Virgin Media to Double Broadband Speed

[Kymmy]

Yet the cat5's as given out with the old ambits are perfectly good for the job which they are given out for

[thenry]

cost cutting me thinks. they probably have a heck of a lot in storage too.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

No idea what shipped with the superhub but previous to that all their modems were only specified upto 100Mb (and even lower in most cases) so cat5 was perfectly adequate.. In fact cat5 in 1-2m patch length will probably do perfectly well at gigabit

Indeed (this is from 2000)

http://www.networkworld.com/news/tec.../1016tech.html

In most cases in which Fast Ethernet is run in an enterprise on copper, the existing Category 5 cable can also provide reliable support for Gigabit Ethernet

[mark1234]

Originally Posted by virginruinedntl

unfortunately the uk govt doesn't mandate manufacturers to use gigabit on their computers.

Why should the government mandate that?

[Kushan]

The Cat5/Cat5e thing was an issue for 50meg users as it was. It's "good enough", but there were situations where Cat5e would give a speed boost. I never seen this myself, but it was something mentioned to me during training so it must have been an issue at some point.
However, I was also told that it was the customer's own cables causing issues rather than Virgin's cables.

In any case, it's not much of an issue - computers for the last half a decade all have gigabit ethernet. If they don't, then they're too old to make the most of 100mbit+ anyway. Besides, the real use in these speeds is multiple machines running at once, so it's a bit moot.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Either way it's a lot more gender specific than qasdfdsaq

That was part of the whole point, qasdfdsaq's not meant to be anything specific, apart from me.

---------- Post added at 16:47 ---------- Previous post was at 16:46 ----------

Originally Posted by Kymmy

No idea what shipped with the superhub but previous to that all their modems were only specified upto 100Mb (and even lower in most cases) so cat5 was perfectly adequate.. In fact cat5 in 1-2m patch length will probably do perfectly well at gigabit

VMNG300 has a gigabit port and works fine up to 200mb.

Cat 5 is *supposed* to work up to 100m (i.e. the full length) in gigabit mode, in theory...

The only problem is when el-cheapo cables with half the conductors missing are supplied. In that case, gigabit will simply not work at all - but in all other cases Cat5 will do fine for Gigabit.

As Ignition once said, sucky quality cable is sucky quality cable. Crap quality Cat5e is just certified to suck all the way to 350Mhz.

[Edit]
Found it:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35225441-post11.html

[DigitalShadow]

Originally Posted by Kushan

30Meg and higher users won't need a new modem (It's impossible to be on 30meg and on an old modem - believe me, I've seen Engineers try it!).

Rubbish, seen it done ages ago, don't you remember 50mbit configs on hacked modems.

We've tested the VMNG300 and it can only support a speed of approximately 92Mb on our network so if you want to get your full speed upgrade you'll need a Super Hub which we'll send to you free of charge.

Rubbish, my VMNG300 pulls my full allowance of 104Mbit, so where they got the 92 from I don't know!

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by DigitalShadow

Rubbish, seen it done ages ago, don't you remember 50mbit configs on hacked modems.

He meant the 30Mbit product Virgin sell - which as it uses channel bonding is not possible to get with the older modems. Not whether the older modems are technically capable of over 30Mbit or not via hacking.

[DigitalShadow]

Thank you ben for the correction, never used the lower tiers, so didn't realise that.

What about my other point regarding 92mbit limit on vmng300?

Also, does that mean as the 100mbit users are moving to 120mbit and the 50mbit users are moving to 100 then 120mbit, that the 120mbit with have STM, thus meaning I'm now going to have STM where I don't at the moment?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

I think that's the idea of moving to 8 downstreams - doubling DS capacity, upstream bonding, and node splits left right and centre. I think the quetion you want to ask is will enough capacity be added - we both know plenty of capacity is being added :-P

So far as the 20 to 30mb goes, the users would be getting moved from a bunch of single 38mbps downstreams onto a bonded 400mbps downstreams, and thanks to the rules of statistical contention, should receive far better service as a result (you saw yourself the improvement associated with going onto a bonded 200mbps DS). However downstream capacity isn't an area where VM are particularly weak, outside of a fault situation, upstream is usually the big problem.

Still, I've always thought 50mbps down a 200mbps pipe was a bit of a tight squeeze and 100mbps to be borderline insane, so the move to 8 downstreams should improve matters more than would be expected out of direct proportionality.

The bonding we dont know yet is actually extra capacity.

It could be new channels been added to do the bonding, or it could simply be merging of existing channels, so 2 single channels become one bonded.

The 400mbit may seem like a large upgrade but speeds are been doubled, there was a 200mbit tier been planned as well although I dont know whats happening with that now.

[thenry]

120 upgrades with management then 200 without ?

[DigitalShadow]

Originally Posted by thenry

120 upgrades with management then 200 without ?

Wouldn't 240 fit better?

[thenry]

yeah probably..

[virginruinedntl]

Originally Posted by mark1234

Why should the government mandate that?

so that the public don't bin their computers in landfill upgrading to a computer with gigabit once 120mb+ broadband is available.

[Kymmy]

I'm knackered then on this old workshop laptop of mine... P3-600 with an old PCMCIA wireless card

Doesn't need though to be fast to run a web browser and the odd ECU programming software... Just tough to withstand the odd vehicle running it over