Quote:
Originally Posted by weesteev
Over Subscribed suggests that the connected node has been oversold, the issue is over utilisation, this can vary depending on node size. You can have a legacy build 500 home node with 200 active customers and high utilisation due to heavy downloading (student area for example). Would you call that over subscription as the node design and capacity planning have allowed for 500 customers and the issue is high use.
I don't agree with the term over subscription, is very often over used on this forum with no real understanding behind its meaning.
|
In your case you gave not so much however I would also say there are most certainly areas which are oversubscribed - for example areas with over 100 20 and 50Mbit modems on a single 3.2MHz upstream and in turn a similar amount of uplifted modems on a 6.4MHz upstream.
If you're talking about legacy build nodes it should be noted that those nodes were built with certain services in mind, the case could be made that as VM introduce more demanding services onto the nodes they should be performing commensurate upgrades to those nodes in order to increase the bandwidth per home passed.
TLDR legacy node sizes are no excuse, when the original company built that 2000 home node that's been split into 500 home areas they didn't build it with the services that VM are running in mind. Splitting nodes both to account for uptake, usage and upgraded services is a BAU activity. When areas fall below VM's capacity guidelines for bandwidth per customer this is a failure on the part of capacity planning at VM and oversubscribed by their own criteria.
I appreciate that I'm discussing how things were when I was with ntl, I know Telewest's approach both to capacity planning and upgrade was different and am not sure which the company is now following.