50M Should i worry? - Page 4

Chrysalis · 02-10-2011, 12:58

I stand corrected on the 27mbit I thought QAM64 doubled QAM16. So that would put at nearer 60%, and yes the % will have variances as its only an average figure but my point was if you got 10mbit users on a 18mbit channel then a single user can swing the utilisation by 60%, thats just scary.

Now you have corrected me on the QAM64 I now feel the minimal that should be used is 2xQAM16 or 2xQAM64. They seem to be realising that the same issue on the downstream isnt ideal (hence them adding downstreams) but are prepared to let the upstream suffer.

Regardless of how many torrent I still feel a user uploading out of 200 is more than a remote possibility, that comment had no reference to torrent users. People do other things like speedtests, uploading videos, pictures, streaming that can max out upstream bandwidth. We even have the trend now of people starting hosting companies on their cable connections because VM for some bizzare reason didnt add anything to their t&c's forbidding non gaming servers.

I agree with you on reducing users, but that is in my view is less effective than increasing pipe size. Also evident is that some areas clearly havent had users reduced much with 100s of users sharing upstream channels. That is not a low number. I would consider something like 10 users on my channel been low not 200. Better to have 100 sharing 54mbit than say 20 sharing 18mbit.

Skie · 02-10-2011, 13:43

I'm expecting some heavy downloading over the next few months. Loads of huge games coming out via steam or other digital distribution methods. Rage alone is 25GB. I'm Betting Skyrim will be just as big, and there are plenty of other titles due soon.

So even if people weren't using torrents to watch the new season of American TV shows, you can assume bandwidth usage will be increasing. Here is my own monthly usage :o

Code:

Date	Download	Upload	Total
2011-10	9.66 GB 	2.06 GB 	11.72 GB
2011-09	87.69 GB	12.57 GB	100.26 GB
2011-08	128.92 GB	21.07 GB	149.99 GB
2011-07	94.34 GB	18.06 GB	112.40 GB
2011-06	73.86 GB	15.22 GB	89.08 GB
2011-05	70.65 GB	13.08 GB	83.73 GB

Ignitionnet · 02-10-2011, 13:56

64QAM = 6 bits per symbol, 16QAM = 4, 50% increase, exponential.

The real world sadly isn't as accommodating as just adding channels. RF noise and network restrictions can restrict the amount of usable bandwidth, upstream bonding is still not a finished article within the software on the Cisco and Motorola CMTS and carries its own restrictions, along with how the various CPE interoperate.

Statistical contention through wider channels is the ideal but gives its own issues, node splits are good for bandwidth and good for network condition due to noise funneling effects, higher order modulations require smaller nodes.

Unsure what you refer to by letting the upstream suffer, given that the uplifts were released on a single upstream and a second and depending on the area third channel have been put in place, however VM know they are behind the curve in some areas.

It's not ideal, work on bonding is underway, but we can debate ideals all we want, the real world is a bitch and constantly interferes, depending on area channels can house a lot of 3Mb, 5Mb, 10Mb upstream customers even on 18Mb without causing problems.

It's never as simple as on paper, what you feel is the minimal really isn't, very few MSOs have upstream bonding widely deployed, for example these guys and these guys don't and UPC sell 120Mb/10Mb on 4 x 256QAM down, 1 x 16QAM up, Comhem 200Mb/10Mb on 5 or 6 x 256QAM down and 1 x 16 or 64QAM up.

Chrysalis · 02-10-2011, 16:04

Well I was already aware of the planned bonding.

You have now told me the traffic management is due to change (I hope soon).

So I will leave it at that for now and see if things get better.

vmfriend · 02-10-2011, 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyCalling

Oh no, you don't get away with falsely accusing people of criminality that easily.

Whatever your view is, whatever your or my ethical position is, downloading copyrighted material is still not illegal. Criminal law has nothing to do with it. You might just about say it is illicit (though since the advent of tape recorders that is debatable), but it is certainly not illegal. You can pretend all you like, but it won't make it so. This is not a point of view, it is the current state of the law in this country. It has been discussed to death all over the internet so you know it, I know it, we all know it.

Why then would you come on to a forum and claim otherwise, accusing people of criminality when you know your claims have no foundation, knowing it will just wind people up? Are you saying it is not for trolling purposes? If so please explain your reasoning, since you're so fond of reasoned discussion.

I am not a legal expert, I was under the impression that downloading copyrighted material without paying for it was illegal under the terms of copyright infringement. However if that impression is incorrect then I stand corrected.

Kymmy · 02-10-2011, 17:55

Not illegal as only the copyright holder can take you to court via a civil case. Now piracy (making money through copyright infringement) is illegal.

General Maximus · 02-10-2011, 19:29

buuuuuuuuuut, look at this hypothetical sceniario:

I pay for my tv license and pay for Sky. Ming mongs like my sister who don't have a tv because they don't want to pay for a license watch stuff on channel and bbc on demand (or whatever they are called) for free on their pc.

I decide I am going out tonight and will miss Greys Anatomy and the X Factor so I download it off torrents tomorrow so i can watch it at my convenience.

Where is the problem in that? I am paying to watch stuff that is on tv but I am downloading it instead yet you have got people who don't pay who watch it online (terrestrial channels)?

I would apply the same to any tv series, current or old. Terra Nova is a new sci-fi series which started last week in the US. Hypothetically speaking, I have no problem whatsoever downloading it and watching it now, knowing that I am paying for it come on Sky some time soon and that I will buy it on dvd when it get released. The same can be said over the years for Buffy, Star Trek, Stargate, Alias, 24 and I could go and on and on.

Chrysalis · 03-10-2011, 08:29

Maximus there is no real issue in that other than you have removed control from the copyright holders

I have figured out now copyright is not just about maintaining profit, its also about control. Its used to control content that isnt even generating revenue.

This is why I have said a few times now I think copyright is out of control and far beyond its original concept.

The original idea of copyright was to protect the earning rights for the creator of the content, nothing more. It originally expired after only a few years rather than the lifetime they have now, and it was never used on free content or content that wasnt available for sale.

How times have changed eh.

It will be interesting to see if these companies carry on adding copy protection to media after the laws are passed that will specifically allow people to make personal copies of media they have paid for.