View Full Version : VM "intends" to deliver HD via the Internet
hokkers999
19-01-2009, 18:24
According to this article today in The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/19/carter_uhf_bargain/
that is what they plan. Quote
Virgin Media's cable network covers about half the country and there are no plans to extend it. It is currently being upgraded to the DOCSIS 3.0 standard, which the firm says will be able to carry data downstream at more than 200Mbit/s. Both incumbents view the potential to deliver high definition multichannel TV over the internet as one of the main commercial attractions of next generation networks.
End Quote
Remind me again how you get HD channels (that VM don't even have) over an Internet connection that is throttled right back after an hour or so fo full speed use?
General Maximus
19-01-2009, 18:38
maybe if we all laugh together they might hear us. I can just imagine the small print....
*you wont actually ever be able to download a HD movie because once you have downloaded half of it we will throttle your connection because you have downloaded too much and you are impacting the service for other users
**we didnt say you can "definitely" download HD movies, we said you "can" in that there is a "possibilty" you may be able to download them. In actual fact that the chances of this happening are remote because we use DPI technology to stop people from downloading what they want. We do this to improve the service for all our users maintain consistent speeds.
hokkers999
19-01-2009, 18:44
maybe if we all laugh together they might hear us. I can just imagine the small print....
*you wont actually ever be able to download a HD movie because once you have downloaded half of it we will throttle your connection because you have downloaded too much and you are impacting the service for other users
**we didnt say you can "definitely" download HD movies, we said you "can" in that there is a "possibilty" you may be able to download them. In actual fact that the chances of this happening are remote because we use DPI technology to stop people from downloading what they want. We do this to improve the service for all our users maintain consistent speeds.
Reminds me of the Monty Python dating service
You will be able to have sex with upto* as many as girls as you want.
* upto means anything from ZERO upwards :D
The current TV service comes down the same cable.....................
Graham M
19-01-2009, 18:59
The current TV service comes down the same cable.....................
Not quite via the same delivery method though...........................?
Turkey Machine
19-01-2009, 19:06
Not quite via the same delivery method though...........................?
It is if the new V+ box is DOCSIS3 enabled. ;)
Haven't the BBC said that they can deliver HD over a 3Mbit or higher connection (http://eurotelcoblog.blogspot.com/2008/10/hd-ready.html)?
The BBC's view is that the minimum threshold bitrate for HD is >3Mbps (though it's interesting to note that their "true" broadcast HD content goes out at 16Mbps or higher), which would be challenging for a lot of broadband connections and would risk high buffering levels
General Maximus
19-01-2009, 20:28
I think you would be pushing it big time. A 720p encoding of of a 45 minute tv episode (24, Lost, Heroes etc) is 1.1gb so you are looking at a sustained transfer rate of 408k/sec solely for that file which is over 3mbit. You would want 4mbit just for that to be on the safe side and if you was talking about watching something (whether it be on pc or tv) and then someone else does some browsing, gaming or anything else you really want to be looking at 20mbit.
Which is the point that Virgin (I think) are trying to make with the 50Mbit service. It's not about how fast you can do one thing, but how many things you can do at the same time
hokkers999
19-01-2009, 22:20
Which is the point that Virgin (I think) are trying to make with the 50Mbit service. It's not about how fast you can do one thing, but how many things you can do at the same time
Except when you get capped 20 minutes into that 2 hour program you're going to be pretty hacked off.
Yes, before you say it I know that FOR THE MOMENT it isn't subject to traffic management, but does anyone here really believe it'll stay that way :dozey:
No, I don't, and nor do Virgin. However at this stage there is nothing to confirmed as to what type of traffic management will be on the service.
So if they do put a completely restrictive policy, then feel free to moan/bitch/etc all you like (and I shall be one of them ;) )
Until there are some concrete details, lets give them a chance
Ignitionnet
19-01-2009, 22:35
It's very simple why they intend to deliver HD via your Internet connection, they can make money out of it that way.
Do you really, for a microsecond, think they'll be giving this content free? They are monetizing the DOCSIS 3 assets, nothing more, nothing less. You get your content from them and pay them for it rather than getting it elsewhere.
I've no doubt it'll be exempt from any forms of shaping or metering, remember that the CEO thinks that net neutrality is *******s.
---------- Post added at 22:35 ---------- Previous post was at 22:34 ----------
Which is the point that Virgin (I think) are trying to make with the 50Mbit service. It's not about how fast you can do one thing, but how many things you can do at the same time
Ah of course, that'll be why the upstream is so pathetic :angel:
Surely the cap is more applicable to 'off net' data sources (i.e. stuff that leaves their network)
The HD content would be provided by a machine / system on the same network - so could have to be configured to bypass the STM.
Ignitionnet
19-01-2009, 23:07
Surely the cap is more applicable to 'off net' data sources (i.e. stuff that leaves their network)
The HD content would be provided by a machine / system on the same network - so could have to be configured to bypass the STM.
It won't work bypassing STM as STM isn't that smart, but certainly other methods of control are. ;)
ShadowTD
20-01-2009, 10:10
Is everyone forgetting IPTV? Virgin have dropped several hints over the last 12 months that they intend to migrate to an IPTV platform to unify on and offnet customers. This could be exactly what they're talking about.
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 10:27
Is everyone forgetting IPTV? Virgin have dropped several hints over the last 12 months that they intend to migrate to an IPTV platform to unify on and offnet customers. This could be exactly what they're talking about.
So they haven't got the bandwidth to even support the (apparently) 91% of people who are on 2 meg connections. Yet they intend to deliver 50meg internet and stream real time HDTV as well?
Of course they didn't say which century this would occur did they :D
So they haven't got the bandwidth to even support the (apparently) 91% of people who are on 2 meg connections.
And your proof of this is? Virgin's core network is fine. All speed issues that are not computer or cable related are at the local level
Yet they intend to deliver 50meg internet and stream real time HDTV as well?
Yes
Of course they didn't say which century this would occur did they :D
50Mbit has launched now, and you could stream HD now if someone was doing it
broadbandking
20-01-2009, 10:56
I must admit I have never seen a problem from the people on know on 2Mb.
2Mb is nothing to Virgin
weesteev
20-01-2009, 11:19
I think people are taking the 50Mb/HD ideas a bit to heart and what Virgin are actually doing is something completely different.
The idea of launching 50Mb is to increase bandwidth by creating a brand new network running different headend gear on the Docsis 3 protocol instead of the current Docsis 1.1. By launching 50Mb the company is dramatically increasing bandwidth and improving reliability by building out this new network and upgrading their core network from 10Gbps to 40Gbps.
HDTV over the internet is on the horizon, the plans for TV are to switch to their proposed NGTV/NGCAS system (Next Generation TV/Next Generation Conditional Access System) which will deliver TV over the same spectrum as their broadband network to a cable TV box that supports the NGCAS and even MPEG4 (see the new V+ box which satisfies these criteria).
This switch will be the biggest change to TV since digital cable launched with the potential to add all the services and channels we want.
Moving swiftly on to channel availability... until Sky get forced from their anti competitive position then we will be unable to view Sky HD channels on cable anytime soon! Personally I would prefer to see an increase to HD on demand content and a switch for Setanta to HD instead of getting HD channels I have no interest in (channle 4 HD, FX HD, Sky Arts HD... coem on seriously!), but that i smy opinion.
TV is changing, it will come to the stage where if you want linear channels then you goto Sky and if you want On Demand channels and content then you goto Virgin. These improvements will take time but will be worth it in the long run, something im really looking forward to! Couple this with 50Mb+, new wireless kits, an improvement to data tariffs on mobile services, mobile broadband and finally a really stable V+ service then the current service has improved recently with a lot of good signs for the future.
Just my 2 cents!
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 12:01
And your proof of this is? Virgin's core network is fine. All speed issues that are not computer or cable related are at the local level
50Mbit has launched now, and you could stream HD now if someone was doing it
1. Speed issues may be "local" (however you define local), but the fact still remains that the system has insufficient capacity. You could have a terabit core platform, if you can't get it to and off the edges to the users it's all just la-la land.
2. 50 meg has launched and you have seen all the problems reported here, I expect you'll say "but it's all new". It maybe new to VM but the kit and the s/w is tried and tested.
3. From reading around it seems that streaming HD at anything less than about 6 mbits isn't really practical (wikipedia et al), while 10mbit is "comfortable". How long can you download continuously at 10meg? that's right about 20-30 minutes.
So no, they DON'T have the capability right now to do it.
---------- Post added at 12:01 ---------- Previous post was at 12:00 ----------
I must admit I have never seen a problem from the people on know on 2Mb.
2Mb is nothing to Virgin
So why the STM then? It IS a big deal to them, the current platform just doesn't have the bandwidth. Perhaps when everyone is on docsis 3....
1. Speed issues may be "local" (however you define local), but the fact still remains that the system has insufficient capacity. You could have a terabit core platform, if you can't get it to and off the edges to the users it's all just la-la land.
Local means the uBRs pure and simple.
2. 50 meg has launched and you have seen all the problems reported here, I expect you'll say "but it's all new". It maybe new to VM but the kit and the s/w is tried and tested.
DOCSIS 3.0 launched commercially last year. Even in the US the first rollout was mid-2008. Also the only problems I have seen with the 50Mbit are install and equipment/cable issues, not speed issues. AFAIK people are getting the speeds they should once those are resolved
3. From reading around it seems that streaming HD at anything less than about 6 mbits isn't really practical (wikipedia et al), while 10mbit is "comfortable". How long can you download continuously at 10meg? that's right about 20-30 minutes.
No-one said anything about streaming HD on the current platform or the current traffic managment.
So why the STM then? It IS a big deal to them, the current platform just doesn't have the bandwidth. Perhaps when everyone is on docsis 3....
Exactly
downquark1
20-01-2009, 12:48
What's the point of having cable TV then? Unify all the bandwidth as an internet connection and provide set top boxes that link into a TCP stream.
Hokkers, you're trying to compare what you might download from anywhere on the internet with a fixed content from a fixed source. Apples and oranges there mate.
Look at what goes on down the cable to your house. Let's take 32MHz of spectrum - it doesn't matter where it is. This could provide you with:
1) Four standard 8MHz analogue TV channels
2) Twenty eight (?) standard digital television channels using DVB-C
3) One hundred (?) standard digital IPTV channels using DOCSIS 3.
My numbers could be a bit out (hence the question marks) but they'll be about right. No doubt someone will correct me. VM just need to reserve Xmbps of backbone bandwidth for the stream from Broadcasting House or wherever and the jobs a good'n. Makes perfect sense to me.
---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 ----------
What's the point of having cable TV then? Unify all the bandwidth as an internet connection and provide set top boxes that link into a TCP stream.
This is exactly where everyone is headed - eg. BT with their 21CN. Unfortunately, VM already has a vast investment in its HFC network to drag along too.
Ignitionnet
20-01-2009, 13:29
The idea of launching 50Mb is to increase bandwidth by creating a brand new network running different headend gear on the Docsis 3 protocol instead of the current Docsis 1.1. By launching 50Mb the company is dramatically increasing bandwidth and improving reliability
The faults 50Mbit customers are seeing from poor SNR due to overcombining of return paths disagrees a tad on the reliability score. Here's hoping it's fixed sooner rather than later.
by building out this new network and upgrading their core network from 10Gbps to 40Gbps.
Sky, BT, etc, have had n x 10Gbps / STM256 and up cores for a while, this was required really.
HDTV over the internet is on the horizon, the plans for TV are to switch to their proposed NGTV/NGCAS system (Next Generation TV/Next Generation Conditional Access System) which will deliver TV over the same spectrum as their broadband network to a cable TV box that supports the NGCAS and even MPEG4 (see the new V+ box which satisfies these criteria).
This I won't discuss too much for fear of being slapped :)
This switch will be the biggest change to TV since digital cable launched with the potential to add all the services and channels we want.
A 100% VoD service does indeed have potential but...
TV is changing, it will come to the stage where if you want linear channels then you goto Sky and if you want On Demand channels and content then you goto Virgin.
It does sound good, but frankly people are quite regimented and do like the linearity of TV as well, so I'd hope it doesn't go exclusively VoD.
Just my 2 cents!
A good 2 cents it was too, thanks for the information!
---------- Post added at 13:29 ---------- Previous post was at 13:28 ----------
What's the point of having cable TV then? Unify all the bandwidth as an internet connection and provide set top boxes that link into a TCP stream.
That's the long term plan I would imagine, however be a while before the hardware is in place to do it.
Not that bandwidth is an issue, BT show few signs of supplying much of it to most any time soon.
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 17:29
[snip]
1) Four standard 8MHz analogue TV channels
2) Twenty eight (?) standard digital television channels using DVB-C
3) One hundred (?) standard digital IPTV channels using DOCSIS 3.
Which is exactly why VM will be forever trying to play catchup with Sky. Sky can already simultaneously broadcast to tens of millions of people, hundreds and hundreds of channels.
Need more bandwidth, chuck up another satellite, and for a company with as much money as Sky it literally is just that.
You do know Sky don't own ANY of the satellites right?
Ignitionnet
20-01-2009, 18:18
Which is exactly why VM will be forever trying to play catchup with Sky. Sky can already simultaneously broadcast to tens of millions of people, hundreds and hundreds of channels.
Need more bandwidth, chuck up another satellite, and for a company with as much money as Sky it literally is just that.
Hokkers, Sky lease satellite capacity from SES-Astra: http://www.ses-astra.com
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 18:22
Hokkers, Sky lease satellite capacity from SES-Astra: http://www.ses-astra.com
Technicalities :erm: so they just lease a few dozen more transponders.
My point was that they can increase capacity quickly and easily way beyond anything VM can hope to achieve.
Ignitionnet
20-01-2009, 18:23
[QUOTE=hokkers999;34718811]So they haven't got the bandwidth to even support the (apparently) 91% of people who are on 2 meg connections./QUOTE]
Hrm. My area is 14% XL, 29% L, 57% M. Certainly isn't 91% on 2Mbit connections and very few have any performance issues on 2Mbit, it's the higher tiers that suffer.
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 19:06
[quote=hokkers999;34718811]So they haven't got the bandwidth to even support the (apparently) 91% of people who are on 2 meg connections./QUOTE]
Hrm. My area is 14% XL, 29% L, 57% M. Certainly isn't 91% on 2Mbit connections and very few have any performance issues on 2Mbit, it's the higher tiers that suffer.
the 91% was what I saw quoted on here in another thread, but your figures just make the STM even more ludicrous.
So let's say VM have 100 customers.
Those 14 that are on 20 meg, at full whack use 280meg (even when they get throttled back they STILL get 5 meg each = 70 mbits), add in the 29 10 meggers and that is a total of 570 mbits.
The 57 on M only use at full speed = 114 mbits.
So the justification for capping me down to 512kbits is what exactly?
The BB M restriction is 50% so its 1Mbit not 512Kbit
Anyway we seem to be getting very off topic here
The original article made no mention of trying to run HD over the existing network. It said:
Both incumbents view the potential to deliver high definition multichannel TV over the internet as one of the main commercial attractions of next generation networks.
Which in Virgin's case is the DOCSIS 3.0 network
What's the point of having cable TV then? Unify all the bandwidth as an internet connection and provide set top boxes that link into a TCP stream.
thats what that IPTV and the DS3 complimentary chipsets coming to/on the market are for....
Path to IPTV
Like TI's approach, Broadcom's 8x4 chipset is agile enough to do IPTV when the silicon is paired with upcoming Docsis 3.0-capable media gateways/set-tops.
In that scenario, the chipset handles MPEG[4 AVC]-to-IP encapsulation of the video, then delivers the streams to IPTV set-top boxes, PCs, Web tablets, or other IP-based client devices hanging off the home network.
Gateways outfitted with hybrid QAM/IP capabilities and 8x4 Docsis 3.0 chips will help operators make the transition to IP in the home "without changing the delivery infrastructure," Kirchoff says, adding that Broadcom's reference design for such a product should be out by the second half of 2009.
thats what makes VMs current (internal /OK leaked) talk of this new AVC capable yet stripped down new AVC STB so strange, while AVC/H.264 is welcome all told, theres apparently no IPTV capable complimentary chipsets as per above in this new AVC CPE STB, this new box is purely a cost cutting OEM vendor refresh, were the AVC chipset/SOC was now cheaper to use than the old Mpeg2 only legacy chipsets/SOC....
did the master Virgin Media Bean counter get his way for short term gain again just like the last time at the expense of long term viability for new services to generate new income later...
its silly to sign up this STB when Neil was already talking about IPTV and inhome streaming as a VM innovation (rebadged generic long term IPTV chipset world plan in reality as above OC)etc that the current IPTV/DS3 chipsets are geared to provide....
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 19:31
The BB M restriction is 50% so its 1Mbit not 512Kbit
Anyway we seem to be getting very off topic here
The original article made no mention of trying to run HD over the existing network. It said:
Both incumbents view the potential to deliver high definition multichannel TV over the internet as one of the main commercial attractions of next generation networks.
Which in Virgin's case is the DOCSIS 3.0 network
Can someone in the know then answer this question.
If the head-end is fully docsis 3, can it handle maxing out all user connections at 50 meg?
or even maxing out all streams at 10 meg which would allow continous hd streaming?
If it can't then VM *still* won't be able to deliver. Especially in light of the post above regarding signing a contract for a future-crippled STB.
@hookers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 20:10
@hookers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast
That's very interesting and applies to "stuff" that is not at the edge of the network. When you get to the head end that we are all connected to it simply becomes a broadcast. Diag 2 of the routing schemes on that page.
Question still stands.
@hookers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast
arrr YES, MULTICAST :angel:
that very same Multicast that the BBC R&D were using and offering YEARS ago, they offered (and still offer to all the UKs ISPs to this day infact)this to all the UKs ISPs to freely use and directly Peer with, so the end users could freely trial it, but they all refused that offer, Virgin Media and BT being the prime examples of this lack of Multicast innovation, and so we ended up with bandwidth sucking/wasting Unicast Iplayer etc.
for instance,regarding the US Obama Inauguration If your ISP multicast peered with the BBC, then you could find a BBC HD stream available at rtp://@233.122.227.209:5554 (VLC will play this).
You'll need about 20Mb/s bandwidth, and not be blocking inbound UDP with any firewall.
a simple hybrid Near realtime IP Multicast/IP Unicast/IP broadcast front end website server could make very good use this massive bandwidth saving protocol, but for the fact VM and bt refuse to turn Multicast capabilitys in all their existing ISP router and related kit back ON, and stop filtering off the existing internal VM core networks Janet Multicast feeds to your NTL255/VM250/DS3 CMs on the retail/business VM packages....so people in the UK can finally begin investigating this very old MBONE innovation....
on top of that OC, the DS3 certification mandates full Multicast functionality in even the lowest basic Bronze certified CMTS cards qualification, to and from all the CPE DS3 certified modems sat on your desk at home/office.....
however, NOT ONE single person will todate, confirm that Mutlicast capabilitys are turned on and fully operational and unfiltered on the new DS3 sections of the VM network as yet, anyone care to check and report back on this multicast availability for use on the VM 50Mbit sections?
Ah, but some ISPs are more enlightened:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/multicast/radio/
Ignitionnet
20-01-2009, 20:45
.
So let's say VM have 100 customers.
Those 14 that are on 20 meg, at full whack use 280meg (even when they get throttled back they STILL get 5 meg each = 70 mbits), add in the 29 10 meggers and that is a total of 570 mbits.
The 57 on M only use at full speed = 114 mbits.
So the justification for capping me down to 512kbits is what exactly?
There are around 400 modems sharing 38Mbit on my service group. That's why, and where your sums fall over. So you've 56 20Mbit customers, 1.02Gbit/s at maximum, 116 10Mbit, 1.16Gbit/s at maximum, and the 228 2Mbit customers, 456Mbit.
Total bandwidth sold, 2,636Mbit/s, bandwidth available, 38Mbit, contention ratio just under 70:1.
hokkers999
20-01-2009, 21:30
There are around 400 modems sharing 38Mbit on my service group. That's why, and where your sums fall over. So you've 56 20Mbit customers, 1.02Gbit/s at maximum, 116 10Mbit, 1.16Gbit/s at maximum, and the 228 2Mbit customers, 456Mbit.
Total bandwidth sold, 2,636Mbit/s, bandwidth available, 38Mbit, contention ratio just under 70:1.
So there isn't a hope in hell then that they can deliver ALL services via the ip protocol then is there?
For 400 clients to get HD-TV over ip, let's stick with 10mbits for bandwidth, they'll need 4gbits at the hub.
Ain't going to happen is it?
You can't offer TV over a contended service, unless of course we all take it in turns to watch the telly :D
Which again is where Sky win out, it's a true broadcast.
Ignitionnet
20-01-2009, 21:39
So there isn't a hope in hell then that they can deliver ALL services via the ip protocol then is there?
For 400 clients to get HD-TV over ip, let's stick with 10mbits for bandwidth, they'll need 4gbits at the hub.
Ain't going to happen is it?
You can't offer TV over a contended service, unless of course we all take it in turns to watch the telly :D
Multicast with IGMP, Internet Group Management Protocol. That takes care of the linear traffic. Obviously VoD traffic is different.
Anyway there's not many HD subs at the moment, and this is a 'future' network. Still somewhat vapourware.
Indeed. I love how this has suddenly turned into 'Sky are better than a TV platform Virgin haven't even announced'
hokkers999
21-01-2009, 00:11
Indeed. I love how this has suddenly turned into 'Sky are better than a TV platform Virgin haven't even announced'
Not as such, I'm trying to point out the technical differences. what we've then done is to do some "back of the fag packet maths".
That rough & ready calculation shows that even docsis 3 can't provide a fraction of the bandwidth required to deliver a unified service over ip.
Maybe when they roll out docsis 4 or even 5....
This is quite interesting (though I only understand some of it) ;)
http://www.advanced-television.com/PDF/E_0508_P14,15,16,18,19(2).pdf
In fact I suggest everyone technical on here reads it, and then tell us what they think lol
---------- Post added at 00:25 ---------- Previous post was at 00:17 ----------
P.S AFAIK Virgin have invested in capacity as well rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 (Before anyone jumps on the sub-headline in that article)
hokkers999
21-01-2009, 01:07
This is quite interesting (though I only understand some of it) ;)
http://www.advanced-television.com/PDF/E_0508_P14,15,16,18,19(2).pdf (http://www.advanced-television.com/PDF/E_0508_P14,15,16,18,19%282%29.pdf)
In fact I suggest everyone technical on here reads it, and then tell us what they think lol
---------- Post added at 00:25 ---------- Previous post was at 00:17 ----------
P.S AFAIK Virgin have invested in capacity as well rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 (Before anyone jumps on the sub-headline in that article)
I had a quick scan through and the one thing that leaps off the page is that docsis 3 does absolutely nothing to increase total available (aggregate) bandwidth.
Which would suggest that unless VM invest in tons more headends STM is going to be back with a vengeance.
P.S AFAIK Virgin have invested in capacity as well rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 (Before anyone jumps on the sub-headline in that article)
I had a quick scan through and the one thing that leaps off the page is that docsis 3 does absolutely nothing to increase total available (aggregate) bandwidth.
Too late
---------- Post added at 01:21 ---------- Previous post was at 01:18 ----------
If you had read more into it, one of the solutions in addtion to rolling out DOCIS 3.0 to increase bandwidth is to switch off the analogue channels.
This means that MSOs should expect to implement measures that increase spectrum or bandwidth efficiency either at the same time as deploying DOCSIS 3.0 or some time afterwards. Options available include spectrum extension to 1 GHz, reclamation of analogue spectrum, splitting fibre nodes to reduce the size of service groups,and implementing multicasting techniques,
Guess what Virgin are doing? ;)
---------- Post added at 01:26 ---------- Previous post was at 01:21 ----------
This is also an interesting bit about what switching off the analogue TV means:
This can liberate a lot of capacity, given that just 80 analogue channels consume the same bandwidth as 800 digital SD channels and even 240 HD channels
---------- Post added at 01:30 ---------- Previous post was at 01:26 ----------
I'm beginning to think I should have created a new thread for discussion that article
Not as such, I'm trying to point out the technical differences. what we've then done is to do some "back of the fag packet maths".
That rough & ready calculation shows that even docsis 3 can't provide a fraction of the bandwidth required to deliver a unified service over ip.
Maybe when they roll out docsis 4 or even 5....
well its unlikely we will see DS4 never mind DS5 any time soon, but thats more to do with DS3 being currently officially speced to upto 125x125 bonded channels , thats 5Gigabit+down and 3Gigabit+ up.
the "Near" in near realtime IP Multicast covers a LOT of space were the antiquated IP Unicast video streaming put in place by the master ISP Bean counters is used today.
and they have not even begun to talk about the matching IP Broadcast thats the digital eqiv of analogue Broadcast, intentionally designed to fill that gap YEARS ago...
@hokkers, exactly where, and under what conditions, do you expect there to be a bottleneck?
cook1984
21-01-2009, 23:34
*you wont actually ever be able to download a HD movie because once you have downloaded half of it we will throttle your connection because you have downloaded too much and you are impacting the service for other users
Of course, this is a complete lie. What they mean is, you might be getting free HD content and not paying them (enough) for it.
Think about it for a moment. It's okay to max out your connection during peek times, but only for a limited time. If it was really about preventing impact to other users, they would limit everyone all the time based on available bandwidth.
As it is, during the time you are allowed maximum speed you are also allowed to impact other users. Someone watching a streaming video that stutters or playing a game that lags is going to be impacted during your download. The damage is then done, no matter if you later are throttled down to 1/4 speed.
Of course, this is a complete lie. What they mean is, you might be getting free HD content and not paying them (enough) for it.
No that's not what they mean. What you have said is complete lie
Think about it for a moment. It's okay to max out your connection during peek times, but only for a limited time. If it was really about preventing impact to other users, they would limit everyone all the time based on available bandwidth.
If you introduce a limit all the time, how is that any different that a slower speed?
As it is, during the time you are allowed maximum speed you are also allowed to impact other users. Someone watching a streaming video that stutters or playing a game that lags is going to be impacted during your download. The damage is then done, no matter if you later are throttled down to 1/4 speed.
As it is, the 50Mbit service, which is the only one currently suited to downloading HD material (and what this thread is supposed to be discussing), has no traffic managment
General Maximus
22-01-2009, 00:40
As it is, the 50Mbit service, which is the only one currently suited to downloading HD material (and what this thread is supposed to be discussing), has no traffic managment
yet :dozey:
Yes yet.
Moan & Bitch about if you like - once we know what it is going to be. In the meantime it is getting very boring.
No-one know how restrictive the policy might be. We may be disappointed (or for some people on here 'we told you so'), or we may be very surprised.
If you don't like the idea of the Traffic Managment, go to an ISP that doesn't use it.
hokkers999
22-01-2009, 01:06
@hokkers, exactly where, and under what conditions, do you expect there to be a bottleneck?
At the head-end (ubr), let's do some more fag packet maths.
1. From an earlier post another poster posited that the ubr they were connected to had 400 subscribers.
2. Lets say they all have 50 meg internet
3. Let's also say they all have 2 V+ boxes
4. Now the silly part - VM has at least 3 HD channels :D
5. let's allow 10mbit per hd channel
6. So, in the extreme. Each household is recording 6 HD channels while browsing the net at 50 meg.
(400 x 50) + (400 x 60) = 4.4 gbits
From the post by popper 125x125 bonding will JUST service that at 5 gbits.
How long before VM can do that level of bonding and how much kit do they have to buy first?
Even if you scale my example down, to each house only watching 2 hd channels plus 50meg internet that's still 2.8 gbits needed.
It won't work bypassing STM as STM isn't that smart, but certainly other methods of control are. ;)
May not be at this moment in time, but surely it would be easy enough to add 'on network' exceptions to the system? :)
General Maximus
22-01-2009, 10:43
Yes yet.
Moan & Bitch about if you like - once we know what it is going to be. In the meantime it is getting very boring.
No-one know how restrictive the policy might be. We may be disappointed (or for some people on here 'we told you so'), or we may be very surprised.
If you don't like the idea of the Traffic Managment, go to an ISP that doesn't use it.
I would normally love to give people the benefit of doubt but in this case there is no doubt in my mind that we are going to be screwed over as we always have been.
As for moving to another isp, I am staying with VM as they are the lesser of 2 evils atm, it doesnt mean I have got to be happy about it though. If i could get Be in my area I would have switched by now.
cook1984
25-01-2009, 19:50
No that's not what they mean. What you have said is complete lie
What is your reason for saying that?
Don't call me a liar unless you can back it up.
If you introduce a limit all the time, how is that any different that a slower speed?
Can you even read, or am I just wasting my time?
As it is, the 50Mbit service, which is the only one currently suited to downloading HD material (and what this thread is supposed to be discussing), has no traffic managment
Not at the moment. Also, 10mb is fine for downloading HD material. An average 45 minute show in HD comes in at around 1.2GB and takes about 20 minutes to download on 10 meg.
What is your reason for saying that?
Don't call me a liar unless you can back it up.
My reason for saying it? You accused Virgin of lying in regards to why they Traffic Manage without backing it up. So unless you can back up your claim, don't ask me to back up mine
Can you even read, or am I just wasting my time?
Yes I can. You said: they would limit everyone all the time based on available bandwidth.
So if they limit everyone on a 20Mbit connection all the time to 5Mbit, how is that any different than a selling a 5Mbit connection?
Not at the moment. Also, 10mb is fine for downloading HD material. An average 45 minute show in HD comes in at around 1.2GB and takes about 20 minutes to download on 10 meg.
But the 10Mbit service is on the DOCSIS 1 network, which was not designed or built to deal with sustained downloads that HD requires. The DOCSIS 3.0 network is more geared towards that kind of traffic.
People, calm down.
Anyhow, back on topic. We dont yet know how virgin will implement either the iptv system or the traffic management on the 50 meg product. It is entirely possible that the stm on the 50 meg product will specifically exclude traffic from the servers used for iptv.
cook1984
25-01-2009, 23:20
My reason for saying it? You accused Virgin of lying in regards to why they Traffic Manage without backing it up. So unless you can back up your claim, don't ask me to back up mine
I did back it up. I said that it would undermine their own HD offerings if people were allowed to download or stream limitless HD content off the internet.
Yes I can. You said: they would limit everyone all the time based on available bandwidth.
No you can't. You even quoted the key statement: based on available bandwidth.
You need to properly read and understand things before going off half-cocked. If you are having difficulty, there are free adult learner language skills courses available at many colleges.
But the 10Mbit service is on the DOCSIS 1 network, which was not designed or built to deal with sustained downloads that HD requires. The DOCSIS 3.0 network is more geared towards that kind of traffic.
Shame we are already seeing major problems for people who are trying to download that kind of traffic: http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33644845-50mb-problem.html
Luckily on 10 meg I usually get a solid 10 meg download speed from usenet, until the STM kicks in.
General Maximus
26-01-2009, 00:25
I'll tell you what, if there is a technical reason why 2mbit and 10mbit cant actually handle streaming hdtv and docsis1 can't handle it, i would be all for them putting some technology in place to stop people from even trying to download the content if they arent able to do it anyway. If peops want to download HD content VM shoule be encouraging them to upgrade to 20mbit at least.
My reason for saying it? You accused Virgin of lying in regards to why they Traffic Manage without backing it up. So unless you can back up your claim, don't ask me to back up mine
For a normal member of the public thats a hell of a way to defend vm's stm :confused:
Perhaps cook might be worried about the dpi kit stm or app throttling being used to filter out anything vm dont like, then (for an extra fee of course) you get vm or affiliates (media company's, advertisers e.t.c who have an agreement with vm) related material at full speed using there X delivery method.
This would in turn eventually lead to your internet turning into there internet in a way which would turn off sharing and informative content by the masses for the masses into another form of pre-paid media.
It would start with torrent clients first then onto newsgroups and ftp then your shaping times change to a daily limit any other application running over the network they didnt like also why not use a phorm u like to filter the http content to direct you to the real site you want, Bingo job done :dozey:.
Not hard really is it from all the arguments mounting up even off the people who already have 50mb vm have boobed big time in my opinion and with how much things have changed within vm even in the past year makes you wonder what they have planned by the comments they have made.
Ignitionnet
26-01-2009, 09:41
May not be at this moment in time, but surely it would be easy enough to add 'on network' exceptions to the system? :)
Nope, it's not that smart, purely runs on traffic passing to and from modem and the counters therein.
To avoid this would require upgrade to DOCSIS 1.1 and use of additional, un-STM'd, service flows.... which is likely how such a system would have to work anyway to guarantee the required bandwidth at the edge of the network.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.