What is the highest possible upload speed on ground cables internet...

What is the highest possible upload speed on ground cables internet? By possible I mean either scientifically(explanation), or practically(example of a provider that does such and such).

Attached: CABLE2.jpg (640x480, 63K)

Backstory: My area will not have fiber internet in my lifetime, but we already have cables and phoneline internet available. I don't want to move to a different town because here I have a free house. No, I can't sell it because it belongs to my parents who love me dearly but will take it away if I "abandon" them. Pic unrelated.

Attached: 526552.jpg (727x1024, 382K)

What a pathetic, trapped life you live.

DOCSIS 3.1 is full duplex 10gbps, though that gets split among everyone in your area.

So realistically 1gbps upload speeds should be possible using normal coaxial. In practice anywhere from 500mbps up to 940mbps should be possible depending on load and your ISP peering and the server you're connected to

Oh no, I have a house, a yard, and a car to my name before the age of 30 in a developed country, 40 minutes away from the Silicon Wadi. Woe is me. Please don't pretend you own a house. The vast majority of tech people still live in rent.
Thank you. Every single answer in google is about fucking fiber.

>Thank you. Every single answer in google is about fucking fiber.
Fiber is the future afterall, i'm not surprised.

There are also some DSL technologies (G.Fast, XG-Fast, etc) that are capable of providing gigabit, or in the case of XG-Fast, multi gigabit connections on copper wire.

XG-fast in particular is looking to be used for FTTF (fiber to the frontage) connections, meaning they run fiber up to your property, and the last 50-100m are done with a copper DSL connection that is capable of gigabit (or more).


Full fiber is unlikely to ever be a reality for many rural dwellings, but a somewhat close fiber connection and last mile copper is feasible.

Distance is a factor you know.

>Silicon Wadi
Do you live in Israel, OP?

>we already have cables and phoneline internet available.
But that's not coaxial.

Thats what HFC is for, run fiber part way, run copper coax the final distance. Much cheaper than trying to do a full fiber installation and can generally re-use previous copper installations without having to replace anything.

Cable likely means DOCSIS cable. Though it could be DSL.

I would love to have a car and house but I don't envy you since you are bind to your parent's house. 10gbps on copper is possible but I suspect the cost will be significantly higher than on fibre for ISP. Your best bet might be 4G LTE if that's a thing in your country, at least where I live people who don't have access to fibre can always opt for 4G, 300Mbps is not that bad.

Fucking jews. I live in the countryside over a hour from any city with only a small town nearby and we have fiber for the house, laid down by the ISP for free for a set time contract, that contract ended months ago though, still I won't change them though.
Europe by the way.

>4G LTE
OP better enjoy his latency

>300Mbps is not that bad.
Oh poor soul

yeah, if anything infrastructure here is pretty great.

>10gbps on copper is possible but I suspect the cost will be significantly higher than on fibre for ISP
In the US anyway, Comcast seems to be split, in densely populated wealthy areas they're installing FTTH 2gbps fiber. And in other areas, they're installing DOCSIS 3.0, or DOCSIS 3.1, depending on the area.

So I don't think the cost for fiber is significantly less since the majority of comcast's recent upgrades have been for DOCSIS 3.0/3.1 instead of their FTTH service, which is in it's infancy.

Explain fiber vs cable. Why don't say Charter/Comcast just replace the copper wires with Fiber on the utility poles?

Why does Fiber have to be buried underground and not just be used in poles like cable?

What kind of line did telephone lines use and why were they never upgraded?

fiber doesn’t need to be buried underground, here the fiber runs along on the poles

G LTE
>OP better enjoy his latency

I ran my entire office (4 people) on 4G for about half a year.
We were in a temporary location and all internet subscriptions were 12 months minimum.
For gaming it's probably shit, but for normal internet use it's fine.

We have ADSL now but we still kept the 4G for redundancy.

>Why does Fiber have to be buried underground and not just be used in poles like cable?
it doesn't have to be, we have overhead fiber runs at my work, they're running up on the poles just like the power lines.
However, generally to avoid anything potentially happening to the fiber, it gets buried whenever possible.

>Explain fiber vs cable. Why don't say Charter/Comcast just replace the copper wires with Fiber on the utility poles?
Because it would be very expensive, you're talking millions of miles of copper, not only would you need millions of miles of fiber to replace the copper, you'd need thousands of laborers to do these replacements, you're realistically talking about hundreds of billions of dollars required to replace the majority of the copper in the US with fiber. No one wants to invest that kind of money when most of the people you'd be servicing with that fiber would be unable to ever pay off the cost it took to lay the fiber to them.
Even after 30-50 years, it still wouldn't be enough money to offset the initial investment, so no investor is willing to front that money for no profit in their lifetime.

>Thats what HFC is for, run fiber part way, run copper coax the final distance.

I still think that's the best solution of all.
Copper cables are far less fragile and much easier to work with.
I don't see any real benefit of FTTH apart from marketing.

>I don't see any real benefit of FTTH apart from marketing.
Ease of upgrade and ping.

I have FTTH, my ISP just has to replace my ONT with a new one if I ever want/need higher than 1gbps.

My ISP is currently looking at NG-PON2 which will allow 10/10gbps per residential customer, and up to 40/40gbps for business customers, with the option to upgrade to 80/80gbps without any drastic change in the network.

All it requires is replacing ONTs and OLTs, the fiber runs remain untouched, and the technicians barely have to do anything but pull out the old ONT/OLT and replace with the new ones.

outside of the city, or major city suburbs, yes, HFC makes the most sense for deployment. However, in cities and densely populated wealthy suburbs, FTTP just makes sense. Especially in new construction.

Verizon buried all the Fiber in my city which seems far more expensive than just getting a truck with a lift. Seems way more expensive to bury Fiber since you have to break down sidewalks and then fix them again instead of just simply replacing a cable. Why didn't Verizon do that?

Also aren't Comcast/Charter networks like 90% Fiber except for the "last mile". How much copper is that if most of their network is already Fiber?

Fiber is literally kilometers long single pieces of glass.
They are quite fragile: you can't bend them in a sharp angle for example.
And when they break they are hard to splice together again.

Putting them outside on poles is just asking for trouble.

Fiber also doesn't last as long as copper.
IIRC they need to be replaced every 10 years or so.
I think copper can last for over a century.

>What kind of line did telephone lines use and why were they never upgraded?
If it's good enough for voice 100 years ago it's good enough for voice today.

>except for the "last mile"
that last mile IS 90% of the connections user, the backbone links are single fiber lines that run to various distributions facilities that then provide service to all the surrounding area.

In terms of how many miles of fiber vs copper, it's overwhelmingly copper.

Also, they're buried because if a fiber is damaged, replacing it can be an expensive pain in the ass, however laying it in the ground and it can stay there for decades without ever having anything happen to it. Yes the initial cost is more expensive, but over the next 20 years, you save a lot more on the fiber runs that are buried since they never need maintenance compared to overhead fiber which if damaged costs $$$ to fix/replace.

>IIRC they need to be replaced every 10 years or so.
lol wut?

I have had the same fiber run since 2006, verizon has no plans on replacing it anytime soon, there are fiber runs in northern virginia that were put in, in the mid-late 1990s that are still operating at gigabit+ speeds.

What kind of bullshit are you imagining? Industry standards are 15-25 years, and most ISPs plan on a 25 year service life for fiber.

I would think HFC makes even more sense in cities.

Copper lines can be kept very short, probably 100 meters tops.
And this saves a whole lot of digging in busy traffic and running cables up to a huge number of small apartments.

OK, so 20 years rather than 10 years.
Still a huge difference vs copper.

Think about all the networking gear required to convert the fiber into copper, that's not free. In a city where you have 5000 people living on a block, having to convert all those people from fiber runs into copper runs gets expensive.
Much easier to just run fiber into the building and have a fiber drop on each floor with ethernet into the apartments.

HFC is generally used in suburban housing developments where things are spread further apart, you have a single fiber node for the entire development and do last mile copper from that hub. Or used in rural deployment but over longer distance (which negatively impacts speeds), but it's far cheaper than full FTTH.

again, most ISPs plan on 25 years at this point, and even then, if it's still works after that time, they wont be replacing it until it actually fails. I wouldn't be shocked by 40-50 year fibers still operating in a few decades.


Also, copper SHOULD be replaced far more often than it generally is, that's why you get people who SHOULD be getting 10-20mbps and end up getting 2mbps at most because their 60 year old copper should've been replaced 20 years ago.

RG-58 coax has a maximum attenuation per 100ft of -13.1dB at 750MHz so make of that what you will but you get very far with regular coax without having amplifiers every 300-400ft or so. That's about a 20x reduction in power every 100ft.