I think the idea of distance charging is going away in many cases. With WDM, the cost of the WDM and SONET eqiupment on the ends of a fully populated 32 channel per fiber, 144 strand pull vastly outweight end-to-end fiber costs of anything pulled through the ground. When you add routers and the like on top of that, the distance issue really goes away and it becomes on of network topology hops. Can anyone with figures for new intercontinental pulls say whether this is true there as well (project oxygen marketing claims this, but...)? Using archaic telephone pricing models to argue cost of providing bulk IP services is just not right. jerry
Jerry: You are absolutely right. I have pulled together some numbers on public pricing for long haul WDM (including right of way) showing that if you out IP over WDM the cost of bandwidth drops by a factor of 100 to 1000. On local loops it is more dramatic - with new WDM technology from companies like Cambrian and Ciena gigabit ethernet or OC-48 SONET on a 5km local loop should cost about $2500 per YEAR. A number of our regional networks have already pulled their own fiber and our realizing these costs in the real world. Fibre - $4 to $6 per meter 20 year economic life and 10% maintenance per year 48 strands NZDSF Right of way $0 -$10 per meter per year (up to $200 per meter on long haul) but common solution is to offer right way owner free use of a couple of strands instead of paying cash Installation $25 per meter underground in cities $6 per meter on poles (maintenance costs 20% year) Twenty year amortized cost with 10% cost of money plus maintenance plus right of way costs at $10/year per meter $17 per year per meter for 48 strands $1.50 per year per meter per strand $.50 per year per meter per wavelength A 5 km OC-48 local loop should cost about $2500/year Bill ------------------------------------------- Bill St Arnaud Director Network Projects CANARIE bill.st.arnaud@canarie.ca http://www.canarie.ca/bstarn
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Jerry Scharf Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 12:07 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: flat vs non-flat charging
I think the idea of distance charging is going away in many cases. With WDM, the cost of the WDM and SONET eqiupment on the ends of a fully populated 32 channel per fiber, 144 strand pull vastly outweight end-to-end fiber costs of anything pulled through the ground. When you add routers and the like on top of that, the distance issue really goes away and it becomes on of network topology hops. Can anyone with figures for new intercontinental pulls say whether this is true there as well (project oxygen marketing claims this, but...)?
Using archaic telephone pricing models to argue cost of providing bulk IP services is just not right.
jerry
Bill, WDM may lower the price per Mbit/s considerably, however many of these Mbit/s will have to be sold to be profitable as a service. Connecting two routers using dedicated WDM gear and 5km of fiber to send over 155Mbit/s traffic is more expensive then connecting the two routers directly using 5km of fiber, even though the first solution would give you much more available capacity. If multiple services need to run over the same fiber then existing ATM or SDH networks are well capable of multiplexing these services over one fiber at often lower costs then installing new WDM gear. There where there is a fiber shortage because there is no further room for service multiplexing or there is a shortage of capacity, WDM will be a very good solution. It is much cheaper then installing new fiber. WDM is therefor very real for connecting TEX's together and for connecting LEX's to TEX's. I expect that WDM needs OADMs or other up and coming technology for SDH or WDM to become cost-effective for the MAN/local loop. To return to the original topic, for the forseeable future (3-5 years?) bandwidth will remain scarce and therefor expensive. The prices per MBit/s will drop shortply but this will be compensated in a large increase in demand. An distance-based pricing scheme could therefor be an appropriate solution. Personally, I don't think it will happen. -- Steven PS: if anyone can prove me wrong with some numbers, please show me :) I've been working on cost calculations for bandwidth for the last couple of weeks. In your mail from 29-5-1998 you write:
Jerry:
You are absolutely right. I have pulled together some numbers on public pricing for long haul WDM (including right of way) showing that if you ou= t IP over WDM the cost of bandwidth drops by a factor of 100 to 1000. On local loops it is more dramatic - with new WDM technology from companies like Cambrian and Ciena gigabit ethernet or OC-48 SONET on a 5km local lo= op should cost about $2500 per YEAR.
A number of our regional networks have already pulled their own fiber and our realizing these costs in the real world.
Fibre - $4 to $6 per meter 20 year economic life and 10% maintenance per year 48 strands NZDSF Right of way $0 -$10 per meter per year (up to $200 per meter on long hau= l) but common solution is to offer right way owner free use of a couple of strands instead of paying cash Installation $25 per meter underground in cities $6 per meter on poles (maintenance costs 20% year) Twenty year amortized cost with 10% cost of money plus maintenance plus right of way costs at $10/year per meter $17 per year per meter for 48 strands $1.50 per year per meter per strand $.50 per year per meter per wavelength A 5 km OC-48 local loop should cost about $2500/year
Bill
------------------------------------------- Bill St Arnaud Director Network Projects CANARIE bill.st.arnaud@canarie.ca http://www.canarie.ca/bstarn
=A0
=A0
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Jerry Scharf Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 12:07 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: flat vs non-flat charging
I think the idea of distance charging is going away in many cases. With WDM, the cost of the WDM and SONET eqiupment on the ends of a fully populated 32 channel per fiber, 144 strand pull vastly outweight end-to-end fiber costs of anything pulled through the ground. When you add routers and the like on top of that, the distance issue really goes away and it becomes on of netwo= rk topology hops. Can anyone with figures for new intercontinental pulls s= ay whether this is true there as well (project oxygen marketing claims thi= s, but...)?
Using archaic telephone pricing models to argue cost of providing bulk = IP services is just not right.
jerry
Steven: New municipal and campus WDM gear from Cambrian, Ciena and Nortel makes it a lot easier and cheaper to deliver data services over separate WDM channels than to MUX them into one SONET or ATM service. More importantly becuase the service is data transparent, each customer can manage their own WDM channel independent of the other channels. Try doing that with SONET or ATM!! Check out www.cambrian.com for more details. However, I agree with you that if you have spare fiber it is cheaper just to light up the fiber without WDM or SONET. Packet Engines claims they can drive 22km of dark fiber with no additional equipment or repeaters Bill ------------------------------------------- Bill St Arnaud Director Network Projects CANARIE bill.st.arnaud@canarie.ca http://www.canarie.ca/bstarn
-----Original Message----- From: steven hessing [mailto:stevenh@inet.unisource.nl] Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 5:08 PM To: Bill St. Arnaud Cc: Jerry Scharf; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: flat vs non-flat charging
Bill,
WDM may lower the price per Mbit/s considerably, however many of these Mbit/s will have to be sold to be profitable as a service. Connecting two routers using dedicated WDM gear and 5km of fiber to send over 155Mbit/s traffic is more expensive then connecting the two routers directly using 5km of fiber, even though the first solution would give you much more available capacity.
If multiple services need to run over the same fiber then existing ATM or SDH networks are well capable of multiplexing these services over one fiber at often lower costs then installing new WDM gear.
There where there is a fiber shortage because there is no further room for service multiplexing or there is a shortage of capacity, WDM will be a very good solution. It is much cheaper then installing new fiber.
WDM is therefor very real for connecting TEX's together and for connecting LEX's to TEX's. I expect that WDM needs OADMs or other up and coming technology for SDH or WDM to become cost-effective for the MAN/local loop.
To return to the original topic, for the forseeable future (3-5 years?) bandwidth will remain scarce and therefor expensive. The prices per MBit/s will drop shortply but this will be compensated in a large increase in demand. An distance-based pricing scheme could therefor be an appropriate solution. Personally, I don't think it will happen.
-- Steven
PS: if anyone can prove me wrong with some numbers, please show me :) I've been working on cost calculations for bandwidth for the last couple of weeks.
Jerry:
You are absolutely right. I have pulled together some numbers on public pricing for long haul WDM (including right of way) showing that if you ou= t IP over WDM the cost of bandwidth drops by a factor of 100 to 1000. On local loops it is more dramatic - with new WDM technology from companies like Cambrian and Ciena gigabit ethernet or OC-48 SONET on a 5km local lo= op should cost about $2500 per YEAR.
A number of our regional networks have already pulled their own fiber and our realizing these costs in the real world.
Fibre - $4 to $6 per meter 20 year economic life and 10% maintenance per year 48 strands NZDSF Right of way $0 -$10 per meter per year (up to $200 per meter on long hau= l) but common solution is to offer right way owner free use of a couple of strands instead of paying cash Installation $25 per meter underground in cities $6 per meter on poles (maintenance costs 20% year) Twenty year amortized cost with 10% cost of money plus maintenance plus right of way costs at $10/year per meter $17 per year per meter for 48 strands $1.50 per year per meter per strand $.50 per year per meter per wavelength A 5 km OC-48 local loop should cost about $2500/year
Bill
------------------------------------------- Bill St Arnaud Director Network Projects CANARIE bill.st.arnaud@canarie.ca http://www.canarie.ca/bstarn
=A0
=A0
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Jerry Scharf Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 12:07 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: flat vs non-flat charging
I think the idea of distance charging is going away in many cases. With WDM, the cost of the WDM and SONET eqiupment on the ends of a fully populated 32 channel per fiber, 144 strand pull vastly outweight end-to-end fiber costs of anything pulled through the ground. When you add routers and the like on top of that, the distance issue really goes away and it becomes on of netwo= rk topology hops. Can anyone with figures for new intercontinental pulls s= ay whether this is true there as well (project oxygen marketing claims thi= s, but...)?
Using archaic telephone pricing models to argue cost of
In your mail from 29-5-1998 you write: providing bulk =
IP
services is just not right.
jerry
On Mon, 1 Jun 1998, Bill St. Arnaud wrote:
Steven:
New municipal and campus WDM gear from Cambrian, Ciena and Nortel makes it a lot easier and cheaper to deliver data services over separate WDM channels than to MUX them into one SONET or ATM service. More importantly becuase the service is data transparent, each customer can manage their own WDM channel independent of the other channels. Try doing that with SONET or ATM!!
Check out www.cambrian.com for more details.
However, I agree with you that if you have spare fiber it is cheaper just to light up the fiber without WDM or SONET. Packet Engines claims they can drive 22km of dark fiber with no additional equipment or repeaters
Actually, the word is "demonstrates", not "claims". :-) At Networld+Interop we had a 12,000 ft spool of fiber with 6 pairs of fiber. The 6 12,000 ft lengths were patches to provide a total of 72,000 ft of fiber and portions of our booth were run through that entire length. Not only that, but the 5 connections between the 6 lengths were done with normal patch cables and SC connectors (which are more lossy than a fusion splice). I work for Packet Engines as SQA manager and that spool is now in our demo area about 50 ft. away and we're still running voice, video and data through it for our demo's.
Bill
------------------------------------------- Bill St Arnaud Director Network Projects CANARIE bill.st.arnaud@canarie.ca http://www.canarie.ca/bstarn
davids@packetengines.com Packet Engines, Inc. (509)922-9190 http://www.packetengines.com/ Spokane, WA (509)922-9185 (fax)
Jerry Scharf wrote:
I think the idea of distance charging is going away in many cases. With WDM, the cost of the WDM and SONET eqiupment on the ends of a fully populated 32 channel per fiber, 144 strand pull vastly outweight end-to-end fiber costs of anything pulled through the ground.
Not true, long haul fiber *way* outways the initial ADM investment over about 1 years time frame, just not up-front. Remember: Dark fiber is a monthly re-occuring.....
When you add routers and the like on top of that, the distance issue really goes away and it becomes on of network topology hops.
Only for small ISP's. This is not even *slightly* true of transcontinental runs. Reality check, it costs me *way* more to put up long haul, than it does local. Something needs to account for this.... But, what?
Can anyone with figures for new intercontinental pulls say whether this is true there as well (project oxygen marketing claims this, but...)?
Using archaic telephone pricing models to argue cost of providing bulk IP services is just not right.
Some of us see it as: We are overcharging customers who don't use their service much, to offset *not billing* enough for those who do.... I don't call that archaic. But, I also don't think it is going to change anytime soon.... Richard
jerry
participants (5)
-
Bill St. Arnaud -
David J. Schmidt -
Jerry Scharf -
Richard Irving -
steven hessing