Monday, September 15. 2008Bandwidth Usage Per Customer Continues To IncreaseJohn Linton I don't look at bandwidth usage by customer type as often as I did in Exetel's first two to three years. This has come about partly due to the 'pressures' of too many things to do in a day and partly due to the complexity of the multiple sources of bandwidth 'types' now being used to meet different types of customer's needs. In the 'old days' we simply had IP feeds from Optus and Powertel which were combined on to one MRTG chart and a second MRTG chart showing the Telstra connection to and from our NSW customers (we only provided services to NSW in those days) it was a pretty simple thing to look at two MRTG charts to see whether there was a need approaching for more IP bandwidth. Today we have PoPs in every State and Territory except Tasmania and multiple sources of IP feeds in all of those PoPs as well as very different types of feeds ranging from Pipe, Akamai, PeerApp, inter-State cross connects and direct IP feeds in to four different PoPs. It's much more difficult to get a 'quick' view of exactly what is happening as the different services now (Ethernet, SHDSL, ADSL1, ADSL2, VoIP and now HSPA) have completely different time 'profiles' and usage patterns per different user type. It was pretty simple in the 'old days' when IP planning consisted of taking an average usage per customer of 25 kbps, multiplying it by the forecast number of customers at the end of each month and adding 15% as a 'safety buffer' and placing IP and customer connectivity upgrade orders once a month based on that simple arithmetic. It's a lot more complicated now and much easier to get wrong which requires more 'safety buffer' and more inefficiency (cost) because those safety buffers are now required for over thirty different connections instead of three. The good news is that the average usage of an ADSL1 user hasn't really changed much over the past five years - it's increased from around 25 kbps average per user in peak times to around 35 kbps per ADSL1 user in peak times. This is a percentage increase of 40% which is more than offset by the decline in IP pricing of well over 50% and 'clawed back' by the fact that Telstra's customer connectivity bandwidth pricing has remained the same over the same time period. Similarly our SHDSL and Ethernet business customers have not increased their average usage by much more than 20% over the last five years and while the customer connectivity costs have remained pretty much the same the IP costs have declined by over 50%. These small gains in cost/efficiency have been 'swamped' by the growth in percentage terms of the number of customers Exetel now has for its ADSL2 services which are now roughly 25% of all data customers. An ADSL2 customer requires an average of 100 kbps in peak times and that includes restricting P2P for NSW users from 7 pm to midnight. As the percentage of ADSL2 to ADSL1 users keeps slowly increasing this situation will continue to mean that more bandwidth is needed on average each month. There is little/no doubt that the cost of IP bandwidth will continue to fall over the next 4 quarters as more bandwidth comes 'on stream' from SX, Telstra and Pipe. Exetel is already being offered IP bandwidth at 30% below what we are currently paying. There is also little doubt that the ongoing improvements in the PeerApp and similar products will make caching of various types of traffic more efficient and that the growth in the Akamai clusters will produce more 'free' bandwidth. Whether these 'improvements' keep pace with the relatively steeply growing average user usage of IP remains to be seen - right now it isn't but that is due to a number of 'one off' factors for us and is probably affecting much bigger service providers in similar ways. We will look at what we think might happen in much more detail over the coming weeks but one thing I think will result is the reduction in the 'off peak period' from the current 12 hours. Our intention for this period, which has worked out very well over the past almost five years, was to reduce the overall cost of IP traffic by making it attractive to the end user to 'queue' their large downloads to times outside the peak usage periods. This has, largely, been the case and the 'discipline' shown by a large percentage of Exetel's heavier downloading customers in doing this has helped all customers by keeping IP charges very low. As we have grown the 'discipline' of the early customers (who were almost certainly more knowledgeable on average) has dissipated and the downloading results of less knowledgeable customers have caused the savings curve to flatten for the first time and shows every sign of trending down instead of the slight but consistent upward trend we have 'enjoyed' since March 2004. In hindsight, a wonderful thing, I should have realised that the 12 hour period was too 'generous' and not done it but, I have to admit it was entirely my mistake - as usual as I was enamoured of the 'marketing' advantage of "half of each day free". As my maamah used to saaayy 'one more thing to worry about". (apologies to Forrest). Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
perhaps I'm in the minority but I'll look forward to shorter off peak periods, the current arrangement extends to far into the work day when I want the fastest access, the bandwidth hogs can have their go while everyone is sleeping
Comments (3)
If the 'formal' analysis backs up the informal analysis then either we will put p2P restrictions on the 8 am to 12 noon period or we will reduce the period to 1 am to 9 am.
Comments (9)
Have you looked at adding any other peering options to help keep transit costs under control?
Admittedly the only IX I know of that Exetel doesn't connect to in Australia (that's worth connecting to) is Equinix. Comments (2)
Peering is not something that makes a major contribution to IP - generally.
The cost is not trivial (when you aren't co-located and this means you are better off without the added complexity in our scenarios regarding Equinix. Comments (9)
Would it be possible to improve on the simple 'time of day' definition of off Peak by introducing the concept of 'Economy Data'. That is data whose speed is continuously managed by Exetel to ensure that 'Standard Data' meets QoS standards regardless of time of day or day of week.
For example, offer a transparent proxy whose throughput can be managed and a customer selects standard or economy data mode using the proxy settings of their application or operating system. Exetel shares the savings by offering a discounted price or larger quota on economy data. Regards C Bumkin Comment (1)
We will always listen to new ideas.
Perhaps you could email me: j.linton@exetel.com.au to out line your thoughts in more detail - as I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting. Comments (9)
I get the feeling that he is suggesting doing away with the current off-peak system with the strict midnight to midday times.
Instead, people will just download normally, at full speed, which would be classed as 'Standard Data' downloading. However, people who are not fussy about the speed at which they are about to download something can use a transparent proxy setup by Exetel. While using the proxy what they are downloading would be classed as 'Economy Data' and Exetel would manage the bandwidth available to connections running through the proxy. For taking a lower bw priority Exetel would either reward the customer with extra quota or discount what is downloaded via the proxy. Or perhaps instead of off-peak and peak quota, Exetel would have standard and economy quota. At least, that is what I make of Country Bumkin's suggestion. Comments (5)
actually that sounds like a good way to solve the problem.
you could have a how to guide/wiki on setting up common bittorrent/download managers etc and users who use say >20gb of standard data and no economical could be emailed a link to the wiki's to see if they could lower their usage and therefore quota. if standard data counted mb for mb while economical counted 1mb for 2-4mb people would re-prioritize large downloads. then reduce the offpeak data to be 48/(the 2-4mb from economical data counting rate)=12-24gb. this would lower a lazy users quota while keeping people who set up the proxy at 48gb with same peak/offpeak. The bonus is that you could lower the speeds of adsl2 users download to less than 100kb/s and they'd accept it... hence exetel could lower IP bandwith. which i believe is your goal. Comments (2)
What we really would like to happen is that P2P set and forget down loaders set the start times to 2 am rather than 12 midnight.
That was what used to happen but it's no longer the case. Comments (9)
if i dont say myself, that is a great idea.
im just sad my ISP is totally against anything to reduce the cost of normal data, but you get that. btw, keep up the good work JL iv been reading your posts, and really enjoy the "even" views that you publish, and it is refreashing in this fan boy fulled indrustry to hear some truth, or near to it good luck Comment (1)
John,
How about lowering the offpeak allowance? I find things slow to a crawl after midnight when they run well during the day. You would still be the best value plan out there plus you would offer a better QOS. Say 32GB offpeak? Rgds, Entreri Comment (1)
Perhaps you could log a fault citing the traffic type and the exact time?
Comments (9)
The last thing I would want is for Exetel to become more reliant on the NetEnforcer. Reducing off-peak quota or the length of the off-peak period are backward steps and wouldn't go down too well with many of your customers. If it has to be done though it has to be done. ADSL2+ customers are the main offenders, so perhaps if it does need to be done then only do it to them. The up-side would be that it would split up all the schedulers starting up at the beginning of the period.
Here are a few ideas though: - make the period shortening voluntary and give either a few more GB or a discounted mobile or HSPA service to encourage people to do it - don't shorten the period, but add something similar to the fair play system whereby ADSL2+ (and 8mbit ADSL1?) users can opt-in or opt-out before the off-peak period starts. People that have opted-in get shaped to somewhere between 512/128 & 1500/256 decreasing their effect on available bandwidth. To encourage people to do it offer a 20-25% or so 'discount' on data downloaded during off-peak while opted-in. - do that off-peak buy back scheme you were once toying with. Allow people to sell 10GB chucks of their off-peak quota back to you for $1 or so, which would make them download less during off-peak Comments (5)
Ive joined exetel over 12 mths ago and am happy with service, one of the good things is the off peak times. Now your thinging of taking that away? You have hit us with a rise of rates, youve shapping our peer to peer, which effects web services ie: Abc Streaming. You say that bandwith is getting cheaper and cheaper, but yet you want to punish us by reducing our usage times! Youve just taken away the refer a friend program ( i refered four, not much but it helps. So when will it end is Exetel in trouble or do I go looking for another isp? Your blog is an open forum and I read it often as I like your tact shall we say in certain areas.Please dont reduce the off peak times.
Comment (1)
Whilst I would support both shortening of the off-peak window up to half and reducing the off-peak download limits by up to half, I think that if ADSL2 users are driving the need for purchasing increased bandwidth then maybe the ADSL2 plan inclusions and/or pricing should be revised (providing they remain competitive) to reflect the Exetel's increasing costs rather than impacting your ADSL1 users.
Comment (1)
Hmm..
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1052203 .. 61% (atm) of voters in the poll don't want you to touch the off-peak system. A testament to it's popularity. Perhaps a forum thread discussion is in order for people to give suggestions on ways to avoid a backstep? Or just to give other suggestions (who knows). Comments (5)
AS I'm sure you're aware I, personally, and Exetel generally regard "whirlpool" views as completely inconsequential being basically those of Internode and aaNet drones attempting to denigrate Exetel.
For Exetel, or any other provider, to base any decision on views expressed on Whirlpool by 'anonymous' posters would be ludicrous. Comments (9)
I am aware of your stance when it comes to WP, and I agree with the point that it is full of trolls. The only reason I cited it was because it was the only poll/discussion at hand.
I wouldn't want Exetel to do anything based on opinions posted on WP which is why I suggested (maybe not clearly enough?) in my comment that, perhaps, you could start a discussion thread like you sometimes do to flesh out some ideas people might have. Comments (5)
I will open a discussion on the Exetel Forum.
At the moment I have no real data (going forward) to base any change on and it will take some weeks to obtain that information. My hopes are that the price of raw IP continues to fall and that the effectiveness of caching and P2P controls continue to get better. However, only time will tell. Comments (9)
Before you make any hasty changes to the 'off peak period' remember that it is the reason a lot of people joined Exetel.
Personally, I would not mind if you shortened it by a few hours but starting it at 1am as well would be a bummer. It would start to look like the stupid off peak system of TPG Comment (1)
i would not like any change to the quota and time.
however, i would like the NetEnforcer to run at off peak so that there is a headroom of 1% to allow nonP2P to go at full speed. For example if there is no other activity, P2P will use 99% of the available bandwidth. However if there are 10% of nonP2P activity, the P2P is limited to 89%. By doing this you reduce P2P by 1%. It lets other non P2P to run at maximum speed. Comment (1)
Part of thee reasons for reducing the off-peak period didn't seem logical to me. It's noted that the original intention for this period was 'to reduce the overall cost of IP traffic by making it attractive to the end user to 'queue' ...' It's added that 'the downloading results of less knowledgeable customers have caused the savings curve to flatten for the first time...'
This means the less knowledgeable customers aren't downloading in the 'free' off-peak period, but are downloading in the 'non-free' on-peak period. If that's the case, and costs are increasing, wouldn't it be equitable to increase charges for the 'on-peak period' quotas (or do the same thing effectively, by maintaining prices but reducing on-peak quotas). Alternatively, of course, Exetel could try an education campaign to users; reminding them of the off-peak period and suggesting some download/bittorrent schedulers to help them use it effectively. It seems ADSL2 users are driving bandwidth costs up, while ADSL1 users are generally driving savings through lower bandwidth use. It therefore seems equitable to apply any negative changes to ADSL2 users, and not the ADSl1 users. Regards, Bruce Comment (1)
i like that idea.
try changing the people first i like my offpeak... Comments (2)
Gee, this must be a record number of posts here! Personally I'd go with JH's idea, if that's possible.
Comment (1)
I can see how people would think it unfair if the off peak download allowance was reduced but if the time period was reduced it wouldn't have as much impact, it's not like they couldn't still download the entire allowance using an 8 hour window each night anyway
Comments (3)
That's right. To download 48,000,000kb (I think exetel count 1000kb as 1mb and 1000mb as 1 gb?) in 240 hours (8 hours x 30 days) you only need just over 55.5kb/s - alot slower than the speed the majority of the bandwidth hogs are capable of with their adsl2 or even 1.5/8mbit adsl1 connections.
Comments (2)
Couldn't the off-peak period be a multiple of the peak allowance purchased (say 2x)?
The off-peak period could also be reduced to 8 hours (perhaps using the users local time to further spread things out). Whatever happens, web browsing and VoIP traffic should be given the highest priority at all times of the day. Comments (2)
We have no intention of changing the off peak allowance - it was gradually increased to that level for a reason and the reason remains valid.
Yes, we could reduce the period but, again, there's a reason for making it a 'neat' half day and I wouldn't like to move from that decision. HTTP traffic is always given priority over P2P at all times of the day. Comments (9)
Don't even know if it is possible or indeed practical but perhaps the P2P could be restricted more in the second half of the off peak period, eg, 12am to 6am when the least amount of users are impacted at the current settings and then 6am to 12pm at 50% of the current speed or 75% etc whatever is needed to give the desired result, something along those lines anyway
Comments (3)
I don't know how easy this might be, but I assume those that download on a timer will leave their computer on all night anyway.
How about having a random stagger of your customers. Say: 1/3 customers from midnight to 6am, 1/3 from 3am to 9am and 1/3 from 6am to noon. That way you would drop your bandwidth by 1/3 at any point in time from midnight to noon. Obviously, you would randomly place customers in each of the groups and send them an email to let them know. If I'm going to leave my computer on, it wouldn't bother me which 6 hour block it is set for. I also like the idea of a off-peak proxy, rather than a time. In other words, completely do away with the time zones, and just have a proxy. Say I get 8GB peak and 48GB off peak, I would just set my proxy for peer-to-peer to the "offpeak" proxy, (and possibly my browser too). The offpeak proxy would be throttled to ensure the peak proxy (or the "straight through" pipe) receives the optimum speed. Comment (1)
I am really starting to like the idea of an 'economy' proxy where connections through it get a low bandwidth priority on the network. You could throw in a generous data discount to get people to use it. I would not remove the current off-peak period/quota for it though.
Perhaps an easier solution without having people go through proxies or opt-in to systems would be to just give a 25% data discount on any downloads done between 3-9am or something. It will make many of the heavy downloaders move to that period. Comments (5)
Well it may not be a matter of reducing offpeak times, because I reckon the 48GB is still obtainable on high end services even if the offpeak hours are shortened. I reckon their should be a decrease in offpeak quota, that would stop the mass leeching issue. For example, I'm paying $55 that includes 48GB offpeak limited at 1500KBPS, but someone is paying $35.00 for an ADSL2+ with 24,000KBPS speed limit.. now their getting the same quota as I am for 15 days (offpeak) of a 30 day month. Limiting low end paying services may solve the issue.
Comments (2)
I'm fine with that. As long as we get the same quota anyway, I don't mind changing my download time.
Comment (1)
Thank you - all that's needed is to start timed down loads after 2 am.
Comments (9)
I'm all for reducing or removing the off peak bonus all together. I don't download large volumes yet my everyday browsing seems to be affected each day by these arrangements that cater to a minority of users.
Under the present arrangement I'll be switching providers once my contract is up, hence it is a perpetuating problem as currently you are detering the 'normal' users and attracting the heavy users further diminishing the utilisation advantages of the off-peak period anyway. Comment (1)
|
Calendar
QuicksearchArchivesCategoriesBlog AdministrationExternal PHP Application |