From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

This may be a silly question:

Is contention something to consider when choosing a FTTP ISP?
--
^-^. Sn!pe, bird-brain. My pet rock Gordon just is.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:

This may be a silly question:

Is contention something to consider when choosing a FTTP ISP?

In practice itrCOs not an issue.

ThererCOs two possible areas of contention. Firstly on the fibre local loop. You share the optical network with others. This sharing is irrespective of
the ISP. Then you have backhaul from the fibre head end to the rest of the Internet. That architecture is many and varied and even within one ISP it
can change by geographical location. Very low cost ISPs may have paid for
less backhaul capacity.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.telecom.broadband

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:

This may be a silly question:

Is contention something to consider when choosing a FTTP ISP?

In practice it's not an issue.

There's two possible areas of contention. Firstly on the fibre local loop. You share the optical network with others. This sharing is irrespective of the ISP. Then you have backhaul from the fibre head end to the rest of the Internet. That architecture is many and varied and even within one ISP it
can change by geographical location. Very low cost ISPs may have paid for less backhaul capacity.

Thank you, Tweed.
--
^-^. Sn!pe, bird-brain. My pet rock Gordon just is.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2