sez UP TO 192. There is no reason that an ISP could not offer less contention..........except have you ever tried to get Eircom to provision a 2Mb on time.

Yes, but this may just refer to the link between Eircom's regional POPs to the ISPs POP should they go with the connection service (not necessary if they make their own arrangements). That is what the document refers to after all.

The fact that it says 'maximum' could then be explained by the example of an ISP starting up a service with initially only a few customers, in which case they would not be yet hitting this maximum.

It does not mean that they will configure the actual bitstream service (into which the bitstream connection service feeds) which specifies a ratio of 24:1 and 48:1 depending on whether it's ADSL or RADSL.

Tenshot

Originally posted by Muck
In another thread, Sloth said he got 24:1 contention on RADSL (albeit at the RA speed poor lad) . I wonder how Netsource can do that maybe they try for 24:1 contention but 'reserve' the right to up it to 48:1 if they are stuck for capacity.

Interesting thread this. One thing not obvious to me before is that the 24:1 contention quoted for the full iStream product assumes a 1 MB line rate.

If you're on the iStream solo 512K service, that's equivalent to a 12:1 contention which doesn't seem too bad at all (40 Kb/s worst case vs 10 Kb/s worst case for RADSL). Might persuade people still on iStream solo to hold off switching to the starter pack for a bit until there's some concrete feedback on whether the contention is causing problems.

flav0rflav

The Interconnect doc describes too very different structures.
One for RADSL, with 48:1 contention, 2M IP level connect at any PoP for all PoPs.
The second structure is for ADSL, 1M and 512k services, with 24:1 contention, ATM level connect at each PoP just for that PoP, and other ATM links available to bring them to single ISP location, if they so wish.

The 512k, 1M, 24:1 services being offered by ISPs are obviously in a different category to the cheap and easy RADSL.

In fact RADSL looks so "cheap" and easy, I don't know why there aren't lots of ISPs offering it. Mind you, it isn't going to be the best or cheapest in the world.

spongebob

The map of Eircom regional POPS indicates that ESAT would already have their own fibre running into most of them. They are the same POPS you lease traditional Frame relay lines out of.

Eircom ADSL Regions and Regional POPs
Quaker Rd. Cork
Mervue Galway
Roches St. Limerick
Waterford (not sure which)

ADSL Regional POPs
Churchfield Cork
Summerhill Dublin
Dolphins Barn Dublin
Priory Park Dublin
Portlaoise S Leinster
Rathedmond Sligo NW
Mullingar N Leinster/SE Ulster

One exception (for ESAT) is Priory Park but there are few exceptions as you see from Moriartys List Sligo has me confuzled and Waterford too but I think it different naming conventions.

ESAT would consequently have no interest in Eircom backhaul when their own fibre backhaul is already IN the same building. This would be a reasonable excuse for their delay as they negotiate a rate from Eircom to pick up the 2Mb slots 'at source ' as it were.

If you wish to resell the pure ADSL products you must take a 45 Mbit pipe in the POP but the RADSL reseller need to commit to only 2Mb increments. Thats quite a different market entry level it seems to me.

M

SkepticOne

Interesting how it is done in Britain.

http://www.adslguide.org.uk/howitworks/dslam.asp

Here, it appears that the contention occurs within the PVC leading to the DSLAM. A maximum of 3 ISPs share this PVC. Therefore, in Britain, if an ISP imposes a cap, the users would lose out because the other ISPs sharing the PVC would not be limiting their users.

This sort of detail is not available in Eircom's bitstream document although the 'bitstream connection service' would seem to indicate that an operator availing of this service gets dedicated PVC at least as far as Eircom's regional POP.

jonski

Originally posted by melachi
I just got a mail from IOL broadband today as a follow up to my enquiry:

"First of all we will start to process orders for IOL Broadband
before the end of May.


Another piece of news you may find interesting is that we
have now added a Self Install Broadband option at an
unbelievable price of €90! This compliments the Engineer
Install option priced at €190. "

And then there are two links to click for self install / engineer install where you're supposed to enter your eircom account number to see if the phone line is actually compatible.
They said "may" and they seem to be on course.

Yup , got the same e-mail my self:)

as for the rest of this thread , omg talk about off topic!

flav0rflav

topic? i'll have a mars. from spar.

MadsL

Maybe someone on the committee can get an official statement from eircom on some of the interesting points made in this thread???

To summarize my take on these issues...

If all ISP share contention points then the cap policy is a nonsense (and should be scrapped IMHO)

If eircom have 'ringfenced' their i-starter access away from other ISPs (who are contended against each other?) THEN eircom are surely in breach of the regulations to supply the exact product wholesale.

50Cent

Jonski said:

as for the rest of this thread , omg talk about off topic!

Damn right...