Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
My point, Kush, is that STM ion a saturated environment makes no speed difference to what the user would otherwise receive.
|
If they set everything up the lazy way, with no traffic prioritization, load balancing, or capacity management then yes, that's what would happen. But they have plenty of options at their disposal to change that, whether they use any of them I don't know.
Quote:
|
Indeed it would be pointless because peak time on 8 channels would be peak time on the other 8 channels in a service group.
|
Not necessarily, that would require there be an equal distribution of user(s) and/or bandwidth demand across all channels, the same number of modems on all channels, and the same user demographic. It's easy enough to have a street full of businesses that shut up shop at 5pm, along the next road on the same node a pile of students, unemployed and other internet scrounging no-lifers, then an estate full of retirees, residential homes, and council housing bottom-feeders who can afford weed and gambling but no broadband.
Since you're implying VM aren't dynamically load balancing across all available capacity, then it follows that they aren't able to dynamically balance peak load either, and left to chance peak load is not likely to statistically normalize itself across all channels unless they're very very fat channels.
---------- Post added at 15:05 ---------- Previous post was at 15:04 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius
It cannot be that hard to introduce a means to monitor our own bandwidth usage 
We used to be able to use snmp to monitor the modems but they blocked that pretty dam quickly |
The system is already there, they just have to create and link it into another system that allows you to see it.