Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
14-08-2017, 17:28
|
#61
|
cf.addict
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 412
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ileikcaek
I'm just wondering when my area will actually see any upgrades after seemingly languishing for years. there's no 300Mb yet, upload is still on 2x QAM16, the CMTS is a RiverDelta hunk of junk with the current single thread download speed issues that I and other people in the area have had to deal with since last year. Tbb places this area as bottom of the chart for VM performance now, when it used to be one of the best.
|
Same here, with the exception of only 12 DS, so don't feel left out
TBB placed Lisburn as one of the worst VM areas as well. Good to know this area is not alone in the "top poor performance stakes" ..... <sigh>
|
|
|
14-08-2017, 18:13
|
#62
|
cf.addict
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 346
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Thanks for the info, Ignition. I hope it holds true.
We are still on 12 channels here due to the limits of the old CMTS.
|
|
|
15-08-2017, 00:36
|
#63
|
cf.addict
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newport, Shropshire
Posts: 338
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Thanks for the reply Ignitionnet. Don't suppose you would be able to find out when this area (Telford, specifically Telf14) are likely to go 64QAM on the upstream? No worries if not
|
|
|
15-08-2017, 11:34
|
#64
|
Inactive
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 46
Posts: 13,996
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon22
Thanks for the reply Ignitionnet. Don't suppose you would be able to find out when this area (Telford, specifically Telf14) are likely to go 64QAM on the upstream? No worries if not
|
Sorry Jon, have to refer you to my earlier post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet
With regards to bonding 4 upstreams not a clue what the hold up is. There are plenty of areas that are perfectly capable but just haven't had the configuration rolled out and it's holding things up.
|
All part of the same programme to get 4 x 64QAM upstreams bonded.
If it's an issue with the network itself needing rebuilding you'll get a card through your door at some point to inform you of upcoming maintenance work.
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 16:33
|
#65
|
cf.member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 94
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Over the past few weeks my 4 upstream channels went back to 3 however my downstream always remained fixed at 8.
Last night everything appeared to change. I now am back to 4 upstream channels and now 20 channels, which is a little surprising as I always thought the plan was to go to 24. Any ideas on why the odd number?
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 16:46
|
#66
|
Inactive
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 46
Posts: 13,996
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Yes. 24 is the maximum capability of the platform, not a minimum. No reason to spend the money on deploying 24 straight away if 16 or 20 will suffice for now.
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 16:52
|
#67
|
I Toast Bread
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Bath
Age: 26
Services: Vivid 350?
Posts: 254
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
What exactly is the upstream channel situation in Bath? Will 4 channels ever be here?
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 16:58
|
#68
|
cf.member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 94
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet
Yes. 24 is the maximum capability of the platform, not a minimum. No reason to spend the money on deploying 24 straight away if 16 or 20 will suffice for now.
|
Thanks for the quick reply. I admit I always thought they would go straight to 24. That said, seeing the increase to 20 is a welcome sight, although with the Puma 6 modems I'm worried about the likely increase in latency this will bring.
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 17:35
|
#69
|
cf.addict
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 336
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travelstar
Thanks for the quick reply. I admit I always thought they would go straight to 24. That said, seeing the increase to 20 is a welcome sight, although with the Puma 6 modems I'm worried about the likely increase in latency this will bring.
|
For additional downstream frequencies, a license has to be purchased from
The CMTS provider. So makes no sense financially to run at full capacity unless necessary.
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 21:08
|
#70
|
Sulking in the Corner
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: RG41
Services: 1 Gbps; Hub 4 MM; ASUS RT-AX88U; Ultimate VOLT. BT Infinity2; Devolo 1200AV
Posts: 11,955
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vm_tech
For additional downstream frequencies, a license has to be purchased from
The CMTS provider. So makes no sense financially to run at full capacity unless necessary.
|
That's an important pointer to the remedies in VM's capacity management toolkit.
__________________
Seph.
My advice is at your risk.
|
|
|
16-08-2017, 21:34
|
#71
|
Inactive
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 46
Posts: 13,996
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vm_tech
For additional downstream frequencies, a license has to be purchased from
The CMTS provider. So makes no sense financially to run at full capacity unless necessary.
|
Exactly. VM pay for every downstream channel they turn up. With that in mind running with the fewest feasible downstreams is a good call.
The node my property is connected to, for example, only has about a hundred premises on it right now as the build is incomplete, so runs on 16 channels. I will play my part in triggering an upgrade by subscribing to the business 'Voom' 350/20 service, waiting on the next business service to come along.
---------- Post added at 21:34 ---------- Previous post was at 21:33 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
That's an important pointer to the remedies in VM's capacity management toolkit.
|
Same for every other provider realistically.
When 24 downstream channels are inadequate for an area they will either have to split the node, which they may do via a remote PHY solution, or deliver DOCSIS 3.1 to offload heavy users from the 3.0 platform.
|
|
|
17-08-2017, 13:48
|
#72
|
FORMER Virgin Media Staff
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,737
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Isn't the idea of DOCSIS3.1 that instead of (say) 24 "large" channels, you have lots and lots of smaller channels to make better use of the available spectrum?
I wonder how that affects licensing.
|
|
|
17-08-2017, 13:56
|
#73
|
Inactive
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 46
Posts: 13,996
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
Isn't the idea of DOCSIS3.1 that instead of (say) 24 "large" channels, you have lots and lots of smaller channels to make better use of the available spectrum?
I wonder how that affects licensing.
|
On the Cisco kit at least you pay by 3.1 spectrum in use and maximum modulation:
Code:
Router# show controller integrated-cable 3/0/0 rf-port 158 verbose
Chan State Admin Mod-Type Start Width PLC Profile-ID dcid power
output
Frequency
158 UP UP OFDM 627000000 96000000 663000000 30 159 32
NORMAL
Resource status: OK
License: granted <17:02:35 EDT May 18 2016>
OFDM channel license spectrum width: 92200000
OFDM modulation license (spectrum width): 2K (6000000)
|
|
|
17-08-2017, 14:02
|
#74
|
FORMER Virgin Media Staff
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,737
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
That makes a lot more sense!
|
|
|
17-08-2017, 14:08
|
#75
|
Inactive
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire
Age: 46
Posts: 13,996
|
Re: Upstream channel bonding: Any plans to bond more than 2?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
That makes a lot more sense!
|
Indeedy.
It's all done this way as we're not that far away from not needing physical CMTS at all, all done in software, so need the ability to charge MSOs without having physical line cards for them to pay for.
Nice explanation of this at http://www.gainspeed.com/our-solutio...-architecture/
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:39.
|