Jim S:
Sorry for the disjointed reply, but I was in Phoenix for the weekend, on my in-laws' computer, & had to run to meet a dinner reservation. So, to continue. . .
G.Lite
G.Lite is the next phase of DSL. I assume you know that it has been endorsed by the ITU. The benefits of G.Lite to the telcos is that eliminates the need to install a splitter at the subscriber end. This is a big dollar savings (labor-wise) to the overall cost of the telco rolling out DSL to its customer base. What is more important to you & I is that it extends the range of DSL out to 24,000 ft, from its present 15,000 ft range. I believe it does this by reducing the throughput over the copper pair, thereby increasing the tolerance of diminishing signal quality inherent over longer distances.
[You should feel heartened to have someone like Jim Wilkinson on this thread. I am. He's definitely "in the loop" on xDSL. I hope to learn a bit from him & his links . . . & may be find the answer I'm looking for, which is the same as yours -- how do I get my ILEC to deliver DSL to my doorstep.]
I wish Jim W. was right w/respect to the potential of having a DSLAM just down the street at a remote location. But even the links he posted described the DSLAM as situated "at or in close proximity to the CO." The DSLAM is essentially the interface b/w the local loop & the telcos fiber-optic digital network -- for digital traffic. It makes economic, if not technical sense to locate the DSLAM at or near the CO. If there were a feasible way to locate it at a remote location -- like in my neighborhood -- I would be most eager to learn about it. Jim W, can you help? I'm all ears, or shall I say, bytes.
30 Miles from the CO
Jim, if I were in your situation I would blow-off DSL & look into a wireless solution. I've also looked into it, but decided to forego for a # of reasons. First, I still had to rely upon an upstream phone connection that was unreliable. Furthermore, I had to weigh the add'l cost of a second phone line & dial-up ISP account. Second, capital costs amounted to about $900, which included a new dish on my roof, a new receiver for broadcast programming, a proprietary cable surge protector & as well as installation. Furthermore, I had to weigh the monthly fee of about $45 that provided me with mere unlimited access during off-peak hrs (requiring me to pay thru the nose during peak hours -- when the markets are open). Third, after speaking with a knowledgeable rep from my cableco (Century Communications), I learned that cable Internet access would be available in " about a year." Since then 4 months have passed & no progress has been made on the cable front. Note that they first promised Internet access by Dec 97. Now they're telling me sometime in 2000. Do I believe them? I am revisiting the wireless solution.
If, DSL becomes deliverable to your locale, it will be years. This is why timing should be a consideration & why I suggest that you also look into the wireless solution. Where are you located? In So. Cal. one needs a direct line-of-site to the southern sky, 60 degrees above the horizon. I'm situated on the top of the Santa Monica Mtns, just north of UCLA so I don't have a problem. If you do, given your rural locale, I don't see a problem gaining a permit to construct a tower to enhance your line-of-sight.
Wire Gauge
Wire gauge is a factor, but I don't think it's a "major" factor. One will tend to find larger gauge wire over longer loops because it is capable of handling larger loads that are necessary to deliver a quality audible signal to the telco customer situated at the end of the loop. The benefit of larger gauge is obvious as well as demonstrated by my situation. But for larger gauge wire in my street, I would not have the ISDN connection I now connect with.
The larger the gauge, the greater the ability to carry a quality signal over longer distance loops. You might be confused with gauge measure. The larger the gauge, the smaller the measure. For example, There's 22-gauge wire in my street. This is fatter wire than 24-gauge, which is fatter than 26-gauge. I first learned about gauge as a teen when wiring my speakers from the receiver. In those days one preferred use lampcord wire, which is 16 or 14 gauge, as opposed to the 18-or 20-gauge wire that may have been provided with the speakers.
Cableco Incentive
Cablecos are less regulated than telcos. Telcos presently have a stranglehold on the local loop leading to your home. Who else owns & operates similar access points to your home. Cable? Electric? Gas? All these utilities have the capability of delivering access to the Internet -- & are striving to do so today. Why? Future revenue.
Ever hear of E-commerce? Do some research? Sure the focus today is on businesses. This is the market that the telcos have been focusing on. DSL is being deployed today mainly to capitalize upon the projected exponential growth of networked access to the Internet. This growth is too great for the existing telco fiber-optic infrastructure to handle - economically that is. It is much profitable for the telcos to deliver a solution that relies upon its existing asset - the copper pairs running from the CO to every phone. The great majority of these targeted customers will likely be w/i the necessary 3-4 miles of the CO. Closely situated residential customers are the incidental beneficiaries. Outlying residential customers will not be heard.
Residential customers? It appears that this has been the focus of the cablecos. I don't know what percentage of the US has cable infrastructure, but it's significant. What's on the minds of the cablecos? First, there is the ability to compete directly with the telcos for telephony. Right now in Culver City & Venice, Ca, MediaOne offers both Internet access & telephone service over its HFC network, in addition to cable broadcasting. Second, consider the entry of digital TV. Not all broadcasts will be high-density (HDTV). Instead, I'm sure there will be ways to order products display not only in commercials, but programming as well. IMHO, this is e-commerce, phase II. Rupert Murdoch wants just what Bill Gates wants. He wants to control the world -- & he can do so by first controlling content, then controlling consumer demand - the sought after response to that content.
So you see, there is every incentive for the cableco to deliver high-speed access to their subscriber base, especially if the telcos drag their feet. The problem we're experiencing, at least for the present, is that both are dragging their feet. The residential customer is left out to dry. The Telecom Act of 1996 was intended to resolve this. It hasn't.
Dateline LA
My particular problem is unique. Unfortunately, I'm situated at the "end of the loop." I'm less than 3 blocks from GTE territory. As a result, there's very little incentive by the local CO to invest in whatever is necessary to delivery high-speed access to my neighborhood. So what if about 250 of their customers can't receive DSL right now. No big deal. The focus now is customers close to the CO, where most businesses are located. But if the local cableco gets it butt in gear, the telcos will respond, particularly if the cablecos offer telephony services as well. Offering of competing telephony will be a severe threat to the ILECs, & IMHO, they will respond to maintain their established customer base. But, until then . . .
So why does the G-lite equipment necessarily have to go into a CO?
That's the $64B question. I'm not sure. While the present reason is most likely technical, it is undoubtedly economical. Perhaps Jim W. will be able to shed some light. As far as I know, there needs to be a split between digital & voice transmission at some point in order to deliver to the home the ability to use the same copper wire for voice as well as data communication. The most logical point is the CO. The CO is the interface between (1) the telco's fiber-optic digital network, which is the medium over which both data & voice communication is transmitted to almost any other CO in the world, and (2) the twisted copper pair from the CO to your home delivering POTS. This is where all the switching equipment is located. In order for G.Lite to work there must be switching equipment in place to split the digital transmission, which is asynchronous & packetized, from voice transmission, which is not. Can this be done at a location remote from the CO? If so, is it economically feasible? If so, is there an incentive for the ILEC to do so? These, IMHO, are the critical issues.
Sorry for the long response. |
