 | | Dcsis 3.0 I have a Docsis 3.0 modem but I don't have COX's ultimate package because I don't want to pay $100 a month for internet. | |
|
 | |
|  acid343211Hallo lisa Aus AmerikaPremium
join:2001-08-31
Byron, GA | said by jchambers28:I have a Docsis 3.0 modem but I don't have COX's ultimate package because I don't want to pay $100 a month for internet. I don't Blame you one bit!!!!!!
--
Support
»www.minutemanproject.com/ | |
|
 jsimmonsPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-24
Falls Church, VA
1 edit | Improved upstream speed more important Personally, I don't need the ultimate package. Premier at 50/5 is fine for now. I'm more interested in seeing existing tiers improved to something closer to symmetric speeds.
I have Cox and a D3 modem. The real advantage for now with 3 bonded channels is much more consistent performance and higher connection stability. That counts for a lot too.
--
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler."
- Albert Einstein
| |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Improved upstream speed more important said by jsimmons:I have Cox and a D3 modem. The real advantage for now with 3 bonded channels is much more consistent performance and higher connection stability. That counts for a lot too. D3 *isn't* a magic bullet in a loaded node situation.
I pay for 50/5 and get about half that on both upload/download on the latest firmware for the 6120.
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 |  Channel bonding extra benefit - consistent speeds
I would like to see docsis 3 channel bonding upstream. Not because I need more upstream speed, but because I would then get that speed consistently.
--
»news.yahoo.com/page/2010election···ashboard
»fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
| |
|
|
| | | Re: High speed low caps bologna. said by Mr Matt:  Cable ISP's will continue to try to up sell customers to higher speeds while implementing CAPS to protect their Pay TV revenue. CAPS will make using high speed service prohibitively expensive for a customer that tries to use it's full capabilities. Furthermore Telephone will have to rebuild their entire network with systems like AT&T's U-Verse and Verizon's FiOS in order to remain competitive. Telephone might be sitting on the side lines hoping that most customers will go to wireless broadband and since AT&T and Verizon is assigned most of the wireless bandwidth they have delayed upgrading their wired networks indefinitely. Right now that might be the only option.
--
»news.yahoo.com/page/2010election···assboard
»fiveeightthirty.blogs.nytimes.com/
| |
|
| cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | I don't see why AT&T exec's and shareholders cannot see how much money they're wasting on u-verse by trying to continue to prop up decades old copper infrastructure. DSL is at the end of the rope. U-verse has a serious distance limit - 4000ft, and the speeds are already behind the times - 32/5. | |
|
| | dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: High speed low caps bologna. said by cramer:I don't see why AT&T exec's and shareholders cannot see how much money they're wasting on u-verse by trying to continue to prop up decades old copper infrastructure. DSL is at the end of the rope. U-verse has a serious distance limit - 4000ft, and the speeds are already behind the times - 32/5. slower than that if you're watching TV!
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
| | Upstream bandwidth Early upstream bonding trials have not gone as well as the industry had hoped, which is one reason we're not seeing widespread deployments. The other reason is because we're still waiting to see upstream demand take off. It hasn't happened yet, but when it does, it will likely happen very rapidly. Here's more from Motorola on predicting upstream requirements: »connectedhome2go.com/2010/11/01/···pstream/
Disclosure- I write the Motorola blog linked here. | |
|
| | | Re: Upstream bandwidth said by Mari :Early upstream bonding trials have not gone as well as the industry had hoped, which is one reason we're not seeing widespread deployments. The other reason is because we're still waiting to see upstream demand take off. It hasn't happened yet, but when it does, it will likely happen very rapidly. Here's more from Motorola on predicting upstream requirements: » connectedhome2go.com/2010/11/01/···pstream/Demand is created by popular applications that use large upstream bandwidth. If no one has high upstream, why would anyone write applications using it? Back in dial-up days there was no demand for video or radio either. It's not that hard to figure it out. Disclosure- I write the Motorola blog linked here. | |
|
| | We might see 5Mbps by 2020 SE Cable and PTD is pathetic with the upload speed. 30 meg down but 2 meg up! | |
|
| | | Re: We might see 5Mbps by 2020 Also they are only using 16QAM 3.2 MHz channels. Some area's might still be on pathetic QPSK as well!
I'm on DOCSIS 3 with SECV, 4 downstream and 1 16QAM upstream. They've been working on the system for a few years, infact today on my way to work I saw a team with a cable lasher running new lines on the existing strand. Lots of amplifier guts were swapped out in the past 3 years, and new nodes were put in. Thousands of miles of cable have been replaced as well. I'm getting great signals, so it shows. With all that new stuff, hopefully they throw the switch on 64QAM upstream and do some multiple channels. They are using an Arris C4 CMTS, so not sure if that can do upstream bonding out of the box. If not, they could still run 2 upstreams and balance modems to effectively load balance each node group. | |
|
| | Upstream I guess cablevision has been better then most when it comes to this. Their packages are 15/2, 30/5 and 100/15.
cablevision is working on replacement boxes and streaming dvr. Also they are now distributing docsis 3 modems to boost users also. I dont think the tech is the reason for slow upstream adoption. I think opening up channels and spending their resources on the video end are taking up the time.
Also keep in mind verizon greatly reduced their fios rollout so cable only has to compete with dsl in a lot of areas. Heck here on long island we dont have fios in many areas but have 100/15 available through cablevision in all areas. | |
|
|  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: Upstream said by majortom1029:I guess cablevision has been better then most when it comes to this. Their packages are 15/2, 30/5 and 100/15. Note that at the current time CV is using the SB6120/SBV6120 which is a 4D/4U modem but is provisioned with 3 Down and 1 Up Channel. They are, apparently, starting to hand out Webstar 8D/4U modems but (I'd assume) still only provisioning them as 3D/1U. There is a newer Motorola 8D/4U modem available but I do not know if CV is using it. | |
|
| | | | Re: Upstream Actually they're using the Cisco DPQ3212 which is 8 downstream/4 upstream as I have one and it's in circulation currently. | |
|
| | | RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: Upstream said by kickass69:Actually they're using the Cisco DPQ3212 which is 8 downstream/4 upstream as I have one and it's in circulation currently. OOPS. Wrong Brand - Cisco not Webstar. As I noted there is a newer Motorola D3 modem that also is 8D/4U.
BTW: Is your modem also locked against the use of DOCSDIAG to view the settings/etc? | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Upstream Yes unfortuantely it is. I had a self owned SB5120 which of course is DOCSIS 2.0 and had full access to DOCSDIAG on that one. There needs to be a updated version of DOCSDIAG to view the internal info on DOCSIS 3.0 modems. | |
|
 fcislerPremium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY | versus DSL its amazing.... dsl can come up with 64 gigabits down/825 kbit up.... in a lab with 16,000 millimeters of the purest copper from seventy miles deep under Tanzania....
While puny cable ONLY comes out with SOFTWARE updates to a technology that people are USING everyday.... dumb investment...
/sarcasm off
This is why I like cable. Half of the stuff they develop is enhancements for existing hardware that companies have deployed.... not new qwerxzyrxDSL which is limited to 19 feet LOS and no manufacturer will buy. What's currently the best dsl being deployed - vdsl2? Whatever ATT is using for their uverse? It's got less capacity that one single non bonded cable channel.... | |
|
| | progress too co$tly the technology and the providers don't want consumers to use the service for video which is the real application. competition is really scant... lots of marketing to get subscribers, little of value offered on the other end. do better. | |
|
 Killa200Premium
join:2005-12-02
Southeast TN | Frequency The biggest feat to getting this upstream bonding in the works is getting free and clear spectrum in the low band. That is one heck of an animal to deal with. | |
|
|  eyetack
join:2002-09-05
Leicester, MA | Re: Frequency I was about to bring this up, but I am glad someone beat me to it.
Ingress interference is the biggest pain in the rear end on the return path. Public safety radio, CB, Ham Radio, and a few others can really make ingress very difficult to deal with, especially on older parts of the system. I've seen upstream frequencies get bounced around depending on where the interference lies. The plant needs to be kept in near pristine condition to run at full bore. | |
|
| | Killa200Premium
join:2005-12-02
Southeast TN | Re: Frequency Not to mention a good deal of the return path is passive, depending solely on the power from the modem to make it down the line to the node or directly to the head end depending on plant location and size. | |
|
| cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | Technically, they can use any channel for upstream. However, most of the aging infrastructure isn't designed for higher frequency return paths. It's only made worse by the crap people install in their homes. For example, the cheap amp I use has a return path up to 50MHz only. | |
|
| | Killa200Premium
join:2005-12-02
Southeast TN Reviews:
 ·Charter
| Re: Frequency The issue your going to run into there is modems in deployments. Your common and most popular docsis 3 modem, the Motorola SB6120, is only capable of doing 5 - 65 mhz edge to edge on the upstream frequency broadcast. The dime a dozen Ubee U10C035 that carriers are handing out only handles 5 - 42mhz.
Moto's flagship chassis receive card, BSR 64000 RX48, only handles receiving at 5 - 85mhz. Most other chassis's less than that.
Point is there still isn't much as far as channel choices to use for the upstream side. Sure you could up and down convert all day long at the head end, nodes, and leg segments to get the 'any channel for upstream" that you want, but how much are you willing to sacrifice on your monthly bill for that luxury? | |
|
| | | cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | Re: Frequency As I said, it's deeper in the network than that... all the nodes, amps, and switching gear hanging on poles, burried in ditches, etc. was never designed for high frequency return -- in fact it's the opposite to keep noise out of the system. Long standing specs and industry practices have always used low range channels (that weren't very well suited for [analog] TV), so gear was only designed to support that.
(Higher freq means more expensive transmitter hardware.) | |
|
| | | | | said by Killa200:The issue your going to run into there is modems in deployments. Your common and most popular docsis 3 modem, the Motorola SB6120, is only capable of doing 5 - 65 mhz edge to edge on the upstream frequency broadcast. The dime a dozen Ubee U10C035 that carriers are handing out only handles 5 - 42mhz. The U10C035 is the same Ti chipset as the 6120 but the radios must be different. Honestly, in my testing for 100meg I found the Ubee modem the better of the two at the time. Things might have changed now with mature firmware. We need more broadcom modems on the market. | |
|
 pokesphIt Is Almost FastPremium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1 | upstream More importantly, will the major cable co's buy into it?
As a Comcast sub, I can only hope (and hope they decide to up our upload speeds free or at low cost (would love to see 50/25, 20/20 or similar) | |
|
| dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: upstream said by pokesph:More importantly, will the major cable co's buy into it? nope. that would put LUCRATIVE biz packages at risk.
--
The shortest distance between 2 points adds 1.5 stars to T. want $25? solve »coord.info/GC20A37 for me | |
|
 ARGONAUTgot android?Premium
join:2006-01-24
New Albany, IN
kudos:1 | Show us the $ Lets see the cost of this speed. | |
|
Gflo
join:2009-06-25
Oxford, GA | Stop complaining I'm still stuck with 3000/384 from AT&T | |
|
though
join:2003-12-03
Lincoln, NE | Faster unless your provider is Time Warner Cable UGH! | |
|
| | Faster docsis 3 up in 2011 Since we are all by the looks of everyones' articles on limits set by the ISPs, whatever happened to the days of getting g the most of of your modem? What are we always capped, limited, throttled--- good, better, best nonsense demands me of heavy duty batteries. Just have one speed tier that is fast up and down and cut all the nonsense! Such a backwards country at times! Whatever happened to America being the best. Donald trump is right...tax all Chinese goods at 25% is a great idea. There is no reason why we cant have faster upstreaming. Anyone who believes otherwise is just mislead docsis 3, 2 pr even 1.1 | |
|
u3912974
join:2007-07-31
San Francisco, CA | Since we are all by the looks of everyones' articles on limits set by the ISPs, whatever happened to the days of getting g the most of of your modem? What are we always capped, limited, throttled--- good, better, best nonsense demands me of heavy duty batteries. Just have one speed tier that is fast up and down and cut all the nonsense! Such a backwards country at times! Whatever happened to America being the best. Donald trump is right...tax all Chinese goods at 25% is a great idea. There is no reason why we cant have faster upstreaming. Anyone who believes otherwise is just mislead docsis 3, 2 pr even 1.1 | |
|
| Reviews:
·Cox HSI
1 edit | Upstream channel bonding doesn't.. Matter if your ISP is not puting 64QAM to use yet. I mean whats the point in upgrading to 64QAM 5.12Msym rate, and only use your getting out of it is powerboost? I am happy for this new D3 system, and it being able to provide more speed. I just don't understand spending money to upgrade for faster speeds, But not use whats there.
When I say this, I am talking about my ISP Cox. Which is upgrading more, and more areas to 64QAM upstreams, But no signs of any kind of upstream speed increases. I mean there 50mbps tier still 5mbps up. When it could easily be 10mbps for there top tier, in the markets who have 64QAM available for you. As of right now it looks like upstream channel bonding will be deployed before any upstream speed increases.
I can say, Atleast Comcast is puting there upgrades to use, and not waiting around forever. | |
|
|
|
·
·
High speed low caps bologna.
