The Impact of Fiber Access to ISP Backbones in Japan

A presentation from a recent meeting of NANOG about the traffic mix and impact of 100Mbps fiber deployment in Japan on the backbone ISPs. This is a very detailed study and shows the impact on end user usage patterns when they have access to big broadband. This could led to a reevaluation of pricing and cost structures for the ISP A presentation from a recent meeting of NANOG about the traffic mix and impact of 100Mbps fiber deployment in Japan on the backbone ISPs. This is a very detailed study and shows the impact on end user usage patterns when they have access to big broadband. This could led to a reevaluation of pricing and cost structures for the ISP industry all over the world.

Comments

  1. This is exactly why the Telcos are looking to have tiered access. When 5% of the users use 75% of the bandwidth, you have an economic problem.

    More commentary here.

    http://www.nyquistcapital.com/2006/02/20/net-neutrality-tragedy-of-the-commons/

  2. Andrew,

    It’d be useful to read the article the power point was based on–or even read the powerpoint more closely.

    The overall thrust of the paper was to emphasize that these were not “different” users but “normal” users who were what we’d call in the states early adopters–further along a usage curve all would adopt. They emphasize that there was no distinct group of “heavy hitters” that were causing a problem. The implication is that simply offering large, symmetrical access leads to folks using that bandwidth (duh) with the further implication that the problem of backbone congestion could not be laid at the doorstep of miscreant users or particular applications.

    The article:
    http://www.iijlab.net/%7Ekjc/tmp/rbb-20060211.pdf

    A different take on the implications of the article (with an emphasis on the implications for a local, US muni fiber build):
    http://lafayetteprofiber.com/Blog/2006/02/data-from-japans-fibered-nation.html

  3. John, Andrew is just selling the bell’s attempt to pull a new profit revenue stream out of thin air by imposing ridiculous tariffs on content providers, who’ll pass those prices on to consumers.

    The apparent talking points being circulated by think tanks is to try and confuse that debate, with the idea there are bandwidth hogs who need to pay more money.

    Our users debunk this confused pro-industry spin of the NANOG report over at dslreports:

    http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/72227