In article <3b0bc95b-c741-7561-1692-75fac74d5883@mtcc.com> you write:
I'd definitely appreciate symmetric, or at least better in upstream. Obviously zoom and all of that has made a lie of us not needing upstream. It would make cloud based "filesystems" more feasible too.
But the larger point is why bother going to all of that effort if you're just going roll it out with low bandwidth? I mean, 100Mbps isn't even competitive with cable these days. But they're a somewhat crazy amalgam. They have POTS everywhere, cable tv everywhere, cable IP in some areas and DSL in others. I wish I knew somebody there to talk to this about because it's really odd.
I agree it is odd to make 100/100 the top speed. The fiber service I have from my local non-Bell telco offers 100/100, 500/500, and 1000/1000. FiOS where you can get it goes to 940/880. The obvious guess is that their upstream bandwidth is underprovisioned, or maybe they figure 100/100 is all they need to compete in that particular market. -- Regards, John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly