Cable Forum - View Single Post

Dawn Falcon · 30-04-2007, 00:45

Hex, the ADSL providers commonly say that 2-3% of their users take the **** with their bandwidth usage, I fail to see how this would be much different on cable.

As for overselling, I'd rather have a sensible service I can use, at a reasonable price, than one which is traffic shapped into uselesness if I *DARE* use it at peak times when y'know, I'm actually home. If that's slower and more expensive, SO BE IT! It's still better than overselling. "Small, slow" upgrades to the network when you're offering higher speeds is not worth it - the "higher speeds" they're offering are nothing more than a way for people to leech more illegal stuff off-peak, as things stand, and to pay more for having the "same" (actually traffic-shaping degraded) connection at useable times.

Every single instance of traffing shaping I've seen has added considerable latency. As for the 56k comparison, the main factor there is the latency again. Becuse of the technical limits of 56k, there's usually a fair bit of latency which leads to click-pause-click registers on server. This annoys non-technical people no end, and traffic shaping, IME, makes broadband act that way as well. This is one of the major advantages of broadband, ignoring raw speed entirely! (it also applies to ISDN, which is why a 64k ISDN connection feels SO much smoother than web surfing than a 56k modem!)

Rubbish it's a necessary "evil", it's a business descision and one which is NOT in any way for the customer, it's purely for the headlines and the bottom line.

Diadem, inspecting the packets takes time. Supposedly very little time, but in practice it adds several hundred ms, IME.

30-04-2007, 00:45	#27
Dawn Falcon Inactive Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 60	Re: Traffic Shaping Affecting All Tiers Hex, the ADSL providers commonly say that 2-3% of their users take the **** with their bandwidth usage, I fail to see how this would be much different on cable. As for overselling, I'd rather have a sensible service I can use, at a reasonable price, than one which is traffic shapped into uselesness if I DARE use it at peak times when y'know, I'm actually home. If that's slower and more expensive, SO BE IT! It's still better than overselling. "Small, slow" upgrades to the network when you're offering higher speeds is not worth it - the "higher speeds" they're offering are nothing more than a way for people to leech more illegal stuff off-peak, as things stand, and to pay more for having the "same" (actually traffic-shaping degraded) connection at useable times. Every single instance of traffing shaping I've seen has added considerable latency. As for the 56k comparison, the main factor there is the latency again. Becuse of the technical limits of 56k, there's usually a fair bit of latency which leads to click-pause-click registers on server. This annoys non-technical people no end, and traffic shaping, IME, makes broadband act that way as well. This is one of the major advantages of broadband, ignoring raw speed entirely! (it also applies to ISDN, which is why a 64k ISDN connection feels SO much smoother than web surfing than a 56k modem!) Rubbish it's a necessary "evil", it's a business descision and one which is NOT in any way for the customer, it's purely for the headlines and the bottom line. Diadem, inspecting the packets takes time. Supposedly very little time, but in practice it adds several hundred ms, IME.