Sonic joining forces with the dark side? (AT&T)

General discussions and other topics.
18 posts Page 1 of 2
by droz037 » Thu May 14, 2015 9:00 am
Sonic partners with AT&T, works to ramp up speeds

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/39000 ... -att-works


For years, Santa Rosa-based Internet service provider Sonic has positioned itself as an alternative to corporate giants AT&T and Comcast. Its Fusion service — phone service and broadband Internet — came at a competitive price, along with what many viewed as better customer service.

The problem was, Sonic’s Fusion service only worked if you lived close to one of its central offices.

To alleviate that Sonic has taken several steps aimed at both improving and expanding its Fusion options. These include deploying better broadband technology in Sonic’s central offices, as well as partnering with AT&T to offer the telecommunications giant’s fiber-to-the-node, or FTTN, technology.

Sonic will offer the AT&T service under its own brand and with its own customer service.

“Our goal with Fusion is to present a very simple solution,” said Sonic CEO and co-founder Dane Jasper.

Back in the 1990s, DSL was provided out of central offices, a metropolitan hub used to aggregate and direct telephone calls and data traffic onto the telephone network. Today, however, broadband is served from “node cabinets” that are placed in neighborhoods.

“It moves the equipment closer to the house, and so what this means for our customers is much greater reach,” Jasper said.

Historically, Sonic’s Fusion was only available from one of the 200 central offices the company operates in 125 California cities. Customers who lived two miles or more from a central office were out of luck, Jasper said.

Meanwhile, Sonic has upgraded its central office technology from ADSL2+ to VDSL, which can yield Internet speeds of up to 75 megabits per second — triple the speed of the older technology — for customers who are close to the central office.

Sonic’s VDSL protocol was deployed in its central offices beginning last December and is now available through most of the company’s footprint.
by dane » Thu May 14, 2015 1:13 pm
I prefer to think of Sonic and AT&T as sometimes-reluctant partners, of sorts. While clearly we compete in the retail arena, Sonic has long had a relationship with AT&T as well. From the old days of phone lines for dialup, to the ATM DSLAMs of legacy DSL, to copper loop rental for Fusion, it's been a long history. Sometimes challenging, but always evolving.

Their resale to Sonic of access via their Fiber-to-the-node neighborhood cabinets is an important step, providing an upgrade to copper service for our members, as well as reach into areas we cannot currently serve using our central-office deployed equipment.

But we continue to see copper as a temporary measure, as we focus most of our efforts on expanding our Fiber-to-the-home builds. As with Fusion from 2008 to 2010, we've been in a process-focused mode, and now we are headed toward scale-up. Exciting times.
Dane Jasper
Sonic
by droz037 » Thu May 14, 2015 1:24 pm
Dane,

Thanks for your input. I definitely see this as a benefit for Sonic and it's customers.

The article mentioned there's a VPN tunnel that routes traffic to Sonic. I hope that's all traffic? Curious to know if it's IPSec or something like MPLS/VPLS?

I currently live two blocks from the CO on 19th and Kirkham in SF. Have been patiently/anxiously waiting for fiber.


Thanks
Leo
by dane » Thu May 14, 2015 2:01 pm
Today VPN capability is IPsec, but we are working on a new VPN platform as an upgrade which seems likely to be OpenVPN. Customers can use the VPN for some or all of their traffic.

In the Sunset, which street and nearest cross-street are you on? (We'll begin taking orders on 20th and 21st for Fiber service very soon - or scheduling migration, if they're currently copper-connected.)
Dane Jasper
Sonic
by droz037 » Thu May 14, 2015 2:46 pm
Ok ipsec s good.

Openvpn is good too. Don't like it as a solution for windows or Mac client vpn though.
OK



I'm on 18th ave a couple buildings up from Judah.

I'll be more than happy to be a guinea pig/beta tester!
by klui » Thu May 14, 2015 3:12 pm
dane wrote:Today VPN capability is IPsec, but we are working on a new VPN platform as an upgrade which seems likely to be OpenVPN. Customers can use the VPN for some or all of their traffic.
What's the reason behind choosing OpenVPN over IPsec? My firewall doesn't support OpenVPN, only IPsec. Could you consider both? I have not had a chance to configure my appliance to use the current VPN. Does the current concentrator have any limitations? I read that it disconnects you after around 12 hours. My choice is to have a site-to-site connection for all of my traffic.
by droz037 » Thu May 14, 2015 3:29 pm
I would think that the VPN would be handled by the device supplied by Sonic and not client based?

Correct me if I'm wrong Dane?
by dherr » Thu May 14, 2015 3:41 pm
Sonic does not actually get to pick the device since this is AT&T U-verse (somebody please correct me if I am wrong).

I have X1 Fusion FTTN with a Pace 5031nv-030 that has AT&T firmware with lots of locked out options. No option to terminate a VPN tunnel.
by droz037 » Thu May 14, 2015 3:55 pm
HHHMMMM.

Well I have a Meraki MX60, I can do IPSec on that.

OpenVPN not so much.

Might be worth investing in a cheap Intel NUC to be a router and OpenVPN appliance
by klui » Thu May 14, 2015 3:56 pm
droz037 wrote:I would think that the VPN would be handled by the device supplied by Sonic and not client based?

Correct me if I'm wrong Dane?
FTTN gateways are owned and managed by AT&T. Sonic has no significant input on how they function. Since Sonic provides the Cisco VPN client for an individual PC they would probably continue to provide a client for their next generation VPN solution. My guess is for individuals who want to have a site-to-site VPN they need to configure themselves. I suppose I can use another machine but I would like to keep using my current firewall.

For those who are on pfSense, DD/OpenWRT, Tomato, EdgeRouter, even Microtik (TCP-based only @ 1/3 the throughput of UDP), they're good. My Juniper firewalls (SSG and SRX) only support IPsec.

I suppose going with OpenVPN has some advantages in regards to cost but I'm not so enthused about leaving those with perfectly capable hardware in the cold in light of recent OpenSSL challenges. I would like both solutions with any limitations with their current IPsec infrastructure lifted.
18 posts Page 1 of 2