Fibre vs Copper for 2 Mb line

I have inherited a 2 Mb UUNET leased line over fibre, resold by
Alternative Networks. It's overpriced and we're looking to save costs
by switching to another supplier (or using prices from other suppliers
to renegotiate at renewal time).

The current connection works out at around GBP1,300 per month. I've
had a few leased line quotes for around GBP740 per month + GBP1,200
install. However, Easynet's SureStream service (which they call a
leased line) is only GBP480 per month. SLAs etc look very similar.

SureStream uses local loop unbundling and runs over 2 x copper
connections. If we went with a leased line from suppliers using BT
tail circuits then the existing fibre would be used.

Does fibre have many more advantages than copper? Is the Easynet
service a no-brainer?

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>I have inherited a 2 Mb UUNET leased line over fibre, resold by
> Alternative Networks. It's overpriced and we're looking to save costs
> by switching to another supplier (or using prices from other suppliers
> to renegotiate at renewal time).
>
> The current connection works out at around GBP1,300 per month. I've
> had a few leased line quotes for around GBP740 per month + GBP1,200
> install. However, Easynet's SureStream service (which they call a
> leased line) is only GBP480 per month. SLAs etc look very similar.
>
> SureStream uses local loop unbundling and runs over 2 x copper
> connections. If we went with a leased line from suppliers using BT
> tail circuits then the existing fibre would be used.
>
> Does fibre have many more advantages than copper? Is the Easynet
> service a no-brainer?

An SLA isn't worth the paper its written on unless breach of it either pays
you a chunk of money or allows you to break the contract at some point.
Giving a four hour SLA doesn't make the service reliable & nor does it
guarantee the thing will be fixed in 4 hours. Without the above then there
isn't any visible incentive for the carrier to actually meet the thing.

Suggest you ask for some network performance & downtime figures for teh last
6 months if you want to be sure that you are buying a reliable service.

All that said I very much doubt you will have a problem with it.

If the SLA is OK then the only thing I'd ask about is whether the thing
could be upgraded beyond 2Mb if you wanted to do so on the copper

HTH

I.

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> Does fibre have many more advantages than copper?

In the context you quote I don't think it makes any difference to line
quality and reliability. Many ISDN30 circuits have been delivered on
copper for years now and at the sites I visit they are very reliable. A
BT engineer recently told me he preferred copper anyway because if it
gets chopped joining it again is easy.

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>I have inherited a 2 Mb UUNET leased line over fibre, resold by
> Alternative Networks. It's overpriced and we're looking to save costs
> by switching to another supplier (or using prices from other suppliers
> to renegotiate at renewal time).
>
> The current connection works out at around GBP1,300 per month. I've
> had a few leased line quotes for around GBP740 per month + GBP1,200
> install. However, Easynet's SureStream service (which they call a
> leased line) is only GBP480 per month. SLAs etc look very similar.
>
> SureStream uses local loop unbundling and runs over 2 x copper
> connections. If we went with a leased line from suppliers using BT
> tail circuits then the existing fibre would be used.
>
> Does fibre have many more advantages than copper? Is the Easynet
> service a no-brainer?
>

We went through the same process 2 years ago, moving from 2Mbps fibre
(Easynet connection over BT line, prior to that it was a BT connection) to
2Mbps SDSL with Easynet. Reliability has been very good, although there was
a problem a few months ago due to a bug in the Cisco IOS used on the 2600
routers but has since been resolved (resulted in a couple of hours downtime,
but if IIRC we received compensation in the form of discount against the
next charging period). We also have ISDN backup with Easynet which only cost
us the price of the card for the router (we already have ISDN30 into the
building for our phone system and so the backup connection utilises 2
existing circuits on that through our PBX).

Dan

Thanks for the replies. I agree about the SLAs; a pro rata refund
isn't much good to us. In my experience, connection issues are more
likely to be the result of failures within the ISP's infrastructure, so
we'll have a backup ADSL from another provider.

In case anyone's interested, I've had pricing from lots of ISPs and
Easynet Surestream works out at under gbp7k for a year, including
installation. BTnet's standard (no SLA) service is within a few
hundred quid pa. Then it jumps by three grand for Onetel and Pipex.
BTnet's Premium service is four grand extra. Then come the rest -
Demon, Telewest, Viatel, Cogent, ClaraNet. We're in sunny Slough so
clearly anyone whose closest POPs are in London is going to be more
expensive.

We host a web server that's used by around 50 customers. Daily traffic
to that web server is about 1.5 Gb. Do you think SureStream is
suitable for this, or should we stick with leased?

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 07:39:45 -0800, Paul Welsh wrote:

> We host a web server that's used by around 50 customers. Daily traffic to
> that web server is about 1.5 Gb. Do you think SureStream is suitable for
> this, or should we stick with leased?

Why don't you put it in a data centre at probably £40 a month for ample
bandwidth for your requirements? They'll have, or should have, more
redundancy than you can afford in areas such as connectivity, climate
control and power supplies.

--
Regards
Tony
(Take out the garbage to reply)

"Paul Welsh" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Thanks for the replies. I agree about the SLAs; a pro rata refund
> isn't much good to us. In my experience, connection issues are more
> likely to be the result of failures within the ISP's infrastructure, so
> we'll have a backup ADSL from another provider.
>
> In case anyone's interested, I've had pricing from lots of ISPs and
> Easynet Surestream works out at under gbp7k for a year, including
> installation. BTnet's standard (no SLA) service is within a few
> hundred quid pa. Then it jumps by three grand for Onetel and Pipex.
> BTnet's Premium service is four grand extra. Then come the rest -
> Demon, Telewest, Viatel, Cogent, ClaraNet. We're in sunny Slough so
> clearly anyone whose closest POPs are in London is going to be more
> expensive.
>
> We host a web server that's used by around 50 customers. Daily traffic
> to that web server is about 1.5 Gb. Do you think SureStream is
> suitable for this, or should we stick with leased?
>

We run 3 websites (amongst other things) on our SureStream with a total
visitor count of around 5000-7000 per day, and last time I checked traffic
it was around 5GB per day. Go with SureStream

Dan

My first thoughts were to co-locate the web server, but there's a lot
more traffic between the web server and the database server than
between the outside world and the web server. The system is also used
extensively in-house.

SureStream it is, then. Thanks everyone.

Hmm, you know I said SureStream it is? Well, I was wondering. Various
ISPs such as Demon, for example, do an uncontended SDSL service. Is
this what I should be comparing SureStream to, rather than a leased
line?