 odogCable Centric Vendor BiasedPremium,VIP
join:2001-08-05
Atlanta, GA
kudos:5
 ·Comcast
| reply to Jerm
Re: Yeah Considering most upstreams are only running in D1.1 3.2MHz QAM16 and thus limited to 10Mbps using a D2.0 6.4MHz 64QAM upstream and a 4 X 256QAM downstream you'd have 160Mbps down/30Mbps up shared among 500-600 users. Upstream channel bonding is definitely going to be killer but traffic is still asymmetrical to the net so downstream is MUCH more important. |
|
| Well said. Of course, we're assuming their plant is clean enough to run QAM64 returns (which is probably a safe assumption since they're spending time and money on pre-cert DOCSIS 3.0 gear in the first place). Nevertheless, there are still plenty of modems out there chugging along with QPSK!
- Tate
--
Happiness is an OC-48 in your basement... |
|
odogCable Centric Vendor BiasedPremium,VIP
join:2001-08-05
Atlanta, GA
kudos:5 | I prefer to call QPSK... QAM4, but hey that's just my glass half full mind seeing the bright side of things. |
|
AquaSportCalifornia - Sun, Surf, Traffic Jams
join:2007-05-03
California | reply to odog
Re: Yeah said by odog:Considering most upstreams are only running in D1.1 3.2MHz QAM16 and thus limited to 10Mbps using a D2.0 6.4MHz 64QAM upstream and a 4 X 256QAM downstream you'd have 160Mbps down/30Mbps up shared among 500-600 users. Upstream channel bonding is definitely going to be killer but traffic is still asymmetrical to the net so downstream is MUCH more important. English, please.
--
Out with the old, in with the Antique! 
***********
"Hey, have you heard the song... 'Bomb Iran?' *bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Ir...* n - never mind..." - John McCain |
|
