100M : VM Throttle VPN's?!?!?!

[Sephiroth]

I can't think of any reason for sarcasm on my part. It's a pity you thought that. I see, however, that you're still there with the uncalled for barbs (the pedantic remark).

The aim of my question was curiosity as to whtehr or not in your case, it was FTTP. Because then, this community would be very interested in your keeping in touch, I would thik.

The "Virgin Media Fibre" thing is that I believe the ASA had words with about their claims as to Fibre Optic Broadband and the VM web site doesn't herald fibre optics as far as I can see. The VM HFC technology is moderately superior to Openreach's copper pair path to the cabinet. I say moderately, because FTTC hs fibre to each cabinet whereas VM aggregate coax to fibre at a local optical node. So HFC is better than FTTC in cases where the distance run of telephone copper to the FTTC causes adverse attenuation.

I don't have a firm date for FTTP oin my area although BT's web site says "orders being taken" but there's no online mechanism for placing the order. When I do go FTTP (as will others), there'll be keen interest to make comparisons with other FTTP offerings and with VM HFC.

So that's whwre I'm coming from. Innocent technical interest. My position on throttling has never changed; under present infrastructure, I want VM to throttle mega-downloaders so my humble access to the internet isn't destroyed.

[Qtx]

Do any of the main isp's actually offer FTTP to home users on any of their main signup pages? I have not seen a rush of people saying on the forums that they have had FTTP installed, probably because next to no one has it. So it makes your question appear very strange.

I wasn't aware that VM was not allowed to advertise their product as fibre any more. Seems pretty silly.

Not so bothered with FTTP at this point in time. If the FTTC gives me a stable connection and it stays stable, that is enough.

My position is VM need to upgrade parts of their network before it gets congested, rather than a year after problems have started.

I won't respond to the other sly dig.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I can't think of any reason for sarcasm on my part. It's a pity you thought that. I see, however, that you're still there with the uncalled for barbs (the pedantic remark).

The aim of my question was curiosity as to whtehr or not in your case, it was FTTP. Because then, this community would be very interested in your keeping in touch, I would thik.

The "Virgin Media Fibre" thing is that I believe the ASA had words with about their claims as to Fibre Optic Broadband and the VM web site doesn't herald fibre optics as far as I can see. The VM HFC technology is moderately superior to Openreach's copper pair path to the cabinet. I say moderately, because FTTC hs fibre to each cabinet whereas VM aggregate coax to fibre at a local optical node. So HFC is better than FTTC in cases where the distance run of telephone copper to the FTTC causes adverse attenuation.

I don't have a firm date for FTTP oin my area although BT's web site says "orders being taken" but there's no online mechanism for placing the order. When I do go FTTP (as will others), there'll be keen interest to make comparisons with other FTTP offerings and with VM HFC.

So that's whwre I'm coming from. Innocent technical interest. My position on throttling has never changed; under present infrastructure, I want VM to throttle mega-downloaders so my humble access to the internet isn't destroyed.

Seph I disagree, I think the openreach tech is now at an advantage to VM. The tables have turned. Consider also FTTC area is now effectively FTTP as well, at least from next year anyway when they start the FTTPod.

---------- Post added at 18:05 ---------- Previous post was at 18:04 ----------

Originally Posted by Qtx

Do any of the main isp's actually offer FTTP to home users on any of their main signup pages? I have not seen a rush of people saying on the forums that they have had FTTP installed, probably because next to no one has it. So it makes your question appear very strange.

I wasn't aware that VM was not allowed to advertise their product as fibre any more. Seems pretty silly.

Not so bothered with FTTP at this point in time. If the FTTC gives me a stable connection and it stays stable, that is enough.

My position is VM need to upgrade parts of their network before it gets congested, rather than a year after problems have started.

I won't respond to the other sly dig.

How much of VMs local loop is coax? in comparison to a FTTC local loop copper length.

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

How much of VMs local loop is coax? in comparison to a FTTC local loop copper length.

I was going to mention that in my previous post but couldn't be arsed to point it out to Seph as he would have been already aware, just like the other questions he already knew the answer

With so many cabinets joined by coax before hitting a node, another bottleneck area for virgin.

[qasdfdsaq]

Before this drops into another good ol' BT vs VM argument...

Last I was told VM's traffic shaping operated on a whitelist basis. Has this changed?