Menu
Reply
  • 3.09K
  • 36
  • 591
Ignition
Trouble shooter
936 Views
Message 31 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018

No idea what point you were trying to make there but whatever it was you didn't make it.

Please do hit Google to find some more things you can pretend to have some knowledge about.

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 9.86K
  • 322
  • 852
legacy1
Hero
932 Views
Message 32 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018

You must of really had a few sorry.

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 3.09K
  • 36
  • 591
Ignition
Trouble shooter
927 Views
Message 33 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018


legacy1 wrote:
You must of really had a few sorry.


Enough to make clear my contempt for someone who clearly has no experience in what they are talking about and appears to be some random guy in their parents' basement regurgitating Google alongside some snippets they've picked up in online forums.

Wouldn't be so bad except your wild, baseless and clueless speculation has actively harmed work towards resolutions in this forum. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, no experience to speak of in the IT field and genuinely just regurgitate what you have learned from reading this forum alongside some ridiculous speculation based on Google.

There are few posters on here more obstructive to the resolution of more complex issues than you posting your clueless, baseless nonsense.

Do take a moment to try and work out a way to explain my post with QoS, CoS or whatever is your current obsession in an attempt to cover up that you have no idea of the basics of networking let alone the finer details of DoCSIS or quality of service managed IP networks.

  • 3.09K
  • 36
  • 591
Ignition
Trouble shooter
925 Views
Message 34 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018


legacy1 wrote:
You must of really had a few sorry.


Incidentally that would be 'You must have really had a few....'

MOD EDIT [Offensive content removed].

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 9.86K
  • 322
  • 852
legacy1
Hero
908 Views
Message 35 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018

Nope but I I'm sorry

So how about I ask this question instead will the hub 4 come in black?

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 9.37K
  • 362
  • 2.31K
Superuser
Superuser
893 Views
Message 36 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018


Ignition wrote:

Comcast run with way more than 16 SC-QAMs. They've 24+ running in many places alongside 4 x 6.4 MHz wide upstreams crammed into the low split 5-42 MHz band.

Yeah I know. I've been reading through the early Docsis 3.1 posts with modem stats and most of those are 16+1 OFDM for some strange reason. 

They sell an 'Extreme' 300Mb tier. Selling that on 38 x 16 = 608 Mb of capacity is 'risky' given how intolerant the United States consumers are to visible contention and requires very small nodal areas.

But they're very tollerant to post-rs errors it seems. I've seen many consumers with 33 dB downstream and millions of post-rs without much complaint. Mostly due to the overhead cables perhaps. "My errors increase when the wind blows".

See https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r29743167-Signals-Report-16-24-32-Downstream-Channel-Bonding-Here

I'm still reading through other DSLreports threads. So many of them on D3.1. I see the thread you linked to has many more SC-QAM and OFDM channels locked.

Regarding VM's capacity issues there are problems both at hubsites and in some cases the access plant preventing addition of extra channels and problems preventing node splits.


So what's new.

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 9.37K
  • 362
  • 2.31K
Superuser
Superuser
893 Views
Message 37 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018


Ignition wrote:

I've had more than a few drinks so am likely more amenable to requests for information I'd usually decline. What would you like to know?

If it's the meaning of life: 42.


Here's a good question if you're not sober yet: how do you calculate the bandwidth of an OFDM channel given a specific SNR.. AND all the factors that affect it?

I've been reading up on the intricacies of OFDM and it's quite complex with a lot of factors. 

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 3
  • 0
  • 0
Astraya
Joining in
706 Views
Message 38 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018

It would be really nice if we got the option (for advanced users) to only get a modem only model.
0 Kudos
Reply
  • 440
  • 16
  • 46
ILuvNips
Fibre optic
636 Views
Message 39 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018

I really can't see that happening, much simpler to keep to the one device from a logistical point of view.

Is there or would there be a massive difference between the current routers that can be set to modem mode and having a device which is only capable of modem mode?

________________________________________________________________

In HA7. Billing Area 21.
Utilisation Fault
F003502423: Review Dates -> 07/10/2015 -> 02/12/2015 -> 20/01/2016 Smiley Sad -> Closed Smiley Happy
Utilisation Fault F004873444: Review Dates -> 29/03/2017 Smiley Sad -> Closed Smiley Happy


0 Kudos
Reply
  • 9.37K
  • 362
  • 2.31K
Superuser
Superuser
618 Views
Message 40 of 89
Flag for a moderator

Re: Docsis 3.1 deployment and Hub 4 - end of 2017 and 2018


ILuvNips wrote:

Is there or would there be a massive difference between the current routers that can be set to modem mode and having a device which is only capable of modem mode?


No difference at all.

0 Kudos
Reply