Inside AT&T’s 83 GB/hour mobile cell tower(9to5mac.com) |
Inside AT&T’s 83 GB/hour mobile cell tower(9to5mac.com) |
I'm curious how these figures relate with what 'normal' towers have allocated. I've seen the rough 1 gbps figure before but don't know how accurate that is.
Standard microwave backhaul in a licensed band typically tops out around 263Mbps as that's what you get with 256QAM in 40Mhz of spectrum.
I tend to avoid articles on any 3rd party sites with the word "Mac" or "Apple" in their domain names for this exact reason. The effects of the RDF are just too transparent.
Say what you want about the network or the company, but I was impressed. (It probably didn't hurt that we had some folks from Apple on the attendee list.)
Do you have any contacts still or any idea who I could get in touch with to get more information? Thanks!
I'm told one can rent them (it was a small rack of equipment), but I'm guessing it's rather expensive.
Evidence: My twitter images twitter.com/MichaelLargent
The image for the speed test was to see if they throttled at the end of the month.
Just to be clear...don't try this on a supposedly Unlimited iphone data plan, or straight talk unlimited...doesn't work lol.
There still a couple of problems that still haven't been addressed (or just aren't included in this article)
1. 1 Cell site isn't enough to cover a densely populated area. Although this is running on 850mhz which is much lower than wifi at 2.4ghz, multiple cell sites are usually better than 1 big one. If their peak is only 189mbps, then it should be fine using cat6 cable, however your limited when for range as you will run in trouble if you run cable over 100m without a repeater or booster. The other option is to use fibre, which is rather expensive but it wouldn't be that bad for AT&T considering their size.
2. Limited to the network beyond the cell towers.
This is coming from experience being at large festivals like Coachella, but although you can get signal on your phone most of the time, sms is virtually useless since your txt's are delayed by 4-5 hours. You can make a call after about trying 10 times, but because of the noise, you can never hear what the other person is saying and vice versa. So unless they are running a local relay for text's and transferring calls, their network servers are the ones that need beefing up rather than the towers themselves.
Now I'm guessing people are going to be using data more than anything, but in the past I've found 2g to be much more reliable (3g flatout did not work at the last festival, Big Day Out I was at). We found that Whatsapp became the most reliable way to communicate between our friends as your messages wouldn't get delayed for hours.
my guess is satellites or communicating with other cell towers but the latter seems counterproductive as it would push a high load to a different cell tower. but if they used satellites, wouldn't there by high latency and bandwidth limits?
From what we would could see, there were a bunch of ancient racks running 2g gear that looked at least 10 years old (all beige), and then a whole 42U rack of 12v batteries for a UPS.
Then there was a quarter-rack which had a bunch of fibre cables going into a few Huawei branded 1u boxes. LTE only got deployed a month ago so it much of been HSPA+.
I think if they had a satellite connection there would be too much latency. And the throughput wouldn't be limiting as well. They could of had one as a backup source though, or just setup as a secondary connection.
I think ATT is a tier 1 network, so your connection to whatever data center will probably get bonded directly to whatever ATT datacenter which has the fastest response (ping) to the content your connecting to...love to see a traceroute for comparison.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/07/cell-phone-towers-i...
Edit: clicking through and actually reading the link, the picture clearly depicts Microwave backhaul. Probably to a site in the vicinity they have a nice big land-based pipe.
When the rugby world cup was running last year I saw a number of temporary cell sites, which had plastic ducting and fibre optics running ~50-200m to existing telecoms cabinets or cell sites.
I imagine that At&t is doing something similar, hooking into an existing cable at the nearest roadside cabinet or traditional cell site.
AirFiber radios (I'm quite fond of mine) and other 24Ghz, 60Ghz, and 80Ghz radios have severe rain fade so you need to keep the distance down to one or two miles unless you feel lucky. Now find a cell tower in that distance with fiber and available mounting space. I suppose that isn't a big problem in a more densely populated area like southern California, but still more challenging than parking a 11Ghz dish on a rooftop somewhere within 14 mile or so.
From what I've heard most carrier interest in high frequency bands is for links going a few city blocks to connect micropops back to a area hub site. That kind of caution with fade margin is more in line of what I'd expect out of at&t or a similar provider.
And just because my ipad was capable of that high DL speed, my hosting server that I was constantly streaming HD movies from, isn't capable of that upload throughput (50Mbps uploading).
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra_high_definition_televisio...
SSDTWEET gets you $10 of account credit.