Sanek
join:2006-08-10
Kanata, ON | Rogers Upstream Bonding Some people have been saying that Rogers cannot provide upsteam bonding because certain frequencies are taken by some channels on the analog cable, but I was skeptical, so I decided to check the standards for both DOCSIS and North American Analog Cable Television Frequencies.
DOCSIS spec uses 5MHz-42MHz for its upstream frequency range. Rogers is using QAM64 for the upstream channels, which means that each channel is 3.2 MHz wide, which means there is enough room for say 11 upstream channels.
Unless Rogers has any Subband channels, I don't see how anything would be interfering with the analog cable. Lowband channels start at 55.25MHz, which is after the DOCSIS upstream frequency range.
I know I have not seen any Subband channels, so unless I'm missing something, I don't see whats stopping Rogers here.
Granted that I'm not an expert on this, so sorry if I screwed something up  |
|
 HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:17
 ·TekSavvy Cable
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| Rogers currently uses QAM16 for upstream. I did hear somewhere that they will be upgrading to QAM64.
Whether it translates to upstream channel bonding and faster upload speeds being offered, who knows.
--
BUCK FELL. From UBB to AVP. Same wolf in sheep's clothing. |
|
 sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to Sanek
Although the spec does permit 5-42 MHz, this range is splattered with RF noise from shortwave transmitters of many sorts and RF generated by things like dimmers, fluorescent lamps ... all manner of electical interference. This is why when cable modems fail, they usually fail because of signal levels on the upstream path rather than the downstream The selected range is normally just above 30 MHz being one of the "quieter" parts of the spectrum.
Rogers currently uses 16 QAM on its upstream path to keep noise problems to a minimum. To use higher modulation standards would mean it would be even more sensitive to noise.
Some MSOs with relatively new installations of neighbourhood cable plant can increase to higher QAM depth, but Rogers is a very mixed bag when it comes to cable plant. Some areas are comparatively new, and some are very old. Most MSOs are looking to move to the frequencies above 50MHz because they are quieter once released from TV use. |
|
Sanek
join:2006-08-10
Kanata, ON | reply to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:Rogers currently uses QAM16 for upstream. I did hear somewhere that they will be upgrading to QAM64.
Whether it translates to upstream channel bonding and faster upload speeds being offered, who knows.
Are you sure? I'm using an SB6121 modem on TSI at the moment and it's reporting QAM64 2.560 Msym/sec as far as I can tell... |
|
HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:17 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by Sanek:Are you sure? I'm using an SB6121 modem on TSI at the moment and it's reporting QAM64 2.560 Msym/sec as far as I can tell...
Ah, perhaps you're on a test segment for 64QAM... I'm on TSI as well on a SB6120 and it's showing this:
Upstream Modulation
[3] QPSK
[5] 16QAM
--
BUCK FELL. From UBB to AVP. Same wolf in sheep's clothing. |
|
sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 | I would be surprised if most of Rogers network would support 64 QAM on the upstream ... just too much ingress. |
|
HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:17 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| First report of upstream bonding, TSI customer on SB6120 in Thornhill.
»[Cable] Upstream Bonding
--
BUCK FELL. From UBB to AVP. Same wolf in sheep's clothing. |
|
|
|
Sanek
join:2006-08-10
Kanata, ON | reply to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:said by Sanek:Are you sure? I'm using an SB6121 modem on TSI at the moment and it's reporting QAM64 2.560 Msym/sec as far as I can tell...
Ah, perhaps you're on a test segment for 64QAM... I'm on TSI as well on a SB6120 and it's showing this: Upstream Modulation [3] QPSK [5] 16QAM »img171.imageshack.us/img171/4690···6121.png
FLFLD POI (Kanata) |
|
HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:17 | Cool. Who knows what Rogers is working on.
BTW, excellent stats. |
|
sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 | reply to Sanek
Interesting ... not on my cable segment! :-( |
|
| I have upload bonding enabled here too. |
|
| No bonding here in High Park yet.
You guys with bonding on - you seeing any improvement in upload speeds? |
|
Sanek
join:2006-08-10
Kanata, ON | said by SimplePanda:No bonding here in High Park yet.
You guys with bonding on - you seeing any improvement in upload speeds?
I believe there would not be any upload speed improvements until Rogers pushes down new profiles. This is profile-limited. This should help with congestion though, in case someone had a slower upload speed (although thats usually not the case with 1Mbit upload). |
|
| upload speeds are going to be increasing VERY soon, watch your bill notices:) |
|
| Do I need the new cisco modem for channel bonding?? I have not exchange the smc modem. Yesterday I look at the cable status through smc, it still shows only one channel which it is channel 1. |
|
resa1983Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:7 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
| said by nhs ice:Do I need the new cisco modem for channel bonding?? I have not exchange the smc modem. Yesterday I look at the cable status through smc, it still shows only one channel which it is channel 1.
Rogers pushed firmware to SB6120s last week. This is probably the reason why they did it. We're test subjects. When they're ready for everyone, I'm sure they'll enable it on the crappy SMCs. |
|
| reply to Sanek
So, wait, if Rogers increases upload speeds significantly, say to 25/10 or even 25/5, won't that kind of destroy their rationale for throttling the upload on P2P?
I think it's pretty obvious that Rogers isn't going to suddenly volunteer to remove throttling. So how are they going to continue to justify it when the upload speeds are no longer so constrained?
--
www.LaconicReply.com - Tech/photography/rant blog |
|
sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 | They'll increase it to probably double but that leaves it in the same situation it was in with 1 channel. |
|
| reply to static416
There's more to the internet than just P2P. Faster upload speeds benefit people who upload files to sites like Flikr or all the cloud computing where files need to be in synch. There's also improvements for those who like to RDP to their desktop. I personally benefit from my 7 meg upload (on Fibe 25) for my Slingbox, as anything over 3 mbps provides a clear HD stream. I dumped Rogers because they couldn't offer the 7 meg upload, but would jump back once they did (even at 5 meg). I liked them and usually offer better retention deals compared to Bell where I pay full price! |
|
| said by wysiwyg1972:There's more to the internet than just P2P. Oh I completely agree. I incrementally backup my 350GB photo library to an offsite location using VPN and a filesync program. I also back it up to a cloud service, and both would benefit from faster upload. Watch movies while I travel on my 3G iPad that are streamed on the fly from my home computer. All these would benefit from a better upload.
Thing is bittorrent and P2P are useful for a lot of purposes other than just the obvious (piracy). Wuala lets you get credits for cloud storage in exchange for contributing storage via P2P. Lots of indie music and movies are legitimately distributed via P2P. »sites.google.com/site/sxswtorrent/
»vodo.net/
But right now, because P2P is effectively killed on Rogers, they basically preventing a huge portion of the population from taking advantage of the benefits of distributed file sharing. And until P2P is protected on all ISPs, legitimate companies are going to be hesitant to rely on it for their business.
--
www.LaconicReply.com - Tech/photography/rant blog |
|
