republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category The Slow Road to DOCSIS 3.0
40% of consumer gear 3.0 ready by 2011
(old news - 11:09AM Tuesday Oct 03 2006)
tags: bandwidth · cable
CED Magazine has a primer up on DOCSIS 3.0, a faster, more secure network standard the cable industry hopes will help them compete with incumbent phone providers. The high end of the standard will allow cable providers to offer 1 gig/100 meg per node, albeit shared to perhaps hundreds of homes. But it will be many years until the standard is fully deployed. Operators will utilize pre-3.0 channel bonding to meet fiber to the home competition (if the regional ILEC they compete with offers it in any volume, right Qwest?).

But the article touches on other options MSOs can attempt until DOCSIS 3.0 is solidified:
"For one, they can add a new QAM for a group of 500 homes sharing a 6 MHz channel, and split that to 250 homes on that channel. "Now you can do 10 Mbps with relatively small costs," says Gil Katz, director of cable solutions and strategy for Harmonic Inc. Another near-term option is to leverage (but not bond) an additional 6 MHz channel for high-speed data (HSD). In addition to increasing the capacity that can be shared by a given group of homes, another benefit is that operators will not have to introduce a new class of modem to support the strategy."
The piece predicts cable providers will begin shifting to DOCSIS 3.0 in 2008 or 2009. Full deployment will be slow indeed, with DOCSIS 3.0 CMTS use at 60% by 2011, and DOCSIS 3.0 CPEs (modems, set-tops, eMTAs, etc.) to be at only 40% by that same point.

Related:
  1. Comcast: 50Mbps Now Available In 20% Of Markets
  2. Virgin Launches 50Mbps Service
  3. Virgin Takes Aim At BitTorrent
  4. Viacom, Time Warner Cable Kiss, Make Up
  5. Comcast Mum On New Bandwidth Tracker
  6. New Comcast Throttling System 100% Online
  7. DOCSIS 3.0 Gets Faster
  8. Vidéotron Expands DOCSIS 3.0 Service
Forums » The Slow Road to DOCSIS 3.0
view: topics flat text 
Post a:
GunnarDanne

join:2002-12-02
Crown City, OH

Hmm

2011... I think Verizon will have most of their fiber out by then. I could be wrong though. I probably will be wrong.

MysticGogeta
The Robot Devil
Premium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
clubs:
·Comcast

Re: Hmm

Perhaps they will, I doubt they will have more then 50-60%ish range, but most of the people who can get it will probally switch to FIOS soI bet there will be a price war around that time to grab customers, and hey I could use a lower cable bill
GunnarDanne

join:2002-12-02
Crown City, OH

Re: Hmm

Comcast likes to be cute sometimes. I don't have cable and they come by asking if I like the service (their service). Then I point to the antenna and tell them I love the price. I'd love a lower cable bill or atleast be able to choose which channels I get.

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME

Re: Hmm

When Comcast was in my area, 'basic' analog (no cheap cable here) started at $50.10/month, and digital was $60.40/month for 1 tuner, and both required onsite installation (fees).
They didn't want to compete, so I went to DirecTv $45.95/month for 1 tuner + free install and free equipment and no extra hidden franchise fees.

Note: both Comcast and DirecTv would require $5/month extra for each extra tuner.
BF69

join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

said by GunnarDanne See Profile :

Comcast likes to be cute sometimes. I don't have cable and they come by asking if I like the service (their service). Then I point to the antenna and tell them I love the price. I'd love a lower cable bill or atleast be able to choose which channels I get.
I haven't watch network TV( ABC, NBC, CBS ) in years because most of what's on is crap. Yeah attentena gets you free TV, it SHOULD be considering what little value it has.
GunnarDanne

join:2002-12-02
Crown City, OH

Re: Hmm

Mmm... during the days its soaps... at night its basically just better quality soaps

Varlik
Without Honor You Will Never Be Free
Premium
join:2002-01-06
Anderson, SC

said by GunnarDanne See Profile :

2011... I think Verizon will have most of their fiber out by then. I could be wrong though. I probably will be wrong.
Verizon isn't everyone's telephone company though. So for those of us in SBC AT&T BellSouth territories you will need to roll the date out a little say to about 2020ish.
--
"Sir SIR! We don't use DHCP servers. We only use IBM & Microsoft servers." From there my call to tech support went steadily downhill.

--Who is Benjamin Breeg? Where is Benjamin Breeg?
scantor

join:2004-08-11
Columbus, OH

Re: Hmm

Exactly. The idea that there's competition for a lot of the country is laughable. I live in the middle of a metro area with over a million people. I can't get DSL. Literally.

That's all I need to know about my options. Cable it is.
hurfy
Premium
join:2002-08-06
Spokane, WA

...and 2030 for those of us in Qwest territory

hehe, like i care i still have the same DSL from last century...on the other hand i was able to get it in 1997 so that was good

Of course that means comcast knows they have little competition here so they suck too price wise at least
matrix3D

join:2006-09-27
Deep River, CT

Re: Hmm

How about living in an area that had NO form of broadband until late 2002? I live over five miles from my town's central office, which SNET->SBC->AT&T deployed there in the mid to late 90's. They said they would "eventually" get around to installing the DSL equipment on the remote terminal in my area. Simply put, I waited for over five or six years for them to install the equipment.

To make a long story short, I languished on 56k speeds for years waiting for AT&T. Comcast FINALLY brought HSI to the area in late 2002... I even remember the exact day they turned it on: December 21st, 2002. What a great early Christmas present that was.

Oh, and by the way, it's now late 2006 and I still don't have the option of DSL where I live. I guess AT&T simply doesn't want to compete.

Toadman
How do you like these Apples

join:2001-11-28
Medina, OH

said by GunnarDanne See Profile :

2011... I think Verizon will have most of their fiber out by then. I could be wrong though. I probably will be wrong.
I am hoping by 2011 that Verizon wakes up and realizes that they have systems in Ohio as well!

hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs:

Big deal.

If the cable companies would use the full capabilities of the docsis 3.0 and not cap the modems might give fois and run for its money but, that will never happen.
LeftOfSanity

join:2005-11-06
Felton, DE

Found this interesting...

"E-router: Related to this is the e-router, a developing spec that will turn the 3.0 modem into a router and do away with the NAT (network address translation) headache. NAT, in existing routers, makes it difficult if not impossible for operators to manage services that hang off the home network. With the e-router, a subnet can be applied in the home that is made more powerful with IPv6 address spacing. "In the old days, DOCSIS was a bridge. Today, the notion is that 3.0 becomes a router that's more in tune with the market and the data that we'll be pushing around," says TI's Peter Percosan. "
--
Fighting on the Internet is like winning the Special Olympics. Win or lose, your still Retarted!
smcallah

join:2004-08-05
Home

Re: Found this interesting...

I also found this very interesting.

said by LeftOfSanity See Profile :

your still Retarted!
LeftOfSanity

join:2005-11-06
Felton, DE

Re: Found this interesting...

Congrats.

Your the only one who pointed that out. I leave it like that on purpose.
Joe12345678

join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

said by LeftOfSanity See Profile :

"E-router: Related to this is the e-router, a developing spec that will turn the 3.0 modem into a router and do away with the NAT (network address translation) headache. NAT, in existing routers, makes it difficult if not impossible for operators to manage services that hang off the home network. With the e-router, a subnet can be applied in the home that is made more powerful with IPv6 address spacing. "In the old days, DOCSIS was a bridge. Today, the notion is that 3.0 becomes a router that's more in tune with the market and the data that we'll be pushing around," says TI's Peter Percosan. "
that sounds like it will give the cable providers a easy way to make you pay per system hooked up the the modem and if you try to by pass it they can pull the same legal tricks as they did to the people who uncapped there modem.

MrChupacabra
Premium
join:2003-03-26
Florida
·Bright House
·Cingular Wireless

Re: Found this interesting...

Why charge per system? You're still limited to the total up and down speeds no matter how many systems you run. We'll still only support one PC to the modem though.
--
If it's worth saying, it is worth saying politely
Joe12345678

join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL

Re: Found this interesting...

said by MrChupacabra See Profile :

Why charge per system? You're still limited to the total up and down speeds no matter how many systems you run. We'll still only support one PC to the modem though.
if they get rid of nat then you may have to pay per ip and 1 system = 1 ip

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Re: Found this interesting...

not if you use a router or hell a linux box with 2 nics in it
thall never know

MrChupacabra
Premium
join:2003-03-26
Florida
·Bright House
·Cingular Wireless

From what I've understood from IPv6 is there is still a segment of the IP range for private (internal) use.

So where is NAT going exactly?
--
If it's worth saying, it is worth saying politely
percosan

join:2002-03-13
San Francisco, CA

2001 sounds late

2011 sounds like a sandbag date. CPE products will be ready for mass deployment in early 2008 so penetration will be based on demand/price and not availability. My opinion is that price will not be a big problem.
-p

calvoiper

join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA

Re: 2001 sounds late

I don't know if 2011 is "real" or "sandbag", but it's anything but "Internet time." With standard setting this slow, cable will have long been passed by.

Using standards setting this slow, the Society of Automotive Engineers would just now be getting around to picking procedures for labelling multi-grade engine oils....

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!

kamm

join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8

Pathetic...

... that is.

2010? By 2010 most of the Western World countries will be waaay ahead of us, thanks to our rotten, so-called "market"-based (means monopoly-based) approach.
The most annoying thing is that everybody gets away with this shit - the totally corrupt, crooked FCC, the fully corrupt legislative body, the buddies in the goverment...
Congrat cables, your investment in FCC chiefs and Senators etc is working very well.

MrChupacabra
Premium
join:2003-03-26
Florida
·Bright House
·Cingular Wireless

Re: Pathetic...

You wear a tin foil hat don't you?

If you keep up with fun technology news you'll see that we got some US companies that are pulling some interesting technology out of their bags. Like silicon boards that can produce laser light.

Also the only real legalized monopolies I've seen are power companies. Cable Co's are regulated by franchise agreements and any cable co that wants to move into the area can as long as they sign up with a franchise agreement with the city/county they're operating in.

Phone companies have to share their lines with others in the area as long as those other companies make sure they pay for the leased lines.

Also I fail to see where you think the entire government is corrupt here. Yes there are a lot of miss-guided people in the FCC doing what they -think- is right. Yes there are people in the legislative body that are corrupt but its not a fully corrupted body.

Do you think men in black are watching you all the time too? sheesh.
--
If it's worth saying, it is worth saying politely

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Re: Pathetic...

the thing is hes right
yes the TECH is out but the slow ass cable telco are draging there feet IMPLAMENTING it DOCSIS 3.0 has been set for a wile now and 2.0 even longer and how many cable co.s use even 2.0?

TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast

Re: Pathetic...

said by elios See Profile :

the TECH is out but the slow ass cable telco are draging there feet IMPLAMENTING it DOCSIS 3.0 has been set for a wile now and 2.0 even longer and how many cable co.s use even 2.0?
Docsis 3.0 wasn't approved to Aug 7,2006:
»www.cablelabs.com/news/pr/2006/0···706.html

And NO hardware has been certified for Doscis 3.0 yet:
»www.cablemodem.com/downloads/Cer···ucts.pdf

So, how are the cable companies dragging their feet when no 3.0 hardware is even available for purchase yet?
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page
grandpinaple

join:2006-01-03
New York, NY

Re: Pathetic...

Seriously do you think Cable companies enjoy doing DOCSIS 2.0 upgrades in FIOS areas when they could go 3.0...

kamm

join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8


moderated:
October 4th, @08:30AM

said by MrChupacabra See Profile :

You wear a tin foil hat don't you?
Or perhaps you just can't grasp the point...?

If you keep up with fun technology news you'll see that we got some US companies that are pulling some interesting technology out of their bags. Like silicon boards that can produce laser light.
Which has nothing to do with broadband, right...

Also the only real legalized monopolies I've seen are power companies.
Suuuure, ROFLMAO...

Cable Co's are regulated by franchise agreements and any cable co that wants to move into the area can as long as they sign up with a franchise agreement with the city/county they're operating in.
Which means monopoly, right. It's enough to bribe the gov and done deal, you've got a monopoly.

Phone companies have to share their lines with others in the area as long as those other companies make sure they pay for the leased lines.

Telcos have to share the wire with other DSL providers, cable doesn't have to share anything.

Which part can't you comprehend?

Also I fail to see where you think the entire government is corrupt here.
Well, so far you have failed to see even the most basic points here...

Yes there are a lot of miss-guided people in the FCC doing what they -think- is right. Yes there are people in the legislative body that are corrupt but its not a fully corrupted body.
It WAS and IS, at the highest level.

Just check out Martin's clearly illegal actions, rebuffed by court, to completely erase any limitations over local communication monopolies. Or check their pathetic, FAKE, FALSIFIED statistical reports on US broadband.

Criminals, crooked criminals.

MrChupacabra
Premium
join:2003-03-26
Florida
·Bright House
·Cingular Wireless


edit:
October 4th, @10:59AM

Re: Pathetic...

If you keep up with fun technology news you'll see that we got some US companies that are pulling some interesting technology out of their bags. Like silicon boards that can produce laser light.
Which has nothing to do with broadband, right...
A HCF network uses fiber optics which uses light to pass data. Removing large amounts of laser equipment with a smaller laser producing chip would improve things dramatically as it would cost less than a conventional laser. This isn't difficult stuff you know.

Cable Co's are regulated by franchise agreements and any cable co that wants to move into the area can as long as they sign up with a franchise agreement with the city/county they're operating in.
Which means monopoly, right. It's enough to bribe the gov and done deal, you've got a monopoly.
A Franchise agreement is the right to use the utility lanes. A Franchise agreement is not a monopoly. Please get that strait in your head.

Phone companies have to share their lines with others in the area as long as those other companies make sure they pay for the leased lines.

Telcos have to share the wire with other DSL providers, cable doesn't have to share anything.

Which part can't you comprehend?
That is a system left in place from the old AT&T days of the 80s to prevent the 'single phone company' from dominating a market. Because of how cable companies operate they are not the only option for a cable co to move into an area with. If they were we would not have companies that over build like Knology. Not many companies do over building because its expensive as hell and investors really hate it. That's why cable does not have to share its lines.

Edit: Almost forgot. The need to share DSL on the line was shot down. They only have to share telephone service.

Yes there are a lot of miss-guided people in the FCC doing what they -think- is right. Yes there are people in the legislative body that are corrupt but its not a fully corrupted body.
It WAS and IS, at the highest level.

Just check out Martin's clearly illegal actions, rebuffed by court, to completely erase any limitations over local communication monopolies. Or check their pathetic, FAKE, FALSIFIED statistical reports on US broadband.

Criminals, crooked criminals.
The FCC, like many other agencies of the government, is not in the highest levels of the government. Also, because one does not see a reason for the limitation over local communication systems that does not mean its illegal. Removing that part of their scope would remove a lot of the red tape they deal with on the local level. Is it a good thing to do? probably not. Would it help slim the FCC down, probably so. Did the courts agree with him? No they didn't. Does it make it illegal, no it does not.

Now please stop pulling out random nonsense from your nether regions. I'm almost expecting you to complain that we dont have better broadband because the government doesn't want us to have access to reversed engineed alien communication technology.
--
If it's worth saying, it is worth saying politely
HyPeRbAnD

join:2006-01-07
Stow, MA

I still think docsis 1.1 & 2.0 can compete with FiOS

Splitting how many customers share a DOCSIS QAM is very easy and doesn't cost as much as DOCSIS3.0. In our system we have been doing this right along. We can make 100 customers per node without even doing any construction. I would think most cable companies that have built HFC networks over the past 15 years are in the same boat.

Even if you dont have spare fibers in a node/splice pack, you can always MUX/DEMUX on a single fiber. They still have many options to consider before having to switch to a new platform. So it wouldn't surprise me if it did take until 2010 or so to deploy 3.0...

You know what's funny, we are splitting nodes not because of high speed data we are splitting because of VOD demands. Adding new streams every 6months or so.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

Qwest fibre

Current cable modem can beat qwest fibre NOW. Qwest's fibre product is capped at 5mbps. even CHARTER cable can do that
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth

tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

Re: Qwest fibre

said by dvd536 See Profile :

Current cable modem can beat qwest fibre NOW. Qwest's fibre product is capped at 5mbps. even CHARTER cable can do that
Qwest's idea of fibre product is a piece of string with a dixie cup at each end.
Qwest's (mis)management lacked the vision to compete, and now they (after stalling endlessly) they lack the capital and the confidence of investor's to even try.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

Re: Qwest fibre

said by tshirt See Profile :

said by dvd536 See Profile :

Current cable modem can beat qwest fibre NOW. Qwest's fibre product is capped at 5mbps. even CHARTER cable can do that
Qwest's idea of fibre product is a piece of string with a dixie cup at each end.
Qwest's (mis)management lacked the vision to compete, and now they (after stalling endlessly) they lack the capital and the confidence of investor's to even try.
Whats in a name?
Qwest stinks as bad as US West did.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth
Forums » The Slow Road to DOCSIS 3.0


Friday, 09-Jan 06:57:41 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.republican-creole