Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Posted on Digitalspy (did not find here with keywords in search) !


QUOTED :

" Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February.Options
Mark as NewBookmark this messageSubscribe to this messageSubscribe to this message's RSS feedHighlight this messagePrint this messageEmail this message to a friendFlag for a moderator....on 28-01-2011 16:58

We will be trialling upstream traffic management on our cable network on Tuesday 1st of February between 01:00 and 03:00. This is a technical trial during a quiet time on our network to ensure our upstream traffic management system works correctly rather than a trial of any new policy during these times.



Between these times P2P and Newsgroup upstream traffic will be managed in a similar way to our current downstream traffic management. The trial is planned to continue through the 2nd and 3rd of Feb but may be extended depending on the results of these initial tests. "


http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/...m-p/310789#M25

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

awesome ..

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I saw this on Digitalspy yesterday but cannot find any details relating to the trial anywhere else.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Well if it's been announced in the Community Forum it's genuine

They did a simliar trial on the downstream management before switiching it on as per the policy

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Even in the VM URL I linked to at bottom of post ? :confused:

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Just great news.. Now P2P and NG being managed.. Wait.. what?

meh!.. Thanks for the heads up anyway, I personally dont use those peer things.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I have read that post from the Community Forum manager via Digitalspy but I am on about an official Virginmedia webpage giving full details about the trial.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

One question, will this effect gaming?

Ok maybe 2, will this effect upstream ping?

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

When the new policy was launched last year it covered both upstream and downstream management on P2P and Newsgroups.

However the upstream part wasn't switched on at the same time as downstream.

As Mark is an employee of Virgin Media, and the Forum is an official Virgin one, I would think that the post is an official announcement of the trial

---------- Post added at 08:34 ---------- Previous post was at 08:33 ----------

It shouldn't do as gaming isn't P2P or Newsgroups

But then that's one of the reasons for the out of hours trial - to make sure it's working as designed before it's switched on in the policy hours

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

It's a good enough source IMO, not like some peep posted a rumour thread on a site like this or Digitalspy !

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Cheers Ben, I can never understand the difference between P2P and gaming, because I thought gaming was P2P, anyway just for the record I'm all for anything that improves performance for the mass's.

As long as it doesn't further degrade my gaming :)

As a side note, I think upstream traffic management has been in place for a while anyway, and if it brings with it more stability and less jitter then bring it on.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I would like to see the official information regarding this trial for clarification.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

That is the official information!

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Thank " insert :nworthy: of your choice here" for VPN and encryption :LOL:

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

It would be good of them to actually inform support of this trial as the is nothing on the systems about it.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Most gaming isn't P2P but some is, technically, P2P.

However VM are referring to P2P in the context of P2P file sharing, not other P2P activities (e.g. Skype, Gaming, Video chat, etc.). In other words, only one specific type of P2P is being targetted.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Except when they haven't quite configured the equipment correctly.:D

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Like most trials I would imagine there to be dedicated support or at least a ring fenced team, rather than advising it to the support platform as a whole.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Exactly why I said "targeted" instead of "being affected" :p:

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Cheers guys,,,,

I take it your referring to the barrage of complaints received last time VM rolled out the last traffic management policy that effected WOW gamers and the like.

So what's the difference in this new trial?

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

The bit that affected WOW gamers has been switched off ;)

---------- Post added at 13:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:10 ----------

As far as I understand it there are two parts to the way the application management works

1) A list of the protocols to manage. This is a global setting so will affect upstream and downstream alike

2) Which direction to manage. e.g. Up/Down/Both.

It's only the second setting that is being changed from 'Down' to 'Both'. What applications are managed isn't being altered

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I agree with Masque on this tho, if customer rings up and support have no idea, then customer as a result will get wrong support response.

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:20 ----------

My question is what are VM going to do about the inevetible overloading of off peak after this comes into force. This will just move the high use to a different time of day.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

They will know before the trial starts

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Leaving it a bit late, the trial starts tomorrow or after midnight tonight whichever way you want to look at it.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Late would be after the trial starts.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

And VM doing this surprises you how?:dozey:

---------- Post added at 14:07 ---------- Previous post was at 14:07 ----------

Well, if telling customers by email, leaving sufficient time for the average person to check/read the email would be nice...

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Honestly, for the 'average' persion they aren't going to notice anything happening as they don't use P2P or Newsgroups.

Those that are likely to be affected by the trial at the times it is happening are more than likely already active within the Community Forums, or at least are aware of them.

Mailing millions of customers about the trial would likely cause more issues that it solves, as you would then get a fair amount of people calling in asking whether X program is affected or not, or at a lower level 'What is Newsgroups' etc

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

it doesnt :)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Skype, one of the most used applications on the internet, I do believe, relys on a P2P protocol to make it work. The average user most certainly WILL notice it.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

every implementation of shaping I have witnessed is always noticeable as it often shapes things its not supposed to. However the average user would probably not even know about shaping so wouldnt blame it. :)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Skype is NOT being targetted by VM's traffic shaping systems. It also uses minimal amounts of bandwidth, and quickly adapts to various traffic levels by itself.

I've already said VM are referring to P2P specifically with relation to file sharing, nothing else.

---------- Post added at 15:27 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

The average user still can't tell if they're getting 8 meg or 20 meg from their "Up to 20mb broadband".

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I would imagine they would have call routing in place to cover this, though obviously it is dependent on the end user dialling from the correct number.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Well nothing today on the systems about it apart from a post on the Community Forums.:erm:

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

They've let their April Fools joke out too early! ;)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I doubt the sky will fall in from a technical trial for a couple of hours in the middle of the night.

1st line technical support haven't been updated because if you were every fault even remotely likely to be in any way, shape, or form related would be in with a pretty good chance of immediately being blamed on the trial instead of being properly worked.

That would cause far more inconvenience to customers than the alternative - to not mention it until it is getting towards going properly live.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Its my day off tomorrow so not really overly interested to be honest.:D

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

you just knew it was going to happen, they increase upload speeds only to find an excuse to bang them back down again. It is all marketing, they have might as well advertise symetrical 200mbit knowing that they arent going to give it to everyone.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

"Up to x mb broadband" ;)

What was it they said a couple years ago... Something like 40% of bandwidth goes to the top 0.5% of users, 80% of total bandwidth is used by 10% of users and the bottom 80% of users use only 10% of the bandwidth. Note: Independant figures, but not UK figures.

And apparantly P2P was down to 20% or less in '08 with youtube using over 50%... No wonder traffic shaping hasn't made a huge difference.

In that context shaping P2P traffic down to 25% of port capacity isn't actually that draconian if it was only using 20% to begin with :p:

Mind you, I use a lot lower percentage of my line's capacity than I did a while ago mainly because my hard drive space hasn't increased in line with internet connection speeds.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

does the properly worked mean blaming the user's pc instead? :rolleyes:

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Now why would we do that if we are using our online tools correctly we can see any issues or management on our side and only then will we look at your equipment.

It is amazing how many 3rd party routers actually cause slow speeds and once a direct connection is made the connection is running at full speed.

You have a known issue which will be in your notes so you cannot use yourself as an example.:)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Not according to Cisco Interesting stat (imho) from Sandvine

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Alright, I was generalizing a bit, and the data I quoted was from one particular manufacturer of traffic shaping/DPI equipment. In any case, the general consensus seems that "real time entertainment", i.e. streaming audio/video make up 40-60% according to all parties, fairly close to half of all internet traffic with some variation by region.

And P2P traffic, in the downstream, varies from the high single digits to low double digit range, which is fairly close to what I quoted anyway. Again patterns will vary by ISP and region, but shaping what takes up 10% of your bandwidth down to a maximum of 25% of bandwidth (well, with NNTP included) was never going to have much effect - that is of course if VM are actually doing it as they say they are.

Even in the upstream, if P2P is using ~35% overall and ~30% at peak times, capping it to 25% really won't reduce overall traffic by more than 10% if you look at it logically. We can pretty much ignore NNTP here since, well, there is negligible amounts of upstream NNTP on a home user's connection.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

To be fair only the one time I used normal tech support they blamed my pc. :D

The CEO office and tier 2 on the VM forums didnt do that.

---------- Post added at 01:00 ---------- Previous post was at 00:57 ----------

Hugh I have to say those stats are a brilliant match with what I would expect. In that p2p doesnt dominate downloading (as some claim) but does use a large chunk of uploading. This falls in line with what I have been thinking.

---------- Post added at 01:05 ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 ----------

In VM's case tho there is a issue not accounted for and that is regional congregation of users. So eg. VM might have a 100 UBR's with not a single p2p user on, whilst another 100 UBR's may have 20 p2p users on each going on 24/7. The first 100 UBR's would have pointless throttling and the 2nd 100UBR's would have not enough throttling. It does seem currently VM's downstream traffic shaping overall is a pointless waste, in a highly congested area I have seen pretty much no improvement from it. If I am seeing nothing from it I fail to see what good areas gain from it. I dont mind posting my tbb graph's for the days this upstream trial is running so we can see the affects from that. As even tho the trial is dusk hours, I do still have congestion then on the upstream.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

But those 100 UBR's with no-one using P2P would not be affected by the throttling so it would be as if it didn't exist. It's not pointless throttling in that case, it is no throttling.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

it would still be a throttle to 25% of capacity on the false positives :)

my example was extreme tho, obviously we can go to less extremes and have eg. 1 or 2 p2p downloaders. vs 18 or 19.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Very odd .. it did happen though ..

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Probably all on the systems today but lucky for me its my day off.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

That indeed there is.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I will have a look tomorrow and possibly get some time offline to do so.:)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

so when is this going live or been trialled in more areas?

it would be nice to be picked for a trial for once.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Will it throttle Vstuff even more than it is now :LOL:

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Only when Uploading.https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/12/20.gifhttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/12/10.gifhttps://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/04/8.gif

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

So what is the point of upgrading Vstuff

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Ask Nopanic.;)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Is VStuff classed as P2P?

I don't use it but I thought traffic shaping only applied to P2P and newsgroup clients.

---------- Post added at 18:13 ---------- Previous post was at 18:11 ----------

From the post in VM's site I presume it is being tested nationally at night(early hours). Could be wrong though.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I presumed the same until ignition told me it wasnt national.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I have had another try of vstuff over the last couple of days and it was useless, 450 meg is all it uploaded over that time.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

You want to trial restricted upload ?

Vstuff wont be affected by the management .. should it go live.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Nopanic you mean do I care if my p2p upload speed is restricted, answer is no I dont care.

What I want is a uncongested upstream. Ignition seems confident this will fix that issue.

Bear in mind since VM seemingly capped my port to 300kbit up I am much happier with my service as download performance shot up when they did that.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Fair enough ...

In theory the new management will resolve a lot of congestion, but the balance is will it affect customers paying for an unlimited, unrestricted service ?

I use torrents and although I don't pay for my service, I'd be royally fooked off if I cant use it ..

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

In theory the new management will do bugger all! Your bit torrent client is the one targeted by the management!

You work for them- you should know! BTW this doesn'r enamour you to anyone!

I don't pay for my service,

Now I know why you appear as [ADMIN EDIT]

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Im not a fan of shaping and its a cheap way out for VM, the proper solution is for them to either stop selling unlimited and place hard limits or to spend some serious wad on upgrades. They dont look like doing neither any time soon so this may be the stop gap solution. Although this wont resolve it for me off peak as it will only be a peak time system. In some areas I think VM have seriously under provisioned and probably would need a 4-10 fold increase to catch up on capacity which is how this situation has came about. Also consider how severe the congestion can get, some people have packetloss of over 10% for over 10 hours a day, with that kind of packet loss you wont be doing much unlimited usage as hardly anything will work.

---------- Post added at 01:55 ---------- Previous post was at 01:51 ----------

very good points, from where he sits VM are saints, free broadband which up to this point has served him well on torrents. However without thinking how bad some people have got it on VM, people who do pay for their service.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Like all staff, I am on the staff package and my monthly amount is pretty much 0, if anyone has an issue with that, they need to come and work for VM.. the theory behind the new management, be it amount or traffic shaping is to allow the people with a poor service to get a better service.

Like it or not. Insulting me, isn't going to change that.

As for the "I should know comments" they do make me smile, what I know and what I share will never be the same thing.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Insults are used when they have no intelligent answer to a post. Seems to be a common debating method for some.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

If I'm coming across as aggressive then by all means point this out to me as it is not my intention.

I reply tongue in cheek, which based on the PM's I get is often taken as it should be.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Why do some people have poor service in the first place?

Is it the fault of the users who have better service and hence VM have decided to take some of it away with the hope of improving the service for the people who have a poor service ?

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I'm a user first and VM staff second and in my opinion is VM should be able to give all customers the top speed and unlimited.

When I worked for faults I would make sure the customer either got the full service or got money back until they could. I agree it is unacceptable, BUT I do not make the decisions and do not get to see all of the data poles.

The network guys are trying out ways to give the customers with crappy service a better one and they are blaming those that batter the network ..

So as I said, whether we like it or not, if they decide to bring in shaping, inspection or management of any kind, we have to live with it or move on.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

It's unfair to cry foul about ADSL real versus claimed speeds, while indulging in "smoke and mirrors" over traffic management.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Its gone quiet on this front... I wonder if they will implement this on the network... I hope so :)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

yeah no new news on this?

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I cannot see the point of it as the upstream congestion is caused by a lot of un-shaped uses as well but I can see them doing it.

Whatever they do with it, it will make no difference to me.

I just don't like them not being open and honest and agree with Igni. Put a limit per GB and be like the rest of the ISP's instead of hiding behind unlimited.

Tell P2P and newsgroup users they will be limited to XXGB per month/week/day or whatever.

Then put every other user on the same restriction.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

If their network, in terms of upstream capacity, is anything near as bad as it used to be then I can see why they're doing this.

Does anyone know how customers are grouped nowadays?

It used to be that on a cabinet level, there was something like 36Mbps upstream split between customers.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

as far as I know its less then that amount most of the time.

a port can either have (as far as I know, if I am wrong expect ignition to correct me) 4 x4.5mbit or 4x 9mbit on legacy (docsis), so 18mbit or 36mbit, it is not always 36mbit. In my area it is 18mbit, and it can even be a mix of 4.5 and 9mbit channels.
On overlay (docsis3) it will typically be a single 9mbit channel for non uplifted areas and 18mbit for uplifted areas, I think seph has even mentioned some overlay areas even only have 4.5mbit.

so basically a chance of 36mbit going to the cabinet if on legacy. Which is only 10mbit and older 20mbit users. I also think its multiple cabinets per node, so one cabinet wouldnt get that bandwidth to it self.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

So - best situation - 36Mbps per node. Multiple cabinets per node. Hmm. And what's the maximum upstream that one user can have? (I actually don't know, and Virgin aren't exactly open on publishing these things on their website...)

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

the maximum is 10mbit if on the 100mbit tier, the 100mbit tier is in only very few areas at the moment.

Everywhere else.
If on a 18mbit docsis3 then generally the highest is 5mbit upload on 50mbit tier.
If on a 9mbit docsis3 the highest for one user will be 1.5mbit on the 50mbit tier.
Sometimes VM 'accidently' upgrade speeds and have people able to upload at 5mbit on a 9mbit upstream.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Not really in the case of upstream traffic. The overwhelming majority of this is P2P, there's not a lot else really that people can use to cane their upload capacity 24x7.

Makes it all the more ridiculous that VM didn't implement this first, however the shaping was implemented with cost control rather than congestion control in mind and this dramatically complicated upstream management.

I suspect upstream management being trialled is a blunt sledgehammer affecting customers regardless of utilisation but we'll see.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I disagree a little here. Based on figures postulated earlier, a higher proportion of upstream use is P2P compared to downstream, and if it makes a difference on downstream it'll make a bigger difference on upstream. Not to mention upstream is more congested on DOCSIS to begin with, and P2P upstream traffic is more constant, on all the time than, say, "other uses".

As for honesty, I can't think of many consumer ISPs that are truly "honest" about unlimited but that's how the business model works. Some use more, some use less. For all the traffic management they're introducing I'm still an extra-heavy user but since I don't get affected by the shaping, I actually (should, in theory) end up with a better overall experience thanks to their disohesty.

Same situation as with bank charges really, some people get ripped off so that others can get better service for less/free. Long as it benefits me I aint complaining...

---------- Post added at 09:22 ---------- Previous post was at 09:21 ----------

Given that's the case with downstream, and there's seperate STM already which isn't having much of an effect, I tend to agree.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

On upstream thats true ignition so yeah upstream shaping 'should' be more effective than downstream shaping on QoS. Of course only time will tell.

Interesting how you labeled the downstrean shaping as cost control. :)

What I would like to see is on this shaping it be on 24/7 (why should good quality service only be during peak?) but it also be dynamic based on utilisation so its only shaping what it needs to shape not for the sake of it. I expect tho VM will do the easy way which is just a basic sledgehammer as you say and only during peak.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Downstream shaping is totally about cost control, it was there to reduce the investment required in peering and transit capacity to support uplifted services and reduce stress on the existing occasionally overloaded capacity and has failed quite abysmally to do so as far as I'm aware.

The shaping in either direction isn't focussed or dynamic, it's even worse on upstream. To focus it properly would require the shaping hardware to be aware of each and every interface on the network which they most certainly are not.

The question of good service is a non-issue, if shaping is required for service quality to be maintained off-peak there are other issues and shaping shouldn't be used to try and cover them up.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

so you saying if non peak is poor without shaping they should up the capacity to resolve that right? trying to understand exactly what you mean.

my off peak doesnt settle down till 2am, and before my overlay started improving it was 4am it settled down. so is still 2 hours after the switch off time off excessive upstream congestion. This is likely to increase because a time limited shaping causes bursts of traffic when its turned off.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I'd have thought it's common sense that if there's not enough capacity there for a decent service even at off-peak times there are problems with insufficient capacity.

Shaping should be there to assure service performance during peaks of demand, if shaping is needed 24x7 additional capacity is required.

Though I'm saying nothing you didn't know already.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I agree, just wanted to confirm that was your line of thinking.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Hopefully after the 100mbit rollout is done VM will get upstream channel bonding working which may improve your upstream similarly to how channel bonding improved your downstream.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

ideally we need 8 downstream channels to handle 100mbit (so stays below 25%). 4 upstream of docsis2.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Not really just not too many people sharing the same bandwidth is quite adequate, can get away with a single 18Mbps upstream so long as not many on it.

Upstream bonding is coming, been under testing by hardware manufacturers and operators for a while.

Only a couple of hardware vendors really had full support for it, neither of which VM purchased from.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Problem is VM will over contend so that not many people on it probably will never apply here, so we may as well go the statistical contention route and have it over subbed but on a fatter pipe. Like the improvement I got from going to bonded downstream channels. Good news its coming tho, I know it probably will only be 2 upstreams but its better than one.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

personally i think this is a bloody joke! and i can not believe how many people seem to be going along with it, if they cannot cope with people using there services then they should put a limit on the amount of user's on there network, why should paying customers be punished for using something they r paying for! i really do not understand how some people think, yes i know internet can be slow at times, but don't blame users for that blame VIRGIN!

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

People go with it for a very simple reason.

30Mb for £18.50
50Mb for £25
100Mb for £35.

It's cheap, has big numbers by the speeds, that sucks most people in.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I bet 100mbit is £30 by summer as well.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I can see that happening if bt infinity offers faster speeds than they do now

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

And how are they going to do that exactly?

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Either increase the rate limit - people have been synching at 80Mbit at 500m from cabinet before the rate limit is applied - or through pair bonding, most people have more than one pair going into their premises and VDSL supports bonding of multiple pairs.

Certainly for those within a reasonable distance of their cabinet 60/15 on a single pair and 120/30 on two is quite feasible.

EDIT: This ignores upcoming technologies such as vectoring, which is to be ready to roll this year, and phantom circuits.

300Mbps has been delivered at 400m using two pairs, 900Mbps at the same distance using four, 100Mbps over a couple of pairs at 1km.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Of course, there would need to be a fairly widespread rollout Infinity before BT hit mass market penetration. Even in terms of phasing out ADSL Max in favour of WBC/21CN BT still have a long way to go

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

will they abandon their policy double line rental for pair bonding? if not I cant see much takeup on that.

---------- Post added at 21:49 ---------- Previous post was at 21:47 ----------

When I checked maps showing coverages of both providers it showed BT only currently cover about 20% of VM and by end of rollout will still be under 50%. So VM will still have weak competition in many areas anyway.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

Crystal ball is broken - can only give the technologies and methods that might be used.

For what it's worth there is no need to apply a policy of double line rental as the line won't be going back to the exchange just to the cabinet.

Of course, this is dependent on Ofcom not being total bumholes which is unlikely. They'll likely insist on full line rental being charged in the name of equivalence of access, competition, etc, as BT serving a second loop to a home purely for a VDSL signal would be horribly anti-competitive and market distorting. Isn't like we don't already have more LLU than anywhere else in Europe.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I thought you said thanks to ANFP BT weren't getting more than ~60-80mbps in the lab?

Still, if I could get the likes of 120/30 from Be or another network with the quality of Be's I'd be all over it even if it cost 3x more than VM's service.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

huh i think you miss read my post, i was not complaining about the new speeds, but the upload traffic management.

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

I think the point is the majority of people are more concerned with price and headline speed for broadband.

If they were concerned about traffic management and capacity you would be paying a lot more than £35 for 100Mbit!

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

During the farce of dealing with VM re; the 30meg upgrade I was determined not to be placed under contract and achieved that objective. The reason was that VM are persistently looking for ways to get a quart out of a pint pot and breaking usability.

Sure enough after a few days of liaising with the IT specialists of a massively expensive service, I subscribe to, it is evident that VM are dropping established ports after a time of inactivity. VM have broken one of my primary reasons for having the internet but fortunately my ADSL is not broken in any shape or form and never will be according to the ISP.

The new not so Superhub has not caused these problem as logs showed the problem from the beginning of February (several days before the new Superhub).

I have seen a post in over threads re; "keep alive". It is not the Superhub, its in the system.

In its current state VM's service is interfering with my usability of the network and for my part the rapidly approaching local uplift to FTTC via my current quality ISP can not come soon enough.

Your reply points towards "you get what you pay for" and you are right but at some historic points in time VM offered both price and quality concurrently. Quality is sliding, price is cheap and before long it will warrant the usual adjective that goes with cheap and ....

Re: Upstream Traffic Management Trial 1st of February
 

What Ben said. My point was that it's cheap and the headline speed is high. People go with the restrictions because of that.