Sky admits to oversubscription - Page 4

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2013, 00:21

The latter bit is a bit moot... VM don't have exchanges and congestion does not occur at the exchange level.

Chrysalis · 05-02-2013, 01:17

Qas are you saying skys own statement is wrong, the issue is with a few exchanges backhaul needing upgrades.

So yes it is at a exchange level although in some cases multiple exchanges could ab affected if in the case of a exchange been daisy chained of an affected exchange.

Whilst VM dont have exchanges they do have nodes and headends. There is no statement from VM which are affected by congestion.

qasdfdsaq · 05-02-2013, 15:43

No, I'm saying Sky have a few exchanges needing upgrades and VM have zero not because they're liars but because they have no exchanges.

05-02-2013, 18:01

Worth considering,

Some parts of sky network are suffering over subscription and the network is completely unmanaged, if sky were to introduce traffic management like say for example Virginmedia do, skys problems would disappear over night.

Some parts of the virginmedia network are suffering over subscription and the network has heavy and enforced traffic management, if virginmedia were to turn off all management like sky the network would collapse over night.

Chrysalis · 06-02-2013, 02:46

traffic management doesnt necessarily mean congestion dissapears, VM are living proof of that they have 2 forms of traffic management and have worser congestion than sky.

A big chunk of modern broadband traffic is coming from services such as netflix.

qasdfdsaq · 06-02-2013, 17:18

VM's STM is supposed to deal with things like Netflix... BT's old usage policies the same, but apparently they don't need that anymore even with BT Vision pumping down the pipes.

ssy · 12-02-2013, 15:38

I've never understood why Virgin has data caps.

Even some mobile phone companies can provide unlimited data and I'm sure if Sky can do it then why can't Virgin?

Qtx · 12-02-2013, 16:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssy

I've never understood why Virgin has data caps.

Even some mobile phone companies can provide unlimited data and I'm sure if Sky can do it then why can't Virgin?

Probably their network couldn't handle it

Were virgin the first to introduce traffic management?

Was smiling like an idiot yesterday on the train, streaming a 720 mkv from my home pc to my phone with zero buffering issues. The fact my sky home broadband upload speed is fast enough, stable enough and no limits/managements, along with unlimited data on Three mobile, meant I could stream without any loss of quality or transcoding. No data limits makes a huge difference. Could probably do the same with 1080 as the Galaxy S3 can handle it.

Not having to worry about traffic management or lowering video quality to keep within limits changes the user experience in such a positive way

Chrysalis · 12-02-2013, 18:43

Plusnet I think started the trend on TM, although VM may have been the first of the big isps to use it but not sure as was years ago when it all started.

QTX you miss STM and the congestion?

Qtx · 12-02-2013, 19:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

QTX you miss STM and the congestion?

Like a hole in the head

Once you break those shackles off you will never willingly put them back on. Nice to be congestion and limit free on sky

qasdfdsaq · 13-02-2013, 01:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssy

Even some mobile phone companies can provide unlimited data and I'm sure if Sky can do it then why can't Virgin?

There are no mobile companies that do it.

All mobile companies have traffic shaping and/or STM-like caps

---------- Post added at 01:18 ---------- Previous post was at 01:17 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Plusnet I think started the trend on TM, although VM may have been the first of the big isps to use it but not sure as was years ago when it all started.

QTX you miss STM and the congestion?

VM were pretty late with STM actually, at the time they did it BT were already capping heavy 8Mb users down to 128k at peak times.