Virgin Media Testing 200Mbps Cable - Begins ultra-fast DOCSIS 3.0 trials in Kent
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·
Virgin Media Testing 200Mbps Cable
Begins ultra-fast DOCSIS 3.0 trials in Kent
(old news - 10:03AM Wednesday May 06 2009)
tags: competition · business · bandwidth · cable · world · networking · Virgin.Net
Tipped by Ignite
While 100Mbps just became the high broadband watermark here in the States, Virgin Media in the UK is already testing 200Mbps DOCSIS 3.0 cable connectivity, according to the Financial Times and the Guardian. But do you need it? Can servers provide it? Can Virgin deliver the 50Mbps speeds they're promising now? Who cares, it's fast, says Virgin CEO Neil Berkett. "Two years ago, when we were testing 50Mbps, you would have asked what that was needed for," Berkett says, after suggesting that 3D video conferencing could make such connections useful. "In two years’ time, where people are now asking about how many people are taking up 50Mbps, they will be asking what is the take-up of 200Mbps." As we saw last week, offering ultra high speed broadband is more about branding and bragging rights than practicality.

Related:
  1. Remember How The Net Neutrality Fight Began
  2. Virgin Takes Aim At BitTorrent
  3. DOC 3.0 In Japan: $60 for 160Mbps
  4. Still Waiting On Faster AT&T Speeds, Line Bonding
  5. Canada Holds Hearings On ISP Throttling
  6. Cogeco Unveils 50Mbps Tier
  7. DSL Vs. Carrier Pigeon
  8. There's Still No Evidence That Metered Billing Is Necessary
Links: New Topic
Forums »

DarkLogix @ 6th May 09:55AM:
Hurry up and get here

I want 200Mbps
reply
NbWY1 @ 6th May 09:57AM:
Re: Hurry up and get here

Cable gone wild
reply
glinc @ 6th May 10:01AM:
meh!

FiOS can do 400Mbps!!!
reply
anon @ 6th May 10:01AM:
200 what about 10??

Virgin Media - moving ahead but not finishing the job first. I don't think I'm alone in having problems getting the bandwidth promised. How about they get what they sell now working before doing the next thing. I've had an average less than 2Mbps since starting to pay for 10Mbps three months ago! Infrastructural issues are the cause according to their technical support team. With no fixed dates promised for correction.
BT sent me a cocky letter when I switch from them to virgin media, saying I'd regret it. Guess what, they were right.
reply
Madness @ 6th May 10:02AM:
Geez

Regardless, one is still limited to whatever speed one can get out of the sending server.
--
No keyboard present or keyboard error. Press <F1> to continue....
reply
psbny @ 6th May 10:06AM:
Re: meh!

if fios were to use the same architecture as cable aka shared service they could do 622/155Mb/s with bpon and 2.4/1.2Gb/s with gpon

edit: and that would be for each 32 customers not 250-500
reply
jmn1207 @ 6th May 10:08AM:
Re: Geez

said by Madness :

Regardless, one is still limited to whatever speed one can get out of the sending server.
One might be limited to a single server, or to perhaps several servers. There is also the possibility of having multiple users.
reply
anon @ 6th May 10:09AM:
Re: Geez

But if you are doing some type of conferencing or VPN with another network that runs at the same speed, it feel like being on a LAN. It would also help for networks which have more than one computer.
reply
patcat88 @ 6th May 10:10AM:
LOL throttling time

Your speeds are useless. with 20mbit plan,

(20/8)*60*60*24*31 = ~6700 GB unthrottled

(20/8)*60*60*11*31 = ~3070 GB per month off peak usage
+
3*31=93 peak GB (much worse than Comcast's rarely enforced 250GB), just 20 mins of flooring your 20mbit connection (3000/(20/8)/60=20)

3070GB offpeak +
or assuming you go over the cap and try to floor it
((11*60)-20[mins of full speed time])*60*(20/8)*.75[throttle]*31[days]*(1/1024)=2200GB per month throttled peak
+93GB unthrottled peak

for a total of 5170GB per month, which means you lost 20% 1-((2300+3070)/6700) of your thearetical bandwidth to throttling

quote:
Bandwidth throttling

The cable broadband services do not have a specific bandwidth cap; however, on 3 May 2007 Virgin introduced "Subscriber Traffic Management" (STM). In particular, between the hours of 10am and 9pm the service provider may throttle down bandwidth for customers "downloading an unusually large amount at these times" (in line with one's package: 500 MB for the 2 Mbit/s package, 2000 MB for the 10 Mbit/s package and 3 GB for the 20 Mbit/s package) such that the speed of one's connection will decrease. To put this into perspective, a 20Mbit/s user is likely to trigger throttling if they download at full speed for approximately 22 minutes during peak hours. According to Virgin Media, this scheme aims to regulate bandwidth usage and to ensure that all customers get a fair share of the service provided. The scheme has been criticised as being overly punitive. Once the download limit is exceeded, the bandwidth throttle remains in place for 5 hours. The actual speed decrease depends on the package subscribed to, and ranges from a 50% reduction for the 2 Mbit/s to a 75% reduction for all others. [54]

A user on the 2Mb package will currently be throttled to 1 Mbit/s (50%) after downloading 500MB between the 4pm and 9pm "peak" window [54].

Virgin Media broadband, based on DOCSIS, runs over coaxial cable television connections in those areas with Cable TV and ADSL lines in areas that do not. Unlike ADSL connections, DOCSIS-based cable broadband remains largely unaffected by line attenuation, and provides long lease-time dynamic (not static) IP addresses to subscribers (based on the MAC address of the client device).

Virgin Media reportedly started conducting trials of a 100 Mbit/s broadband service on its cable network in April 2006.[55][56]


»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Med···rottling
reply
Araiden @ 6th May 10:18AM:
Re: Geez

Well, that's considering your only accessing one thing or one server. What about people with home networks, boxes that can stream hd movies, netflix, amazon etc. You can have up to 4 boxes per house. That doesn't include gaming, people surfing the web, downloading things. It's definately over kill at this point but I could probably use a 20 meg connection in my house with all the stuff going on we love the internet. :) And as bandwidth increases you will see more and more things there to take advantage of all that bandwidth. I for one am excited to see companies offering speeds like this.
reply
Simba7 @ 6th May 10:25AM:
Re: meh!

The problem is..

Will Verizon actually offer those speeds?
reply
patcat88 @ 6th May 10:41AM:
Re: Geez

said by right :

But if you are doing some type of conferencing or VPN with another network that runs at the same speed, it feel like being on a LAN. It would also help for networks which have more than one computer.
Whats the upload? Internet says the upload for any single TCP download is 3% of the download speed/data.
200*.03=6mbps, not good news.
reply
dlewis23 @ 6th May 10:47AM:
Can servers provide it?

Short answer NO.

At the moment 200 Mbps internet anything is pretty much useless because most servers can't provide it as they are only connected at 100 Mbps. Even servers with a 1 Gbps connection could then only have 5 people downloading at max speed at any one time.

This also sucks at the server end because computers that have this connection that get taken over can now take down the average server by them selves.
reply
wifi4milez @ 6th May 11:05AM:
Re: Can servers provide it?

said by dlewis23 :

Short answer NO.

At the moment 200 Mbps internet anything is pretty much useless because most servers can't provide it as they are only connected at 100 Mbps.
Some are connected at 100Mbps, however most are connected at 10Mbps or less. Sure its cool to have 200Mbps (yes, I would want it) however as pointed out its nothing more than bragging rights at this point.
--
When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat.
-Ronald Reagan-

reply
jadebangle @ 6th May 11:47AM:
Re: Can servers provide it?

If I could get 100mbps for 89.99 a month that would be the best thing in life...
50mbps for 49.99 a month will do as well...
Its not just speed the price as to be right too
reply
jlivingood @ 6th May 12:41PM:
Re: Can servers provide it?

said by dlewis23 :

Short answer NO.

At the moment 200 Mbps internet anything is pretty much useless because most servers can't provide it as they are only connected at 100 Mbps. Even servers with a 1 Gbps connection could then only have 5 people downloading at max speed at any one time.

This also sucks at the server end because computers that have this connection that get taken over can now take down the average server by them selves.
The other interesting question apart from servers at one end and the access network at the other end is the (1) regional networks that are traversed and (2) backbone links that are traversed. Both of those need enough capacity as well.

While it is interesting to hear of something like 200Mbps or 300Mbps or whatever, if you aggregate all of those customers into a 1G or 10G regional network, it's not so meaningful. Thus, access network speeds need to be matched to regional and backbone capacity in addition to the capacity of the servers someone is trying to reach.
--
JL
Comcast
reply
niblifar @ 6th May 01:21PM:
Re: Can servers provide it?

It's not useless. Imagine a family of five or six that are heavy leechers. Simultaneous maxed out downloads happening at the same time would saturate that pipe.
--
Vita est bona.
reply
Ikyuao @ 6th May 01:36PM:
TCP memory buffer issue

This won't give you lots of bandwidth unless you need set up a special TCP memory buffer be very large in order to have efficient bandwidth use so on vista with TCP normal parameter setting will give you lots of bandwidth speed as well as linux does that too so however server TCP buffer need be set up be large in order to provide physical 100 Mbits bandwidth or more bandwidth at long distance link of internet networks as well as clients needs be to have large TCP memory buffer too also.

And DOCSIS does not control buffer nor does not manage any TCP sessions so responsible is up to operating system and user as well.
--
Professional Linux environmental blows microsoft windows out of the water.
reply
anon @ 6th May 02:22PM:
Re: Geez

Right, I am on a 30/5 connection via cablevision
and I routinely max out the upload and I have maxed out the download a number of times, usage in the 20-30mbit range are common for me.

It's not about single transfers but entire network usage.
I have 3 desktops
1 media server,
PS3
XBOX360 with netflix streaming/xbox live
plus a laptop and multiple users.

they are going to offer 100/15 and if I had the extra cash I'd get it :)

how knows I might get it anyway lol :)
reply
Eat Me @ 6th May 02:58PM:
Re: meh!

said by psbny :

if fios were to use the same architecture as cable aka shared service they could do 622/155Mb/s with bpon and 2.4/1.2Gb/s with gpon

edit: and that would be for each 32 customers not 250-500
Shared among 32 customers, 2.4Gbps GPON is around 400-480Mbps.
reply
FastiBook @ 6th May 04:36PM:
Re: meh!

In my area the number of lines to backbone per user i've been told is capable of faster than that. In fact, they could do gigabit for 2% of customers while keeping everyone else at the current tiers.

The conduit pipes they use to connect the curbside boxes to each other and to the nodes are 4 inch diameter, the wires they use between boxes are quarter inch by 8th inch. You do the math. :)

- A
--
LETS GO METS!
reply
ViRGEdx @ 6th May 08:20PM:
How Does 200Mbps Work Exactly?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought DOCSIS 3 could only bond up to 4 channels. 38x4 is 152Mbps, not 200Mbps.
reply
jpr281 @ 6th May 10:48PM:
Re: How Does 200Mbps Work Exactly?

said by ViRGEdx :

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought DOCSIS 3 could only bond up to 4 channels. 38x4 is 152Mbps, not 200Mbps.
Europe has a different DOCSIS than the US.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Speed_Table
reply
mc5w @ 7th May 05:27AM:
Yeah Right

One problem is that you would need at least a 3 trillion instruction per second supercomputer just to run an antivirus program that processes 200 Mbps.

So, you have bottlenecks at both ends. Now all I have to do is overcome the $0 per hour bottleneck and move out of my siste's house.

The matter that viruses drive CPU upgrades is out of hand. What some IT professionals tell me is that 90% of viruses come from Maxisquash er I mean Microsoft as that is how the H-1B people have been extorting green cards and citizenship from Uncle Sam. High Tech wanted people who are required by the government to work for the same company for 6 years and High Tech got what they wished for. High Tech should of been more careful of their wishes.
reply
jap @ 8th May 02:37AM:
upstream,upstream,upstream

All this talk about mondofast downstream. Over, say, 30Mbps down I'm happy but I want it near symmetrical. 30/20 is far more appealing to me than 60/10.
reply
Hpower @ 8th May 12:31PM:
Re: upstream,upstream,upstream

Yea seriously. I am tired of seeing 5000000/1 speeds. lol I would be much happier with 30/20 myself compared to 50/5. But, I guess its just cheaper for the ISP's stand point of providing faster download than upload. I remember when my friend had 512KBPS SDSL and I thought that was the way broadband should be :)
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually.
reply
LiamCo @ 8th May 12:41PM:
Re: Yeah Right

Not to sound rude but do you really understand what you are talking about? Antivirus programs don't inspect data bit by bit. They use virus definitions, to compare each file to known virus profiles. You wouldn't be doing realtime monitoring of the data as it's coming down the pipe. That's not what AV protection does. After each file is completed, that's when the virus scanner looks at it and sees if it fits a virus profile. The only way your av would be struggling to keep up is if hundreds of files were being downloaded per second, which doesn't make sense unless you are trying to download a book page by page or something.

If your theory were right, people with older computers wouldn't be able to download anything on a 10mbps connection, which obviously isn't the case.

I don't know where you get your information from, but it's flatout wrong. And the concept is flawed at the basic level of how virus scanning works.

Viruses have NEVER driven cpu upgrades. Data intensive applications like videogames and media creation programs do. Unless you are doing a full scan of your computer, virus programs take up a negligible amount of processing capacity, even when downloading large files at high speeds.
reply
Simba7 @ 9th May 10:02AM:
Re: meh!

Multiple and/or redundant pipes to each node.

That makes sense. But when will they offer it?
reply
bn1221 @ 3rd Jul 02:53PM:
Re: Yeah Right

Liam its possible to scan for virus patterns at wire speed. Some Cisco switches and my old Alteon firewall did it. As soon as it sees a pattern in the stream is turns off that connection - even before the file is done downloading.
reply

Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2009 silver matrix LLC