cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Any timeline for 100mbit upload to be rolled out to residential packages?

marcosscriven
Dialled in

Currently I'm on gbit connection - engineer visited today and mentioned I should keep an eye on upload levels, as it may be upgraded.

Has anyone got further info on this by any chance?

13 REPLIES 13

Client62
Hero

So far we have confirmed sighting of Hub 4 and Hub 5 Gig 1 customers with 110Mb/s configured as the Upstream Max Traffic Rate.

Not see any VM Residential PR material on this yet. 

It is already the norm on the VM Business products to have a 10:1 DS:US ratio.



Is this something that VM just apply without asking, in order to test this out before official rollout?

Are you saying that even though there's no PR material, some people do have it on residential connections?

Yes & Yes

Restart the Hub every week or so and see if the Upstream Max Traffic Rate changes from 55,000,000 to 110,000,000 bits / second in the Configuration data.

I know vm apologists say it is coming. But we always had 10:1 ratios until VM failed to roll out upgrades properly.

Docis 3.1 can support better than VM offer.

Hub 4 should never have been released. As no wifi 6, no multi gig port. So not fit to deliver Gig1 service.

Hub 5 should support 6e.

Then when it comes to IPv6, 15 years behind

 

In short VM are always 5 years behind the curve.

Hub4/Gig1-> pfSense->Microtik CRS312/CSS326/CRS305->Meshed Asus RT-AX89X
VM Network - Timwilky

Pure 3.1 DOCSIS could have had better upstream and solved the poor latency and very high jitter often seen on Hub 4 & 5.

But VM has implemented  mixed 3.0 and 3.1 DOCSIS quite the worst technical solution of all requiring channels of very different bandwidths to be demultiplexed and re-multiplexed into a bonded service.

Could mixed 3.0 and 3.1 channel operation be the last gasp for DOCSIS ?

It's not a feature specific to VM. All operators that have deployed OFDMA today are bonding both types of channels.


@Timwilky wrote:

I know vm apologists say it is coming. But we always had 10:1 ratios until VM failed to roll out upgrades properly.

Docis 3.1 can support better than VM offer.

Hub 4 should never have been released. As no wifi 6, no multi gig port. So not fit to deliver Gig1 service.

Hub 5 should support 6e.

Then when it comes to IPv6, 15 years behind

 

In short VM are always 5 years behind the curve.


Telewest stopped being 10:1 as of the 4 Mb product in 2004. ntl at least the 10 Mb product from 2005. I'm not sure what upgrades you had in mind that VM botched. Most cable companies became more asymmetrical due to 3.0 then 3.1 offering a far easier time of increasing download relative to upload alongside the pandemic bringing 2+ years of upload demand increase overnight. The UK was hurt by the varying quality of the networks and the need to sell the same product or at least have the prospect of selling the same product everywhere. Had the UK market been more able to vary what was sold by area we would've seen higher speeds in some. As it is it's had to wait for VM, they of botched upgrades, to upgrade networks so that no area is left behind.

No cable company in the world has maxed out the capabilities of DoCSIS 3.1. Very few have actually upgraded their networks to take advantage of it. I'm aware of what was TDC Group being an early starter and completing upgrade with Huawei equipment and professional services and Spectrum in the USA in the very early stages of upgrade with a fraction of their footprint upgraded. To do so required replacement of nearly every node and amplifier in the entire network.

The decision on what hardware VM use isn't down to VM: Liberty Global decision. The family share the same base hardware.

When IPv6 is going live isn't down to VM: Liberty Global decision.


@Client62 wrote:

Pure 3.1 DOCSIS could have had better upstream and solved the poor latency and very high jitter often seen on Hub 4 & 5.

But VM has implemented  mixed 3.0 and 3.1 DOCSIS quite the worst technical solution of all requiring channels of very different bandwidths to be demultiplexed and re-multiplexed into a bonded service.

Could mixed 3.0 and 3.1 channel operation be the last gasp for DOCSIS ?


In the UK and Ireland. Worldwide many operators are planning 4.0 networks, including most Liberty Global territories. Mixing 3.0 and 3.1 is fine. The scheduling of the upstream transmissions from the modems is abstracted from the capacity of the underlying channels. I'm not clear on why there seem to be potential issues. Operators have both used a combination of 3.0 and 3.1 and prior to that different bandwidth 3.0 channel groups for years. In fact such channels were a feature of North American networks as they ran a legacy 1.1 channel at 3.2 MHz width and bonded it with 3 or 4 6.4 MHz wide 2.0 channels. They also snuck in a 3.2 or even 1.6 wide channel later on for a little extra capacity until plant upgrade.

The schedulers shouldn't have a problem with mixed mode operation. https://www.commscope.com/globalassets/digizuite/1653-arris-usschedulingind3-1-whitepaper-final.pdf

As recently as two years ago VM was going to migrate to DOCSIS 4.0 and deploy R-PHY. If the maximum benefits were to be obtained from this then driving fibre so deep into the network to achieve n+0 would have been ideal (but a major project as the network is as bad as n+10 in some places).  It's actually easier to migrate to XGS-PON than DOCSIS 4.0, and as VM's made the decision to go with XGS-PON the writing is on the wall for DOCSIS.

As for the OP's questions: it's quite common for upgrades to be quietly implemented on a limited basis before a full rollout, and forum staff are unlikely to be told what the area upgrade schedule is as it's not necessary and that publication of such a schedule will inevitably bring unwanted aggravation if it were to slip.

--
Hub 5, TP-Link TL-SG108S 8-port gigabit switch, 360
My Broadband Ping - Roger's VM hub 5 broadband connection