What stops internet access from being cheaper in India !!!

[mgcarley]

1) Recently Airtel has made a policy to not give connections to students as they don't pay bills, even though majority of its customers are students (At least from what I've seen). That's why I too am facing the problem to get a connection. I got it a few days ago, and Airtel surveyors are daily calling me to verify my "job".

Interesting.

2) Beam's & Act's pings are one of the best in India as far as I have seen in India. Its as low as 1 ms.

1ms is easy on the same network. To other networks - that's a challenge.

3) Whatever last-mile coverage is the current status, I believe majority of usage chunk lies there only. Deep penetration (read Laaaast mile) is obviously a dream, and unarguably a big problem. If the bandwidth isn't a problem, why are they implementing crappy FUPs? Many ISPs (such as Tikona & Reliance) are big time suckers. Be it the QoS, or service or whatever, they suck. From dirty game, I meant FUP and hidden clauses (mostly related to capping of speed of bandwidth) which many ISPs implement many times.

The FUP issue has a lot to do with the implementation of the networks, but it also is a cost factor, even if the two issues are not mutually exclusive. FUPs are a necessary evil for a large number of reasons, first and foremost because of the QoS issue: if you give everyone 100mbps lines then you have two choices:
1. Charge them for 100mbps of wholesale bandwidth + an averaged cost of whatever infrastructure & overheads are required to reach them.
2. Charge them a reasonable rate, share the bandwidth between a number of users and implement an FUP so that users get what they paid for but also can't hog the bandwidth all to themselves.

Plus, when it comes to DSL there are other factors that come in to play. The backhaul up to the DSL cabinet is rated, that is to say, if there's 1024 users connected to a cabinet and a CIR (committed information rate) of say 48kbits per subscriber, then they will supply 48*1024=49152kbits to the cabinet. In theory, 3 users will suck that up pretty easily, so to prevent that from happening, the ISP is forced to put an FUP. In this example you've got a tad over 49mbit/s of bandwidth which will give you some 17 tbytes of monthly usage, but divide that between 1024 users and you have an average of just 14.4GB/subscriber/month - obviously some subscribers will have bigger packages than others (some might have 2GB while others might have 40) but it all works out in the end.

I should probably also point out that the metrics I've just cited were what was used in New Zealand (until recently, anyway) for full-speed DSL (up to 24mbit/s) and as such these exact numbers don't necessarily apply to India, but these metrics can be changed of course, and is merely supposed to give an idea of why there are FUPs, especially on ADSL plans.

On the other hand, if you have any other last-mile (let's say Metro Ethernet because it uses nice round numbers most of the time), let's say the ISP provides a neighbourhood with 1gbit/s of bandwidth, and you've got say 1000 users on it.

1gbit/s could in theory supply 1000 users with 1mbps unlimited, so if you take in to account say Rs500/mbit/month wholesale cost (including transport to my DC and onward to the neighbourhood), plus a last-mile cost of say Rs200/month = Rs700/month cost. Add overheads & a profit margin and let's round it up to Rs1k/month + taxes for 1mbps. Sounds about right, yes? Great. That's roughly the kind of thing that's being offered by many providers at the moment - some are doing it for less than that, but bear with me for the sake of using nice round figures.

So, now we want to introduce 2mbps, 4mbps & 10mbps plans.

Can we all of a sudden provide 10gbps to the network? Not really, no. For one, the cost of the 10gbit/s SFPs (the plug for the fibre) is significantly more expensive than the 1gbit/s SFPs. Secondly, all the other equipment probably maxes out at 1gbps anyway, so we'd have to segregate the network in to teeny tiny pieces and have 10 little separate but still 1gbps networks. This is potentially feasible but likely requires a rebuild or re-architecture and may still be expensive to implement anyway - especially if you have to keep doing it again and again every time you want to upgrade.

We could simply sell 10mbps unlimited for 10x the price, right? Wrong. Big pricing issue - are you going to pay 10k+ for 10mbps? I don't think so. Rs2k... maybe, but even that's pushing it.

So what do we do?

We implement an FUP or cap.

1mbps maybe has 30GB
2mbps maybe has 60GB
4mbps maybe has 120GB
10mbps maybe has 300GB

Based on these FUPs, my 10mbps users are costing approximately the same as a 1mbps user. How so? 1mbps 24*7 = +/- 300GB (a little over, but still).

Are my 1mbps connections costing me 1/10th as much though? No. They might only use 10% of the resources BUT they still need that full 1mbps speed when they're downloading, so my costs aren't going down really by that much, but what you'll begin to see (and we are seeing something like this in Mumbai now) is:

1mbps @ Rs600
2mbps @ Rs800
4mbps @ Rs1000
10mbps @ Rs1200

Which more or less works for most people.

Please keep in mind the above numbers are EXTREMELY simplified and in no way representative of costs in the real world.

4) I said in reference to India, and its reach to the people. Most of them haven't even heard about it.

Most people don't know what they're using, end of story. That doesn't make Metro Ethernet "alpha/beta stage" - that has a whole different implication.

5) Then 100mbps should be the ideal speed.

My thoughts exactly.

- - - Updated - - -

@mgcarley

I never meant to blame Hayai for anything. In fact i was stating that You and Hayai in general must have got caught in the government red tape. In fact i followed your ISP's section on IBF very closely and was hoping that Hayai came to my home soon in Mumbai. I know it is general tendency to blame government and corruption and i admit i do it but that seemed to be the most likely case at least with your ISP (strictly my opinion).

No worries. A combination of things contributed to numerous delays, including but not limited to yours truly.

I completely agree with you that point of high speed broadband is so that i do not saturate the bandwidth. Take my case here in US. In India i had a 256 Kbps UL connection which meant downloading a 700 MB took several hours. And here in US i have a 15 Mbps FiOS connection and it takes hardly few minutes to get the same task done and i have freed up the line after my download is finished. This is something most of the ISPs in India do not understand.

Exactly.

They think that if they give 100 Mbps we are going to download stuff at 100 Mbps full day which is not going to happen because that would mean we will need TBs of storage at our disposal.

Correct, although I did have one person claim to me recently that he had 50TB of storage at his place... though with that kind of storage I wouldn't be surprised if he was actually running a business and/or a commercial pirate.

I am totally in for a high speed broadband with reasonable FUP like 100 GB.
Your plans were (are) bang on target and they are what is actually needed rather than money milking plans of likes of Failtel.

When you come home, we might be there if we aren't already.

 

[JuGGa]

^Thanks for clearing up the things.

PS: You own any ISP ?

 

[Party Monger]

You were the one commenting on the Medianama airtel head honcho interview? Great to meet you here. Infact i was sort of expecting it. With knowledge and zeist like that, its hard to miss an interesting convo I reached that article through @Metalspree 's facebook share.

What i did was a very basic analysis of the costs involved. At the cost of 55 bucks for a client paying 1000 bucks, you need to be ****ing up heavily to not be able to come up with competitive plans! I remember your post on medianama about how the last mile costs are high and even you did come to the final assessment that they could be more competitive with the rates.

About bsnl, the copper lines have always existed. Only their offices needed the equipment setup.I remember when i got the connection. Thats the only thing they changed. So i doubt the last mile setup costs are high for bsnl atleast. However being an govt company, it obviously ****ed up the advantage it had.

About their cheaper plan, well at 250 for 250 mb to 1gb data transfer, i dont think they are in a loss since their copper is everywhere and they dont give connections where they don't have the lines setup already. Atleast not im my city.

But im a budding chartered accountant, i can only crunch the numbers you give me, you're the one with the inside knowledge

It's not just that the servers are domestic, it's that the bandwidth in use is PEERING bandwidth and not TRANSIT bandwidth. The same is true in Europe and the rest of Asia.

In India we don't have that luxury because NIXI in it's infinite wisdom charges Rs14/GB as settlement charges, so most of the time ISPs are forced to peer in Singapore (About $1/mbit/month, no settlement charges) which involves sending traffic through the cables and back...



Wrong. Both Google and Facebook (among others) have servers in India. Google has them in Mumbai (Prabhadevi), Chennai and Delhi. Facebook has it's offices in Hyderabad PLUS any ISP with an Akamai box or peering is connected to Facebook.

I can reach Google's network in a whopping 2ms from my home connection. Well, sometimes 3 or 4ms, but still.



That calculation is fine if everyone is connected to the network at equal speed with equal cable at equal distances, but because 99% of BSNL's last-mile network (to use them as an example) is ADSL, there are about 200 other variables you have to take in to account. In their defence, it's not as simple as you imagine, but on the other side of that same coin, they don't manage their network as well as an ISP of that size should and there's a lot they could do to improve it.



They're not allowed to sell their lines at capacity. Add in another 33% plus transport overheads and calculate that.



Depends where you're talking. BSNL has an obligation to serve the entire country, even unprofitable areas. You're suggesting that to serve someone in Orissa or Bihar or the North East (say 1000-2000km from the landing station) costs them the same as it does to serve someone in Chennai itself. It doesn't. There's a whole lot of backhaul between the two places and that needs to be accounted for, not just in the capital expenditure but in the operational expenses as well.

PLUS there's the added cost for cross-subsidizing the plans, that is to say, they're probably making a loss on their Rs200/month customers, so they have to recoup that from the Rs1000/month+ customers - they need to average our their costs and prices across the whole nation, not just based on the arbitrary figures of the bandwidth bill.



Don't. I've probably aged 15 years since 2009. Just a warning

Also, Airtel, Reliance Communications, MTNL and BSNL are in huge amounts of debt. BSNL is on the verge of collapse if the USOF doesn't save it's bacon.



That's a bit irresponsible of you. There are quite a few people using our services who might be inclined to disagree with your comment about Hayai going kaput. As it happens, many ISPs (Fivenet, Beam Telecom, CIPL among others) who were sceptical are now interested to know how we're doing it and how.

Only Airtel themselves seem to be still sceptical (as shown in a recent article on Medianama) but they don't care so long as I pay my bandwidth bills on time... but with Airtel's new FTTH plans it seems they're responding to our offerings.

Government red-tape was a problem for a while but now it's less of an issue than the last mile - that's the real painful bit at the moment.

- - - Updated - - -



No they don't - the Fair Usage paragraph on All Plans Fiber to Home specifically states that end-user bandwidth is shared but they don't give the numbers anymore.

According to a telephone conversation I had with one of the DGMs at Beam a couple of weeks ago, they have +/-200 STMs (that's around 30Gbit/s of bandwidth) and with some 3 lakh customers, that suggests a contention ratio of around 1:10.

 

[mgcarley]

^Thanks for clearing up the things.

PS: You own any ISP ?

No worries & Yes.

You were the one commenting on the Medianama airtel head honcho interview? Great to meet you here. Infact i was sort of expecting it. With knowledge and zeist like that, its hard to miss an interesting convo I reached that article through Metalspree 's facebook share.

...and I came to this thread because someone on twitter asked me to come and make a comment.

What i did was a very basic analysis of the costs involved. At the cost of 55 bucks for a client paying 1000 bucks, you need to be ****ing up heavily to not be able to come up with competitive plans! I remember your post on medianama about how the last mile costs are high and even you did come to the final assessment that they could be more competitive with the rates.

...small question - what exactly is costing 55 bucks?

Also, yes, last mile costs *are* high, but they are (for the most part) a one-time cost and can be amortized over a few years. In Airtel's case now that they're beginning to charge proper prices for services (Rs1000 instead of like Rs500) then all complaints about last mile being expensive kind of go away because they can now afford to do it (in theory). Assuming they get the numbers I was talking about, of course.

About bsnl, the copper lines have always existed. Only their offices needed the equipment setup.I remember when i got the connection. Thats the only thing they changed. So i doubt the last mile setup costs are high for bsnl atleast. However being an govt company, it obviously ****ed up the advantage it had.

BSNL is still doing a lot of green-field stuff and is replacing a lot of it's older copper, but more to the point, the demands on it's backbone are pretty extreme - most of it has been running on 10G wavelengths but that's not enough any more. BSNL and MTNL are maxing out their peering links rather badly (upwards of 95% utilization in some cases) which causes congestion and stuff like that... and when you're Rs6k Cr in the red as BSNL are, how do you expect them to upgrade even a single switch?

About their cheaper plan, well at 250 for 250 mb to 1gb data transfer, i dont think they are in a loss since their copper is everywhere and they dont give connections where they don't have the lines setup already. Atleast not im my city.

Just because the copper is "everywhere" doesn't mean it isn't costing them money... but even by the time the information reaches the copper, it's had to traverse anything from 1km to 2500km of fiber to get there - and that has to be taken in to account when you're looking at your Rs250 price tag as well: as previously mentioned, it might work for the users close to the originating point but for those in other states or far-flung corners of the country, those areas are almost definitely making a loss which needs to be countered by the customers in profitable areas and the cost of service averaged out... like I was saying - the cost of providing a user in Orissa or Bihar or whatever is going to differ than providing a user in Chennai just up the road from the cable landing station, which will differ from providing a user in AP or MP or UP or anywhere else in TN... you get the picture.

One of the other things is that there are other costs which are inflating every year (salaries, especially) and a company like BSNL will always have a difficult time upping it's prices to match that inflation rate - and even if they did, they'd probably have a similar debacle on their hands to what we saw with the railways a couple of months ago.

I'm personally of the opinion that they should open up their copper last-mile (that is, LLU) to other ISPs so that 1. Other ISPs can get the coverage and 2. BSNL can have another revenue stream... # 1 especially because as also mentioned, much of BSNL's funding has historically come from the USOF which is a fund all private ISPs are paying in to anyway (as part of holding an ISP license), so it'd be nice for private ISPs to realize some of the benefit of that.

But im a budding chartered accountant, i can only crunch the numbers you give me, you're the one with the inside knowledge

I wish I could share my actual numbers, but even then they'd not be relevant to BSNL.

 

[JuGGa]

^Which ISP ?

 

[Niks]

^ That would be Hayai.

 

[raksrules]

@mgcarley

Have you started operations in Mumbai ? Specially Borivali west area ?

 

[mgcarley]

mgcarley

Have you started operations in Mumbai ? Specially Borivali west area ?

Yes and yes.

 

[kuduku]

As I read this thread the main issue is of last mile connectivity . What happened to the BWA which were auctioned sometime back and a Delhi businessman won all circles on behalf of Ambanis ? Wasnt the BWA for same thing to remove/reduce last mile issues . Till now no one has rolled out anything . BSNL was getting Wimax but thats also out now . They have stopped any purchase and new installation of BTS . Their new mantra we are testing 4G but dont know which technology when asked . Is it LTE or anything else .
And
To reduce bandwidth costs someone needs to open a good torrent site comparable to TL/IPT and other so that Indian traffic remains inside only , with backing of an ISP . That way FUP in other network and free in own network , as OVH does for new plans . A very very non technical understanding of things

 

[?dOuBtFiRe?]

^
Good idea but most torrents are illegal stuff, making it easy for corporate honchos to control the flow. Then pple will be back to step 1.
My wish is that irregularity in ISP products are the same all over India atleast Metros. Compare Airtel's plans in Blore, Hyd, Del,Kol, Mum & Chennai.
Plans DIFFER BADLY. This is unfair.

Also there is a huge concentration of ISPs providing good service in Hyd, Blore & Mumbai. What about the famous dialogue " 4 Metros".
Not many good ISP in Chennai & Kol.

Also can you please comment on the new schema introduced by TRAI aka TRASH this year stating that minimum broadband speed should be @ 2mbps.

 

[swatkats]

No they don't - the Fair Usage paragraph on All Plans Fiber to Home specifically states that end-user bandwidth is shared but they don't give the numbers anymore.

According to a telephone conversation I had with one of the DGMs at Beam a couple of weeks ago, they have +/-200 STMs (that's around 30Gbit/s of bandwidth) and with some 3 lakh customers, that suggests a contention ratio of around 1:10.

Apparently, Even i thought why would they sell 1:1 Plans. May be they are trying to attract customer base?

What you said is completely right. they have Approx 25-30Gbps of bandwidth and i followed your post which says They cache all the Stuff. Nice thing.

...and I came to this thread because someone on twitter asked me to come and make a comment.

I tend to learn things. It was me who asked you on twitter.

- - - Updated - - -

As you're saying that the Above Infograph is Out of Date.

Could you please Revert back to us with the Present Figures. Give us the stuff which MTNL and BSNL shares about Bandwidth and landing charges. I guess you cannot let your own bandwidth figures out as you signed NDA. Right?

 

[mgcarley]

As I read this thread the main issue is of last mile connectivity . What happened to the BWA which were auctioned sometime back and a Delhi businessman won all circles on behalf of Ambanis ? Wasnt the BWA for same thing to remove/reduce last mile issues . Till now no one has rolled out anything . BSNL was getting Wimax but thats also out now . They have stopped any purchase and new installation of BTS . Their new mantra we are testing 4G but dont know which technology when asked . Is it LTE or anything else .

Airtel has released LTE in Kolkata and Bangalore, BSNL is trying to sell it's spectrum back because it needs the money. But while the government might like to trumpet 3G and 4G as being the greatest thing since the radio, there are still issues with it, including but not limited to the fact that wireless in any form SUCKS as a transmission medium, especially for high bit-rates. It's finicky, prone to interference, slow & more latent, easily overloaded and generally unstable. I'm very much of the opinion that wireless should be a supplement to a wired connection, not the primary mode of connectivity... you've all seen what happened to BSNL 3G (and MTNL 3G) when they released unlimited plans - the whole network turned to custard.

And
To reduce bandwidth costs someone needs to open a good torrent site comparable to TL/IPT and other so that Indian traffic remains inside only , with backing of an ISP . That way FUP in other network and free in own network , as OVH does for new plans . A very very non technical understanding of things

The very nature of Bittorrent would make this meaningless - for example, if I were to download some Hindi movie from TPB right now it would probably come mostly from India, UK or USA (largest concentrations of Hindi-speakers)... the very nature of Bittorrent is that it's completely agnostic as to where the parts of the file actually comes from.

What ISPs *are* capable of - and are starting to do - are install P2P caches. Some ISPs have them - Beam, Alliance, Fivenet, us... I don't know enough about what's in the cores of the others though. BSNL etc probably don't.

^
Good idea but most torrents are illegal stuff, making it easy for corporate honchos to control the flow. Then pple will be back to step 1.

Are they? Most of the torrents I download are completely legal.

My wish is that irregularity in ISP products are the same all over India atleast Metros. Compare Airtel's plans in Blore, Hyd, Del,Kol, Mum & Chennai.
Plans DIFFER BADLY. This is unfair.

Yes and no.

Delhi and Mumbai are magnitudes more expensive to lay down cables in than Bangalore, Hyderabad and Kolkata. This probably contributes to it. As far as Airtel is concerned, it is based in Delhi, so that is presumably it's primary market and/or the easiest market for it to influence, that is to say, the top-guys at Airtel will know all the right guys in Delhi to speak to in order to get stuff done, the same way I know more people in Mumbai than I do in, say, Chennai: it's a simple matter of proximity, even though they're a nationwide player.

Also there is a huge concentration of ISPs providing good service in Hyd, Blore & Mumbai. What about the famous dialogue " 4 Metros".
Not many good ISP in Chennai & Kol.

If by "huge concentration" you mean "one in each city", then yeah - you're talking about Beam and Act, for sure. In Mumbai I'm not sure who you're referring to - I'm not widespread enough yet that I could really be counted, so maybe Fivenet? Also Kolkata has Alliance, but they suffer the same problems as Beam and Act, which is the cable operators and their shoddy networks and lack of maintenance.

Also can you please comment on the new schema introduced by TRAI aka TRASH this year stating that minimum broadband speed should be @ 2mbps.

2 things:

1. The minimum broadband speed is NOT 2mbps - this has been widely misreported. 2mbps only comes in to effect in 2015. As of this year, it's 512k (up from 256k in the previous NBP).
2. It only really concerned the advertising of Internet - it's perfectly legitimate for an ISP to sell a 1mbps high-speed Internet plan and charge you exactly the same amount of money for it as they do now, they just can't call it broadband. I don't believe it has any bearing on FUPs (which weren't really tackled in this particular piece of legislation) - you could look at this from two different perspectives: "A rose by any other name..." or "You can put lipstick on a pig..."

Incidentally they reckon that speeds of 100mbit/s should be available to urban areas by I think 2017 - but there's no mention on what they'll be able to charge for it or what kind of quota you'll get or how... I mean, frankly, it's a piece of cake to provide 100mbit/s - but figuring out the rest of the numbers... that's the really hard part.

Airtel's new FTTH plans have a max of 175GB for over Rs5k - if that's any indicator, then the situation isn't really going to be improved because the plan itself is too lax and the document is not comprehensive enough, in my view. It has no real service guide and most of the quality expectations are aimed at cellular services, not wired broadband.

Hell, they could have made the minimum 50mbps to be called broadband and it would make absolutely zero difference whatsoever except for the terminology used in the brochure.

Unfortunately it seems that it's really going to be up to some company to provide outstanding service and raise the bar, otherwise I'm afraid they'll just be able to get away with the same sh*t they always have been.

Apparently, Even i thought why would they sell 1:1 Plans. May be they are trying to attract customer base?

I'm sure they do, but this would count as a leased-line and I doubt they'd advertise those prices publicly.

What you said is completely right. they have Approx 25-30Gbps of bandwidth and i followed your post which says They cache all the Stuff. Nice thing.

Well, yeah... I know it's right... like I said: I heard about the bandwidth from the "horses mouth"... and the guys who sold them caching servers were also working to sell me caching servers, so...

I tend to learn things. It was me who asked you on twitter.

There you go then.

- - - Updated - - -

Could you please Revert back to us with the Present Figures. Give us the stuff which MTNL and BSNL shares about Bandwidth and landing charges. I guess you cannot let your own bandwidth figures out as you signed NDA. Right?

I haven't seen the latest tenders for BSNL etc so I don't know exactly what they pay right now (since they tend to sign quite long-term IRUs - that is, irrevocable rights of usage - that may still actually be current for them). I was merely comparing those numbers to my own.

...and I wonder if anyone realizes that BSNL's landing station at Tuticorin only goes to Sri Lanka?

 

[?dOuBtFiRe?]

The very nature of Bittorrent would make this meaningless - for example, if I were to download some Hindi movie from TPB right now it would probably come mostly from India, UK or USA (largest concentrations of Hindi-speakers)... the very nature of Bittorrent is that it's completely agnostic as to where the parts of the file actually comes from.
Are they? Most of the torrents I download are completely legal.

Wont getting a hindi movie from TPB illegal in nature. The point i said for his idea is that in India if we operate a Torrent site having contents of Illegal nature like Hindi or English TV or movies, its good provided if they are run in a good manner else it will get twisted in the arms of politicians a la MPAA backed by movie studios.

2mbps only comes in to effect in 2015. As of this year, it's 512k (up from 256k in the previous NBP).

I will be atleast happy if that base speed is increased to 512k. Its atleast twice high.

Also why would BSNL set up station to support Sri Lanka. Or was it bcause of the war. Thx for that info.

 

[mgcarley]

Wont getting a hindi movie from TPB illegal in nature. The point i said for his idea is that in India if we operate a Torrent site having contents of Illegal nature like Hindi or English TV or movies, its good provided if they are run in a good manner else it will get twisted in the arms of politicians a la MPAA backed by movie studios.

Humour me for the sake of the argument. Legality was not the issue I was referring to, merely the way the bittorrent protocol works, in that whether a torrent site is run from here or Sweden or NZ or Bolivia, the actual parts of the file will just come from whoever is offering those parts, irrespective of geographical location or anything.

As mentioned, some ISPs are using P2P caching technology to cache torrents and streaming media, though in most cases, this traffic still counts towards your FUP/data limit, but this is the best way for an ISP to increase performance on torrents. Starting a torrent site in India would be a bit of a waste of time as far as performance is concerned and as I understand it, there are plenty of India-centric torrent sites already.

Moving on to the legal side of things though, torrent sites are, by and large, perfectly legal. Legally speaking, they are to the bittorrent protocol what a hyperlink is to the http protocol - a simple reference saying "here it is".

Uploading and Downloading of copyrighted material on the other hand, that's a completely different story, and in India, the copyright law is only really concerned with content produced in India - there is not any real provision for content generated outside of this country.

I will be atleast happy if that base speed is increased to 512k. Its atleast twice high.

Yes, but as mentioned in my previous post, whether 256k or 512k it's completely irrelevant. Airtel still has post-FUP speeds of 256k on some plans, however the only thing that changes is that they can no longer call those plans broadband. That's it.

Setting a base speed as it has been done in the last 2 NBPs is and was been a complete waste of time.

Also why would BSNL set up station to support Sri Lanka. Or was it bcause of the war. Thx for that info.

I don't know... someone needed to, although I'm surprised Airtel didn't do it since Airtel operates in LK.

 

[techygeek]

@mgcarley have you started services in kandivali(W) . if yes then where can I see your plans?

 

[raksrules]

@mgcarley

I would like to know if the services have full fledged started in Borivali west area ? And does it mean anywhere in Borivali west or any specific areas ? I know you said it has but need more information.
Also is your website currently updated with latest plans ? Although i am not in India now but i will be in few months and will surely take your connection if it is available.
Mine is a residential building.

 

[mgcarley]

mgcarley have you started services in kandivali(W) . if yes then where can I see your plans?

Yes, but Kandivali is a little bit of a spotty area, so service may or may not be available depending on your address. Our website has the plans available but I won't link to it here (not sure of TE policy) but now that someone has mentioned our name it shouldn't be hard to find.

mgcarley

I would like to know if the services have full fledged started in Borivali west area ? And does it mean anywhere in Borivali west or any specific areas ? I know you said it has but need more information.
Also is your website currently updated with latest plans ? Although i am not in India now but i will be in few months and will surely take your connection if it is available.
Mine is a residential building.

Borivali is a bit better than Kandivali - I believe can at least offer copper services to most buildings (we haven't started building our own FTTH service in either of those areas yet).

Our website is always updated with the latest plans because that's the way to order services.

Also, any further questions about my service should probably be directed at me by PM because I don't want to hijack the thread any more than I already have.

 

[swatkats]

What is the NTP Saying Exactly. Most of the Online Sites messed up the Stuff.
So basically it is 2Mbps by 2015 and 100mbps by 2020?

 

[HailStonE]

What is the NTP Saying Exactly. Most of the Online Sites messed up the Stuff.
So basically it is 2Mbps by 2015 and 100mbps by 2020?

That's correct. right now its suppose to be 512kbps but most ISP's are still providing 256kbps as broadband, After 2015 the new definition would be revised to 2Mbps but again there would be a lot of red tape involved & unless Govt. agency put its foot down most ISP's would not implement it just like most still don't... Everything gets delayed in INdia so rest assured your broadband definition & its implementation would as well...

100Mbps is a distant dream & I wouldn't be too optimistic about the targeted date... It would take much beyond 2020 to get 100Mbps...

 

[comp@ddict]

10 mbps 1000 bucks pm Hyderabad beam fiber

There is hope