VM Mobile customers gain access to free public WiFi via The Cloud

[qasdfdsaq]

You're thinking about it all from a 'implement it on the DOCSIS layer' perspective, which isn't the only way. They could just do what BT do, which is to just dial in a software PPP session from the router. The Superhub already has PPP capability and guest network capability, all they'd have to do is put together the right firmware (or demand Netgear do so), there's no hardware requirement for a different CPE.

There's no reason rate limiting has to be done on the CMTS side either. The original Netgear firmware is quite capable of that.

Plus since you're going to be dealing with captive portals and guest access it'd be far easier using the PPP solution and just plonking in a separate subscriber management system elsewhere than trying to integrate that all into the existing DOCSIS infrastructure. Indeed, there's plenty of free third party hardware and software that can already do all of the above, no need to make things hard for yourself

[Ignitionnet]

Per my post the issue is providing a separate pool of bandwidth for the guest network that doesn't impinge on the subscriber. That's the complication. The solution is a second service flow.

[qasdfdsaq]

Well no, it doesn't require a second service flow. Like I said, rate limiting the guest connection can easily be done on the CPE itself, had VM not removed the feature deliberately. The existing service flow already provides 15% more bandwidth than is required, adding or removing 2% from this is not complicated.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Per my post the issue is providing a separate pool of bandwidth for the guest network that doesn't impinge on the subscriber. That's the complication. The solution is a second service flow.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Well no, it doesn't require a second service flow. Like I said, rate limiting the guest connection can easily be done on the CPE itself, had VM not removed the feature deliberately. The existing service flow already provides 15% more bandwidth than is required, adding or removing 2% from this is not complicated.

Indeed, why do you need a second service flow when you can just provision the existing service flow to have more bandwidth so the customer still gets their full connection? Why can't a customer on 152meg get provisioned for 180mbit and have the CPE limit to the 160ish that it is now, leaving a completely separate pool for the extra bandwidth?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Well no, it doesn't require a second service flow. Like I said, rate limiting the guest connection can easily be done on the CPE itself, had VM not removed the feature deliberately. The existing service flow already provides 15% more bandwidth than is required, adding or removing 2% from this is not complicated.

Can the device both rate limit the WAN and have a lower rate guest connection that doesn't use the WAN rate limit?

[qasdfdsaq]

I'm not sure why the device would have to rate limit the WAN, the WAN rate limit is already applied at the CMTS? Regardless I see no reason why it wouldn't be able to, most QoS implementations can do it.

[Ignitionnet]

I think I'm not making my point, which is a pretty specific one, very well so will leave this be.

[qasdfdsaq]

Indeed, I don't get what your point is, I fail to see what is so difficult about siphoning off a couple megabits from a connection that is already overprovisioned by dozens of megabits.