Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality

Fri Feb 27 19:57:33 UTC 2015

The statistics certainly *should* be used when provisioning aggregate 
resources.
But even if 1% of users would reasonably be using a fully symmetric link 
to its potential, that's a good reason to at least have such circuits 
available in the standard consumer mix, which they aren't today.

On 02/27/2015 01:30 PM, Scott Helms wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> Well, I wouldn't call using the mean a "myth", after all understanding 
> most customer behavior is what we all have to build our business cases 
> around.  If we throw out what customers use today and simply take a 
> build it and they will come approach then I suspect there would fewer 
> of us in this business.
>
> Even when we look at anomalous users we don't see symmetrical usage, 
> ie top 10% of uploaders.  We also see less contended seconds on their 
> upstream than we do on the downstream.  These observations are based 
> on ~500k residential and business subscribers across North America 
> using FTTH (mostly GPON), DOCSIS cable modems, and various flavors of DSL.
>
>
> Scott Helms
> Vice President of Technology
> ZCorum
> (678) 507-5000
> --------------------------------
> http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
> --------------------------------
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Taylor <dtaylor at vocalabs.com 
> <mailto:dtaylor at vocalabs.com>> wrote:
>
>     But by this you are buying into the myth of the mean.
>
>     It isn't that most, or even many, people would take advantage of
>     equal upstream bandwidth, but that the few who would need to take
>     extra measures unrelated to the generation of that content to be
>     able to do so.
>
>     Given symmetrical provisioning, no extra measures need to be taken
>     when that 10 year old down the street turns out to be a master
>     musician.
>
>     On 02/27/2015 11:59 AM, Scott Helms wrote:
>
>         This is true in our measurements today, even when subscribers
>         are given
>         symmetrical connections.  It might change at some point in the
>         future,
>         especially when widespread IPv6 lets us get rid of NAT as a de
>         facto
>         deployment reality.
>
>
>         Scott Helms
>         Vice President of Technology
>         ZCorum
>         (678) 507-5000 <tel:%28678%29%20507-5000>
>         --------------------------------
>         http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
>         --------------------------------
>
>         On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Naslund, Steve
>         <SNaslund at medline.com <mailto:SNaslund at medline.com>>
>         wrote:
>
>             How about this?  Show me 10 users in the average
>             neighborhood creating
>             content at 5 mbps....Period.  Only realistic app I see is
>             home surveillance
>             but I don't think you want everyone accessing that
>             anyway.  The truth is
>             that the average user does not create content that anyone
>             needs to see.
>             This has not changed throughout the ages, the ratio of
>             authors to readers,
>             artists to art lovers, musicians to music lovers, YouTube
>             cat video creator
>             to cat video lovers, has never been a many to many
>             relationship.
>
>             On 2015-02-27 12:13, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
>             <mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>
>                 Consider a group of 10 users, who all create new
>                 content.  If each one
>                 creates at a constant rate of 5 mbits, they need 5
>                 up.  But to
>                 download all the new content from the other 9, they
>                 need close to 50
>
>             down.
>
>                 And when you expand to several billion people creating
>                 new content,
>                 you need a *huge* pipe down.
>
>             Steven Naslund
>             Chicago IL
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Daniel Taylor          VP Operations            Vocal
>     Laboratories, Inc.
>     dtaylor at vocalabs.com <mailto:dtaylor at vocalabs.com>
>     http://www.vocalabs.com/ (612)235-5711 <tel:%28612%29235-5711>
>
>

-- 
Daniel Taylor          VP Operations            Vocal Laboratories, Inc.
dtaylor at vocalabs.com   http://www.vocalabs.com/            (612)235-5711