dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
111
share rss forum feed
ncwred

join:2014-01-31
Austin, TX

DOCSIS 3.1?

Won't 200/20 and 300/20 require DOCSIS 3.1 modems? I know DOCSIS 3.0 can do these speeds on paper, but I'm not sure if in reality they'll do that.

I have a SB6141 which can do 343Mbit down supposedly. (8 channels.)

I'm in Austin and will hopefully have choices for 1 Gps:
AT&T
Google
Grande

Life is good.

djrobx
Premium
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VOIPO

Re: DOCSIS 3.1?


said by ncwred:

Won't 200/20 and 300/20 require DOCSIS 3.1 modems? I know DOCSIS 3.0 can do these speeds on paper, but I'm not sure if in reality they'll do that.

They'll probably need modems that do 16 channel bonding. 8 channel bonding can do 304mbps but those channels are shared with other subscribers, you'd never see full speed.

motorola870

join:2008-12-07
Arlington, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

Re: DOCSIS 3.1?

said by djrobx:

said by ncwred:

Won't 200/20 and 300/20 require DOCSIS 3.1 modems? I know DOCSIS 3.0 can do these speeds on paper, but I'm not sure if in reality they'll do that.

They'll probably need modems that do 16 channel bonding. 8 channel bonding can do 304mbps but those channels are shared with other subscribers, you'd never see full speed.

confirmed 16x4 modems will be needed someone has posted in the TWC forums showing more than 8 channels on the downstream active in their node along with 4 upstream channels
davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:3
Technically no, they can do it now with D3.0 modems if they have enough channels dedicated to broadband for the number of subscribers per node. That 343Mbps is full of overhead stuff, your net is about 304Mbps. With the new 16 and 24 channel bonding they can theoretically do 608Mbps and 912Mbps. There may be one more bump left to be developed in the latest Puma chip which could give 32 channel bonding, which would theoretically give 1216Mbps. I think the cable companies are depending on D3.1 modem architecture for data transfer rates higher than that and there will be no larger numbers of downstream channels bonded under D3.0 than 32. Upstream under D3.0 will likely remain at 8 channels or 216Mbps to the end of D3.0

ATX guy

@rr.com
AT&T gets a bad wrap in the article. AT&T has deployed gigapower and they deployed it all over the Austin RR area. They have hit all of the new subdivisions popping up over the city. Google is not server if Austin until later this year and they haven't even stated where they will be in Austin. Kudos to AT&T for being first and doing a good job with it. I currently have TWC and while the service has been reliable I'm concerned that it took them this long to respond in the Austin market. I'm in contract for a new home. Gigapower is being installed. TWC while not bad lost a faithful signature Home customer with lack of vision and communication. Sure Att didn't start anything until after google announced they were coming to Austin but ATT will be 7 months ahead and 10s of thousands of customers a head of Google. Maybe google will do fine in the Austin market. What I know is that competition is good. Even with grande twc google and att announcing their speeds at best you may have two of this options where you love in Austin. Good luck.
ncwred

join:2014-01-31
Austin, TX

Re: DOCSIS 3.1?

gigapower is only available in a handful of places. We'll see what ATT plan is, but I'm skeptical it'll be widely available, since U-verse is only available in a limited number of places. I can only get 3Mbit DSL where I live, right next to UT Austin.

»whitepaperclip.com/gigamap/
malletto

join:2009-01-03
Purcellville, VA
Haha, i know people who have UVerse in the austin area, they hate it. I would NEVER go with AT&T for internet/TV.

motorola870

join:2008-12-07
Arlington, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
said by ATX guy :

AT&T gets a bad wrap in the article. AT&T has deployed gigapower and they deployed it all over the Austin RR area. They have hit all of the new subdivisions popping up over the city. Google is not server if Austin until later this year and they haven't even stated where they will be in Austin. Kudos to AT&T for being first and doing a good job with it. I currently have TWC and while the service has been reliable I'm concerned that it took them this long to respond in the Austin market. I'm in contract for a new home. Gigapower is being installed. TWC while not bad lost a faithful signature Home customer with lack of vision and communication. Sure Att didn't start anything until after google announced they were coming to Austin but ATT will be 7 months ahead and 10s of thousands of customers a head of Google. Maybe google will do fine in the Austin market. What I know is that competition is good. Even with grande twc google and att announcing their speeds at best you may have two of this options where you love in Austin. Good luck.

hmm that isn't the entire service area. TWC is deploying 300/20 in all areas not just FTTH areas like At&t is not to mention At&t has a lot of copper areas still in Austin and surrounding areas.

kpfx

join:2005-10-28
San Antonio, TX

1 edit
It can work with 3.0 as it stands. There's no limit in the spec as to how many channels you can bond, its just based on what hardware is available now with most being the 4x4 and 8x4 variants.

However, typical residential nodes will have about 50-100 cable modems, but you can also segment the devices into separate downstream groups (i.e. half the modems connect to channels 145-152, the other half to 153-160). So in that scenario you're looking at a shared 343 Mbps across 25-50 residential users.

Not sure what % of people actually sign up for the fastest 300 Mbps tier since I'd wager most users will be 10x1, 50x5 or 100x10.

And then there's the SCDMA-TDMA which is more efficient when compared to straight Ethernet so your overhead is much lower. If utilization grows above 80% during peak times then its just a matter of segmenting more users to another block of channels.

If course if they wanted to offer more than 300 Mbps to an end user then yes, hardware that can bond more than 8 channels will be needed.

why60loss

join:2012-09-20
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Time Warner Cable
said by ncwred:

Won't 200/20 and 300/20 require DOCSIS 3.1 modems? I know DOCSIS 3.0 can do these speeds on paper, but I'm not sure if in reality they'll do that.

I have a SB6141 which can do 343Mbit down supposedly. (8 channels.)

I'm in Austin and will hopefully have choices for 1 Gps:
AT&T
Google
Grande

Life is good.

Guess sponge bob can't go around and say dumb old Texas anymore. I thought it was funny at the time, but I guess now NC looks like they are full of the dumb and old.

At lest google may save us from the time warner cable of doom.

Lin

@rr.com
I wonder if you'll have to use their routers or if you'll still be able to use your own.

motorola870

join:2008-12-07
Arlington, TX
kudos:4
DOCSIS 3.0

16 downstreams 4 upstreams being bonded