'Godfather' of DOCSIS Looks Beyond DOCSIS 3.0Still faces serious upstream, contstant bit rate limitations... ( old news - 10:43AM Wednesday Feb 25 2009) tags: business · bandwidth · cable · networkingRouzbeh Yassini, considered by many to be the "godfather" of the DOCSIS cable specification, says that while DOCSIS 3.0 is a great advancement, there's plenty of work to be done. For his keynote address at the Light Reading DOCSIS 3.0 conference in Denver, Yassini addressed the fact that the specification still has upstream limitations. "Good job, but no cigar yet," he says. "Even 35 Mbps upstream is still not enough," says Yassini, even though channel bonding should eventually address this. Yassini also noted that DOCSIS 3.0 100Mbps downstream speeds are peaks, not constants -- in an industry where constant bit rates are increasingly important for HD.
Related:- Comcast DOCSIS 3.0 Hits Pittsburgh
- Grande Communications Intros PowerBoost
- Cable Cooking Up New Network Management System
- Comcast: 80% DOCSIS 3.0 Coverage By Year's End
- Suddenlink Brings DOCSIS 3.0 To Texas
- Cox Scraps App-Specific Throttling Trials
- Metrocast Offers Fiber To The Home
- Comcast Still Fighting FCC Throttling Sanction
|
 |  | 
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by jadebangle  :Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection.
Yes, you may be uploading all those 8megapixel images to flickr or posting your kids 2 hour birthday party video to youtube. All those things can benefit from faster speeds and would be nice, but 2 or 3mbits is adequate.
Don't get me wrong, faster is always nicer, but the overwhelming majority of users barely use their upstream now. | |
| | | 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
 ·PenTeleData
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by cdru :said by jadebangle :Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Yes, you may be uploading all those 8megapixel images to flickr or posting your kids 2 hour birthday party video to youtube. All those things can benefit from faster speeds and would be nice, but 2 or 3mbits is adequate. Don't get me wrong, faster is always nicer, but the overwhelming majority of users barely use their upstream now. bittorrent | |
| | | | 
anony501
@comcast.net
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Eat Me : bittorrent
Bittorrent for personal use (e.g. sharing a home video with friends and family) or bittorrent for commercial use, allowing 3rd parties to use (for profit) the ISP bandwidth to share to people you have no relationship with. | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Eat Me :On a serious note, a lot of people are telecommuting these days and they need the upload to upload large files quickly. They probably should be using a business account but I doubt that a telecommuter would be able to afford an OC connection to their home. You don't need an "OC" connection to have a fast connection, but yeah, it's not necessarily going to fit under the definition of a residential connection.
Even with telecommuting, the necessity to be uploading large files frequency can be minimized with some planning. And if you are constantly needing to transfer large files, maybe telecommuting isn't the best fit for the job. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA | Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 Then those people (relitively few of the general population) may need a faster "business grade" ($$$) connection.
for the purpose of residental broadband DOCSIS (and in some cases ADSL2) are just fine and will be for years to come. | |
| | | | | | | | | 
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 What a smart idea! Unfortunately you have conviently seemed to have forgot that they dont offer a faster "business grade" connection, business connections simply just have a better SLA, the speeds are the same for 2x the cost, stupid imo.
--
My Anime Site - AnimeCrazy.net | |
| | | | | | | | | |
tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
 ·Comcast
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 I didn't say it would be from ComCast. Those users may need to pay for a dedicated line from their telco or other provider.
Then they'll see the true cost of a real High speed business connection.
ComCast business is starting to offer higher speed commerial lines to traditional core business areas, but it may be a while before they offer that in all residental areas. | |
| | | | | | | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| I would be willing to be the company they work for wouldnt be providing them that bandwidth to benefit anyway so your argument is moot.
I work for a multibillion dollar worldwide company and we do not even provide this kind of bandwidth to our remote users. I don't see it being very wide spread amongst much smaller companies with a remote work force not even close to ours. | |
| | | | | | | jesseb_66
join:2002-12-06
Tucson, AZ
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 I bought an hd Camcorder a few months ago we upload all the time. We just had a baby girl and post videos for the fam back East in MP4.
It can take awhile I ussually start uploads before work and let em run from there.
The demand for higher upload is comming.just because you can't think of a need doesn't mean there isn't.
ISP's had better start getting ready. | |
| | | | |
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by jesseb_66 :I bought an hd Camcorder a few months ago we upload all the time. We just had a baby girl and post videos for the fam back East in MP4. It can take awhile I ussually start uploads before work and let em run from there. The demand for higher upload is comming.just because you can't think of a need doesn't mean there isn't. ISP's had better start getting ready. Home security, control and surveillance controlled via the internet is also on the rise. | |
| | | | kd6cae
P2p Shouldn't Be A Crime
join:2001-08-27
Lancaster, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| My belief is that the internet is a computer network that is two way, and the option should be available for those that want it, of having better upstream, even if on residential. We're not even using the full potential of docsis 2.0, or even ADSL's upstream potential.
Why is every single residential ISP except Verizon afraid to give users better upload? with folks such as myself wanting to do off site file backups, or stream high quality audio/video, or perhaps have uses for upstream noone's thought of yet, why not give us at least the option of allowing the technology to do the most it can for those that want to make use of it?
If one lives close enough to a DSLAM to achieve 1Mbit upstream sync, why not allow a user to get that if they want it? I agree, not all users will currently want more upload, but we shouldn't be prevented from getting it just because we don't run a business!
If cablevision can offer a 5Mbit upstream tier over the exact same cable technology I'm currently using with TWC, why isn't TWC offering me the option of a 5Mbit upstream tier? It makes 0 sense if you ask me. | |
| | | | | | 
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| said by cdru :Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Offsite Backups for one...
3 computers here in this room.
Sure would like to do monthly offsite backups - but at 10-18GB for each computer(that comes to something like 30-54GB), 2mbps would be painful.
I have 2.2mbps(nominal) upload now... but I don't want to trash my connection for hours.
2mbps = 900MB per hour
5 hours = 4500MB
12 hours = 10800MB
24 hours = 21600MB
48 hours = 43200MB
This is under ideal conditions with no other connection usage.
So, for me to backup my machines I would have to possibly upload for 50+ hours and not use the connection for anything else otherwise it will take longer?
Uhm, yeah. 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
| | | | 
Chris 313
Come get some
Premium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
clubs:
·Comcast
·Comcast
·Charter Pipeline
·Comcast Digital Vo..
·AT&T CallVantage
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by dadkins :said by cdru :Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Offsite Backups for one... 3 computers here in this room. Sure would like to do monthly offsite backups - but at 10-18GB for each computer(that comes to something like 30-54GB), 2mbps would be painful. I have 2.2mbps(nominal) upload now... but I don't want to trash my connection for hours. 2mbps = 900MB per hour 5 hours = 4500MB 12 hours = 10800MB 24 hours = 21600MB 48 hours = 43200MB This is under ideal conditions with no other connection usage. So, for me to backup my machines I would have to possibly upload for 50+ hours and not use the connection for anything else otherwise it will take longer? Uhm, yeah. Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it? | |
| | | | |
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Chris 313 :Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it? EXACTLY!
What if you had two computers... 
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | 
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Chris 313 :said by dadkins :said by Chris 313 :Yes, I agree with that. What happens when you have a backup that's a little over 100GB. THAT would be truely painful, wouldn't it? EXACTLY! What if you had two computers... Over 200GB! No thanks! Makes me glad I have an external here to do more frequent backups vs what I'd do online with 200GB worth of stuff to back up. I'd do twice a month on my external if I had that much, while online, I'd do it once maybe every 2-3 months. Also, you have to be aware of Comcast's combo 250GB cap when doing something that large. Yeesh! Heh..
We have file server with 1.8TB data, 3 computers all approaching 800GB on their drives, plus a few external's all needing to be backed up.
Off-site back ups with a typical residential cable/dsl connection is all but impossible, not enough upload as well as silly caps.
as others have said, upload is becoming increasingly needed just to do routine things.. we ourselves do a lot of video and audio here and hate waiting hours to upload a simple 15 min HD vid clip. | |
| | | | | | | |
Fanfoot
@cisco.com
|  Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0
Dude, you need offsite backup. Maybe it didn't matter when all people had on their computers were their old tax returns, but now that you're storing all your music, all your pictures, all your home movies, etc.
And the network needs to evolve as people figure this out. | |
| | | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | LOL, I love this argument.
Then I would suggest you do the wise then and back it up locally and then either have it delivered offsite or take it offsite with you. | |
| | | 
Phil
Rojo Sol
Premium
join:2001-06-11
Camarillo, CA
 ·Verizon FIOS
·DSL EXTREME
| said by cdru :Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Varies from one person to the next, but gaming servers, P2P, FTP server, streaming content from home, online backups, etc.. There are numerous reasons justifying faster uploads. | |
| | | |
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Phil :said by cdru :Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Varies from one person to the next, but gaming servers, P2P, FTP server, streaming content from home, online backups, etc.. There are numerous reasons justifying faster uploads. Servers are almost always forbidden from a residential connection. Whether the provision of the TOS is enforced or not is another topic.
I've streamed video and audio from home numerous times when I had a 2mbit fios connection without issues. Sure it wasn't 1080p HD with 7.1 surround sound, but picture quality and sound was more then adequate.
Are your backups really time sensitive that they MUST get there within a certain timeframe? Do you really have multi-gigabytes of data that must be backed up, in full, very frequently where a differential or incremental backup would suffice?
As I originally said, faster is always going to be nicer. My point was that for an overwhelming majority of customers, 2 or 3mbit is significantly more then what they need. They are using online backup services to backup MAYBE a gig or two of files. They aren't using it to backup their entire divx movie collection they pirated. They maybe have a game server, but it's much more likely they are just a client on someone else's server. For the hardcore pirate, hardcore gamer, or the file backuper with OCD, there are "needs" for faster speeds. But saying that 2,3,5 mbits is pathetic is wrong as the market, as a whole, just doesn't need faster and/or more symmetrical connections. | |
| | | | | majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY | Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 Not on Opt online boost. Web servers and email servers are allowed on boost with their ports open. | |
| | | | |
Phil
Rojo Sol
Premium
join:2001-06-11
Camarillo, CA | Well I'm most definitely in the minority when it comes to upload usage and I don't even run P2P apps. | |
| | | | |
Fanfoot
@cisco.com
| My iPod is 160GB. It is nearly full. It has music, photos and videos on it that I would not want to lose under any circumstances.
Every so often I switch computers. The way Carbonite works right now is I abandon the old backups and do new ones. Or at least this is what happened last year when I did this.
So... 160GB of data to be backed up at 2Mbps would take what, 640,000 seconds, or 177 days or about SIX MONTHS to back up. And during this time my data won't be protected. And that's assuming my connection is perfect and I don't use it for anything else.
So if I upgrade my computer every 2 years, my data will only be protected 75% of the time at BEST.
And its just "C-R-A-Z-Y" for anybody to want more than 2Mbps?
You know how stupid you're going to sound in a few years right crdu? How about you post your real name so we can all make fun of you when the future shows up? | |
| | | | | |
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Fanfoot :
My iPod is 160GB. It is nearly full. It has music, photos and videos on it that I would not want to lose under any circumstances. Ok. Fair enough. I bet your iPod doesn't get 160GB of new content constantly though. I bet a good portion stays the same for some lengthly period of time so it really don't have to be backed up from scratch.
Every so often I switch computers. The way Carbonite works right now is I abandon the old backups and do new ones. Or at least this is what happened last year when I did this. I don't believe Carbonite allows you to restore a full system from their service. You have to have at least a functional system first before restoring files, don't you? So you really only need to backup what is essentially your "data" files. You shouldn't have to restart your file set. Besides, when you discard an old backup, isn't that leaving you vulnerable until a new backup is complete?
So... 160GB of data to be backed up at 2Mbps would take what, 640,000 seconds, or 177 days or about SIX MONTHS to back up. Actually, that would be about 177 hours or a little over 7 days. Math's hard I know.
And during this time my data won't be protected. Even if you had a 10mbit connection, your data wouldn't be protected for 1.5 days. The safest thing would have been to leave your existing file set backed up until you completed your new one and verified it was valid, then delete the old one. That way you would never have to be without a backup in case something should happen to it. But under that method you really wouldn't be limited to any time limit as you'd always be protected, so I can see why you went with that way to support your argument. A wise person with limited bandwidth would have probably just backed up the changed files to begin with, which is how carbonite works by default, isn't it?
So if I upgrade my computer every 2 years, my data will only be protected 75% of the time at BEST.
And its just "C-R-A-Z-Y" for anybody to want more than 2Mbps? No, but it's c-r-a-z-y to base an entire argument on a miscalculation. Plus I never said there was NO need for it, just that 2 or 3 mbits is ADEQUATE for an overwhelming majority of customers.
You know how stupid you're going to sound in a few years right crdu? Pot. Kettle. Black. Before calling people stupid, check your own posts. But also consider that I may actually have some intelligence. I didn't seem to have too much problem making it through college with a comp sci degree. Sure the future may be drastically different, but I don't think so. I predict that there will be the same proportional gap between the upload and download speeds as what there is now. But my crystal ball has been a little fuzzy lately. I haven't upgraded to the new hidef ball yet.
How about you post your real name so we can all make fun of you when the future shows up? Sure. Chris Drudge. Never have kept it a secret. But calling someone out when you yourself are an anonymous coward. I've been around here a few years and plan on being around for a few more. Feel free to come back any time and we can chat about who was right and who was wrong. | |
| | | | | | 
PaulHikeS2
join:2003-03-06
Merrimack, NH
·Comcast
1 edit | said by Fanfoot :
So... 160GB of data to be backed up at 2Mbps would take what, 640,000 seconds, or 177 days or about SIX MONTHS to back up. And during this time my data won't be protected. And that's assuming my connection is perfect and I don't use it for anything else.
So if I upgrade my computer every 2 years, my data will only be protected 75% of the time at BEST.
Actually about 7 days, not 177.
(edit) CDRU beat me to it....faster at math I guess!
--
Jay: What the @#$% is the internet??? | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| said by cdru :Servers are almost always forbidden from a residential connection. Whether the provision of the TOS is enforced or not is another topic. Another arbitrarily harsh line-item in a TOS/AUP that nobody really cares about.
Even worse, the whole client-server model is starting to become very very unclear given the progression to cloud / push aware services.
For example, if I use a cloud model for managing my email, contacts, notes, office documents, e.t.c. (similar to Palm's synergy), the server often acts as the served, and the other way around conversely.
See, the whole reason that the line item is even in the TOS is because DOCSIS 1.x and 2.0 both had very a-symmetric speeds for downstream and upstream. (9 and 27 megabits, respectively). Granted, the cable ISPs have built out these systems so that the typical ratio for down:up channels is 1:6, but the point I'm making is still valid; return path is nowhere near as fast. Well, what's an easy way to keep this uncongested? No servers.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB. | |
| | | 
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| said by cdru :said by jadebangle :Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. TCP/IP is a handshake protocol. This means that the receiver must tell the sender that the data has arrived successfully arrived and to send more data. Until the sender has been informed of the arrival (at the receiver) of what it has sent, it can/will not send more data. Thus depending on how fast the downlink is at the receiving side, the uplink side (and the actual receiver->sender speed of the connection between the receiver and the sender) must be fast enough to keep the downlink end saturated (ignoring the issue of the need to resend due to receive errors or dropped packets) or the downlink is going to be throttled due to the sender not being told to send more data soon enough. As you increase the download speed, you must increase the upload speed to keep pace or you will be unable to use all of the download speed capability. | |
| | | |
AnonCow2
@comcast.net
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 There's not really much of an issue in TCP/IP
with respect to throttled upload speeds impairing
download speeds to due the need for ACKs from
the receiver. In older TCP/IP implementations
this was indeed the case but modern mechanisms
like cumulative and selective ACKs (in which
you send a single ACK indicating the receipt
of a large window of packets) have dramatically
reduced the impact. | |
| | |
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| said by cdru :Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Oh please, don't be so absurd. First of all, it's precisely this kind of thinking which drives me crazy. Second of all, the burden to build-out networks isn't in the hands of the consumers to prove that they need more before ISPs deliver it. I guarantee in a few years, you're going to look back and think, jeez, I sound a lot like Bill Gates in that oft-too-repeated quote of his about a certain amount of RAM being more than enough for just about anyone.
The whole point is that demand always grows to fill the free bandwidth. By always, I mean always. It's simple really, what the whole argument centers around is a classical chicken-or-the-egg type question. Will web technologies that need more bandwidth pop up and wait around until speeds are adequate, or will developers make software which works under the current state of penetration and then become prevalent enough that more bandwidth becomes necessary as it gains popularity.
The answer should be so obvious.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB. | |
| | | |
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by Nerdtalker :The whole point is that demand always grows to fill the free bandwidth. By always, I mean always. Show me a graph of your past 24 hours of bandwidth usage with your upload pegged at your service's limit and you can prove your point. Show it at anything less then near 100% utilization and you help support mine.
I agree that if the bandwidth is available, then uses will come up for it. But I disagree that demand always grows to fill available space. If that was the case then everyone would be demanding their ISPs increase their upload speeds. But the majority of us still sit here with very asymmetrical connections. Why? Because people tolerate it because it meets their needs for what they want to pay.
If they wanted faster, symmetrical speeds then they would go with a plan that offered them, if available (e.g. FiOS's 20/20 plan), or be demanding them if they weren't available. But most residential customers don't want to pay the premium to they go on their merry way.
And by the way, billg never said the remark regarding 640k being enough. | |
| | | | |
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| Re: Not much improvement over docsis 2.0 said by cdru :Show me a graph of your past 24 hours of bandwidth usage with your upload pegged at your service's limit and you can prove your point. Show it at anything less then near 100% utilization and you help support mine. The relevance of the point doesn't hinge solely on 24/7 use of the upstream bandwidth, rather, whether functionality which occurs sporadically is contingent on there being even more upstream bandwidth than there is.
The assumption you're making here is that the average amount of stuff someone uploads can be easily spread out over the course of a day inside that 1-2 megabit window, comfortably. That doesn't always apply.
For example, I use a number of wireless networked security cameras for offsite monitoring, both at my house, other peoples houses (ones that I've recommended and setup for family, friends, e.t.c.). These things do MPEG4 640x480 streams, and a normal to high quality compression ratio uses at least 1.2-2 megabits. If you switch to MJPEG (for compatibility), that falls off even more. If you have more than one person viewing at a time, you're just guaranteeing a headache. Given the fact that I have 3, and another property has 4, you'll see that it often isn't possible to comfortably (at about 10 FPS) view more than two at a time. In situations like this (I guess another example would be placeshifting with a slingbox) the user doesn't have the convenience of simply letting the accrued bandwidth nicely integrate over the span of several hours. They need it, and they need it fast.
When I get home, if you really care, I'll show you my last 24 hours of usage pattern so you can see how viewing the camera immediately saturates both the "powerboosted" 3 megabits of upstream, and then the sagged 2 megabits that comes after.
said by cdru :I agree that if the bandwidth is available, then uses will come up for it. But I disagree that demand always grows to fill available space. If that was the case then everyone would be demanding their ISPs increase their upload speeds. But the majority of us still sit here with very asymmetrical connections. Why? Because people tolerate it because it meets their needs for what they want to pay. If they wanted faster, symmetrical speeds then they would go with a plan that offered them, if available (e.g. FiOS's 20/20 plan), or be demanding them if they weren't available. But most residential customers don't want to pay the premium to they go on their merry way. I think we're going to just have to disagree here. The example you give of FIOS is an entirely different and (from a penetration point of view) exotic newcomer. Trust me, as an optical engineer, I recognize the fact that FIOS and FTTH are so clearly the way to the future, but the current asymmetric offerings of the cable networks (which, ironically as you know is Hybrid Fiber Coax, I love fiber...) are endemic because of the narrow return bandwidth in the DOCSIS 1.x and even 2.0 (and even, arguably, the 3.0 spec as the article suggests).
It seems like, if the bandwidth is there, people will find a use for it eventually. That's what I mean when I say that it always grows (albeit sometimes slowly) to fill that space.
Interesting... I learn something new every day. I had no idea that actually wasn't him. I guess he just gets a bad rap for it.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB. | |
| | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by cdru :said by jadebangle :Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Ever upload raw video footage?
ever do video conferencing[the more upload, the better the quality]
there ARE LEGIT uses for upstream bandwidth BESIDES stealing movies, music and software
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
| | | RibaldJester
join:2006-10-20
Urbana, IL
| said by cdru :said by jadebangle :Its always 10/1, 20/2, 30/3 massive on the download side, pathetic on the upload side Please give an example where 2 or 3mbit upload isn't adequate for a residential connection. Yes, you may be uploading all those 8megapixel images to flickr or posting your kids 2 hour birthday party video to youtube. All those things can benefit from faster speeds and would be nice, but 2 or 3mbits is adequate. Don't get me wrong, faster is always nicer, but the overwhelming majority of users barely use their upstream now. 2 - 3Mbps would be ok if users actually every got anything close to that. Upstream on Cable is a joke. They want it to be treated just like TV, Asymmetrical communications. This is not what the Internet is about. I should be able to run whatever service I want, included web/mail/ftp on my Internet connection. Furthermore, I think we would see a lot more upstream usage, if we actually had high speed upstream connections. Saving your files to the cloud, gaming, streaming HD content etc. I think it's very short sited to say "users only need x" when we don't have any idea what users really want. | |
| percosan
join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA
| The Godfather does not understand D3 There is no 35 Mb/s upstream limitation in the DOCSIS specification. In fact, current certified devices support 4 bonded channels yielding ~100 Mb/s and future devices could add more upstream as requested by MSOs.
Same goes for downstream ... the spec is not the issue. It is the product that Cable sells.
Stan | |
| |
See 26 replies to this post | |
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | What's the Don's agenda? What is he trying to sell here | |
| majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
2 edits | HMM Isnt cisco developing / or developed products that use docsis 3 and can be converted over to fiber to the home easily? I thought I read something about that.
The next thing cablelabs I feel should work on is this tech with cisco.
I think this pdf shows it »files.shareholder.com/downloads/···7722.pdf
I honestly think thats what cablelabs should work on with cisco. It looks like cisco has the equipment already.
update. I found it its called Prisma DOCSIS-PON. Allows cablecompanies to delploy docsis 3 then swith over to PON with very little equipment to be changed.
»www.cable360.net/Assets/CT_PON_S···8(2).pdf
I feel thats what cablecompanies should be deploying. | |
| executor04
join:2004-05-18
Kew Gardens, NY
| upload! Even people who say why do residential connections need it, are not seeing the big picture. Its a 2 sided argument. First side is people are less patient to wait to have their uploads done. That is because of the other side of the argument, theres entities like fios around who are offering those speeds for CHEAPER prices.
If those 15/2 or 25/5 or whatever other speeds were offered for 29.99 a month, I don't think theres any issue and people won't complain. However find me people who pay that price for connections. We are paying 50% more for 100% less. | |
| | majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
1 edit | Re: upload! Well i pay $60 a month for 30/5 (its actually 38/5 since our downstream is uncapped but the limit for dcosis 2 is 38 and they advertise it as 30/5) i also get email and web hosting ports opened and those servers allowed. This is through cablevision. | |
|
Fanfoot
@cisco.com
| The Godfather? Really? Okay, so the guy who is just so fucking brilliant he figured out you could take multiple channels and combine them to offer more bandwidth? That's his contribution?
I'm not saying this isn't useful, or important.
But suggesting its a particularly brilliant innovation? I'd personally suggest it isn't even enough of an innovation to be patentable. Yes, I know somebody probably patented it. But there are lots of REALLY REALLY smart people out there inventing really really amazing things. This just isn't one of them.
Rant off. | |
| | CWO333
join:2005-02-24
Chicago, IL
 ·1and1
1 edit | Re: The Godfather? Really? It says he was part of the original specification which I read as being one of the original people behind the entire line of DOCSIS standards. So it was more than just the channel bonding but the entire way of communicating on the channel in the first place. Also, DOCSIS 3.0 in itself is more than just channel bonding. | |
| |
bbandraman
@spcsdns.net
| said by Fanfoot :
...he figured out you could take multiple channels and combine them to offer more bandwidth? That's his contribution?
....But there are lots of REALLY REALLY smart people out there inventing really really amazing things... Rouzbeh is actually the father of the cable modem
which was his original public contribution (from
the lancity days); If you are doing anything with
Cable you probably owe him more than you realize for
pushing CableLabs and the industry to innovate on
multiple fronts.
Yes I am a YasFan!  | |
| | | majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
1 edit | Re: ATA100=docsis3.0, ATA66=docsis2.0 samepattern............... I think your getting your Megabits and megabytes confused.
Drives are either rated at megabits or mega bytes.
Sata 1 is 1,500 mb which is Mega Bits or 150 MB which is megabytes.
Sata 2 is 3,000mb which is Mega Bytes.
a sata 2 hdd normally gets around 65MB throughput which is 520mb well above 100/mb/s
So like I said you got your MegaBits and MegaBytes confused.
Its gigabit that hdds (that are not raided together) cant get the right speed. | |
| |
pspcrazy
Anime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA | I can it's called getting a better hdd, or raid 0 two hdd's together, a lot of people do it now, and it's really easy to do.
--
My Anime Site - AnimeCrazy.net | |
|
doubleatheman
@santarosa.edu
| Why would I need more uplod speed? Why do I need more upload speed?
*Remote assisting- to my home pc from work.
*Accesing files from my home- network drive.
* LEGAL Bittorrents -(I like to help opensource os's get out their, im a seeder.)
*Video uploading - I have several buisness that I edit for, they need hd content, and I also have several youtube projects of my own.
* Photos - I have 12gb of home photos alone, and about 20 gb more from my work, sadly I do not have thease backed up online, I would have to leave my computer on for weeks
* Gaming - I know this does not demand bandwith, but it does in the sence of if your doing anything else above, it will slow down the game.
*Video survalence - this is something I plan on doing in the future
Whom ever said I would download more than I upload. Sure this was true in the good ol days when all dsl was ever used for was fast web browsing. Back then people read static content created by few people at large buisness. Now days everyone is making content, videos, photos, 3d renders, ect ect. The average user is producing touns more gb of data in th course of the year than they used to.
I would like video uploading to go just as smoothly as video downloading. Also I remote assist alot of people over the internet. (Log me in.) Now sometimes I would like to see true color representtion of the users screen, but their upload speed is way too slow. | |
| 
siberx4
Bandwidth hog
join:2004-10-19
West Vancouver, BC
| What about cloud computing? Those arguing against the need for increased upstreams are also completely ignoring the current push towards client/server architectures (they call them cloud computing these days, but the principle is the same). Running web apps like Google Docs or using their shared storage to keep your files accessible from anywhere means you're piping tons of data in *both* directions.
If we keep moving towards cloud computing models for common apps and storage, we're definitely going to need a whole lot more upstream to do it.
Also: Man, I *wish* I could get a 2mbps upstream - there isn't a cable or ADSL company in my area at all that provides anything higher than 1mbps up on any of its plans available in residential locations.
--
We are not retreating.
We are merely advancing in another direction.
-Douglas MacArthur | |
| | Joebury2004
join:2009-02-16
Merrillville, IN
| Re: What about cloud computing? exactly what I was thinking, my iDrive takes forever to upload on. You guys are all lucky to have broadband, I am using EV-DO rev A right now as i am living in a hotel for work 
I get 1.1-1.7 mbps down, and 500k up with sprint | |
| axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
| wow 35Mbps upload should be enough for anybody, forever.
Not really, but I think it'd be great over the next 5 years. Build it and new uses will be found for it. Just because 35Mbps will be slow in 10 years, doesn't mean we shouldn't go for it today | |
| | | |
|
|
·