Consider this: TEAMS is a much much cheaper option because of an owned cable, then why are retail 1Mbps circuits being pegged to Seacom old rates of around 400-600USD? I'd say TEAMS retails offering now should be around 125USD/Megabit which is not happening. On how much redundancy should be purchased is clear : the entire country got affected on Saturday due to shares/dependency on TEAMS and into this week. 60/40 ratios seem realistic not 90/10. On Safcom 3g being routed via Sat, I've seen this a number of times. Usually around the time when the unlimited offers come into being. But even on fiber the 450-700ms still way too out for any serious use. Seriously, these latencies impact a lot on sensitive apps like e.g. voip. On Market jargon, here's some figures : Safcom 3g HSDPA network : Uplink speeds cannot exceed *32KB/sec*, as the technology itself is the hinderance. Orange 3g HSUPA/+ network : Uplink speeds cannot exceed *120KB/sec*, as the technology itself is the hinderance. For a start, those two purely indicate the difference between the older and newer network implementation. Corrections welcome. :-) Rgds. On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Bernard Mwagiru <bmwagiru@gmail.com>wrote:
Just wondering the investment required to have a full redundant TEAMS/SEACOM for an ISP. For some, rhe redundancy exists but not full capacity redundancy. Thats why during the outage, there was great contention at the bottle-neck redundant link
I dont think any ISP worth his salt would re-route all traffic to satellite unless for mission critical systems like Mpesa. So the part about latencies due to satellite re-route is a misnomer.
The part about "safaricom's older technology" still sends tickles :-) ...Someone aptly pointed out the differences between market and tech jargon being thrown about in here.
./bernard