Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis
Oh dear, not sure if I wanted to hear that. Because now I know VM can do it then it says to me they dont consider high jitter etc. a problem. It is a sad thing that the same problem exists on VM network now that I suffered from 5 years ago. The incapability to keep jitter low and performance high in high takeup/usage areas and now you tell me they already can move off the heavy users. (before you told me they couldnt? when I asked if could be split from them).
|
Nah I didn't say they could move them off, they could just change use the QoS mechanisms within DOCSIS 1.1/2.0/3.0 to deprioritise their traffic. This is the mechanism Comcast use to enforce their FairShare system.
The downside of course being games don't like that, nor do streaming services. People who have been deprioritised don't get to send or transmit unless there's no traffic of a higher priority waiting.
---------- Post added at 18:26 ---------- Previous post was at 18:23 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis
although VM can do bad boy pipes now, I guess my 2nd idea has the advantage the overall shared capacity is larger so lower jitter on high utilisation. If VM could get 36mbit docsis2 going then it would be over 140mbit of upstream which is much harder to jitter than 9mbit. I tested on a 10mbit lan connection, I only had to utilise about 60% to get jitter, but on 100mbit I could hit almost 98%,
|
It's 26.4Mbit per upstream, and sadly DOCSIS isn't Ethernet. Regardless of how wide the pipe is once it gets so full jitter will arise. The bonus is that more people need to be uploading at once to fill a wider pipe. Statistical contention is a good thing.
---------- Post added at 18:36 ---------- Previous post was at 18:26 ----------
I love Comcast's openness on this matter.
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/conferences...dth_woundy.pdf
http://customer.comcast.com/Pages/FA...ork-Management
EDIT: Ah also for more serious technical information -
http://downloads.comcast.net/docs/At..._Practices.pdf