View Single Post
Old 01-09-2017, 23:59   #19
Sephiroth
Sulking in the Corner
 
Sephiroth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: RG41
Services: 1 Gbps; Hub 4 MM; ASUS RT-AX88U; Ultimate VOLT. BT Infinity2; Devolo 1200AV
Posts: 11,955
Sephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny star
Sephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny star
Re: 4 upstream channel bonding - post here

Quote:
Originally Posted by General Maximus View Post
it is all depends on the modulation of the upstreams. Some are still QAM16 and some are QAM64. Those that are QAM64 have a 50% increase on throughput vs QAM16

http://www.radio-electronics.com/inf...qam-256qam.php
But that additional throughput goes away when you only allow 2 ticks instead of 4 for your transmit window. Nothing else has moved; it's still a 6.4MHz wide channel (as evidenced by the 5120K symbols/sec rate); the tick is still 6.25us.

Or, as Igni has mooted (not in his words though), has Cisco increased simultaneity at the CMTS so as to allow smaller transmit windows and thus allow more users to to get onto the upstream with smaller amounts of data that won't get too much contention at the CMTS. Something like that?
__________________
Seph.

My advice is at your risk.
Sephiroth is offline   Reply With Quote