<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Caps... Impossible upstream.. in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16908564</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:40:25 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:40:25 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Caps... Impossible upstream..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908695</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1118186"><b>cypherstream</b></A> : Hopefully they have a really clean ingress free return path capable of reliably using 64QAM modulation in the upstream on 6 MHz channels.  If that's the case, I have to say KUDOS to Cablevision for maintaining such a clean plant.  If not, we'll expect to see those people with borderline levels get knocked off as they can't reliably transmit upstream.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908695</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:04:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Caps... Impossible upstream..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908564</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/656571"><b>sh0ckie</b></A> : While it's great to see CV respond to competition from VZ by raising its speed, it's useless if their backend can't handle the load. I'm not the only OOL user who has seen the quality of the service degrade in the past few months. Speeds are far more erratic than they used to be, even during off-peak hours.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908564</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:43:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Caps... Impossible upstream..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907662</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/118623"><b>MxxCon</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><SMALL>said by  Vamp <A HREF="/useremail/u/761749"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</SMALL><br><br>It should be noted that these upstream (and downstream) speeds can't be heavily used</DIV>while i agree with you regarding upstream, downstream is unrestricted.<br>there are no reports of users getting any caps or warning for downloading too much.<br><SMALL>--<br>[Sig removed by Administrator: Signature can not exceed 20GB]</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907662</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:05:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Caps... Impossible upstream..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907590</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/247620"><b>subman87</b></A> : <br> 50/10 would be nice..........]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907590</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:52:41 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Caps... Impossible upstream..</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907522</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/761749"><b>Vamp</b></A> : It should be noted that these upstream (and downstream) speeds can't be heavily used, they are just not supported by the network. It would only take about 5-6 people to max out the entire node.<br><br>If it works, it works on a system that has a cap threshold (cap on heavy use) or that has very few heavy users (doubtful).<br><br>PS. I hope FIOS responds with 50/10 :D :D :D]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907522</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:40:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
