Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jtwn
Chrysalis, I'm willing to bet my mum that we know bugger all compared to the people who actually run the show, I'm sure they are more then fully aware of the situation, they probably just can't deal with the situation for one reason or another...money, already pushing the tech too far, coffee machine broken down etc..
Higher order modulation will ease the pain, but really, channel bonding is where its at in improving the situation wholeheartedly. We can be rest assured though, that the speeds would be upped, hopefully not to the extent that it would negate the greater available bandwidth to give some kind of marketable return to the peeps up top. Its going to be an every man for himself if if they offer 100mb over 4 bonded channels but then its not like we are going to get those kind of speeds from anywhere anyway.
|
Dude I can see you have an interest and need to get a job with a cable company to use that interest a bit and see how things work in the real world. What you're discussing is still experimental technology and no standard has been finalised and ratified.
Bonded channels aren't necessary to run 10Mbit, in Sweden UPC are delivering 24/8 without bonding channels, and in Chrysalis' case the performance issues are I believe a bit of a mystery and the situation isn't nearly as bad as he thinks.
A part of the reason for it being easier there is I guess that UPC don't feel the need to fill their entire downstream spectrum with crap DTV multiplexes full of ****e that hardly ever gets watched, and instead save channels here and there to shove some of that lovely stuff that really makes the money, broadband, down.
If you're that interested ntl could remove congestion issues in some areas overnight without resegmentation if there's a channel free and a card available, no need to do any physical work outside of the headend. I guess there are certain reasons why they aren't, probably procedural / managerial actually.
I would imagine if it weren't for having to get things signed off in blood by about 10 different departments they could quite effectively resolve most issues through a combo of 2nd downstreams and 16QAM returns. Only areas where the upstream is incapable of supporting the additional power demands of the 16QAM, the channel plan is so full there's not even a single channel available for another DOCSIS downstream, or there's not an MC28U card available would this potentially be an issue.
BTW network condition is in most cases not an excuse for 16QAM being an 'issue', considering that I know of operators in Europe and North America who run 6.4MHz wide 64QAM upstreams with DOCSIS 2 which are far more demanding on the network.
With your allergy to contention you'd be scared if you knew how many 512k, 1Mbit and 2Mbit home users BT have been able to cram onto a 4Mbit pipe in the past with no issues
