Quote:
Originally Posted by Skie
The "tested to 92meg" line seems like an indication they wont be forcing upgrades, they just want to scare people into upgrading. But wouldnt a 4 downstream modem running 100mb actually end up stealing bandwidth from an 8 downstream modem when the network gets busy?
And does anyone on 100meg with a VMNG300 and the new "fluff" config fancy running some speedtests?
|
It wouldn't really "steal" anything, just slightly unbalance. A superhub on 100mb would cause, say, 25% load across 8 channels. A VMNG300 only capable of using channels 1-4 would cause 50% load across those but leave 5-8 at 0%. Used capacity would be the same, remaining capacity would be the same, and Superhubs on all channels would just have to bias towards 5-8 and trancieve proportionally more traffic on those channels and overall balance would be brought back into line. Even when busy, the total packet load would just get spread amongst the varying channels in a different pattern. In theory.
I do remember Igni mentioning a while back this doesn't actually work as well as it should in the real world though.