Google Fiber in Austin?

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Dargason

I'm happy with my 30mb/s down (charter) but I wish I could increase my upload rate. I think it's only about 3mb/s.

My Charter service is 30Mbps down, 4Mbps up. That's just a limitation with cable. It is, from it's base, a single-directional broadcast system. There simply isn't enough bandwidth (or transmit power) in the upstream direction. They key advantage of cable, though, is that it's downstream is very good, and is just as good on 30 year old infrastructure.

[Brent]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

My Charter service ...

Off topic, but is your Charter all encrypted now?

http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/15/c...t-basic-cable/

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Brent

Off topic, but is your Charter all encrypted now?

http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/15/c...t-basic-cable/

No clue - I don't use them for TV - just internet.

[mguebert]

Originally Posted by Brent

Off topic, but is your Charter all encrypted now?

http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/15/c...t-basic-cable/

I live in the St. Louis service area, and only Pay / TBS / and History / Nat Geo is copy once.

[Brent]

Do we have any Provo, Utah + SageTV folks around? Provo is getting Google Fiber as well http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/...e-silicon.html

[darcilicious]

In order to bring Fiber to Provo, we’ve signed an agreement to purchase iProvo, an existing fiber-optic network owned by the city. [...] Provo started building their own municipal network in 2004 because they decided that providing access to high speed connectivity was important to their community’s future. In 2011, they started looking for a partner that could acquire their network and deliver an affordable service for Provoans. We’re committed to keeping their vision alive [...]

Interesting. I wonder how many other municipal fiber networks would like Google to come and expand/upgrade their networks.

[Brent]

Originally Posted by darcilicious

Interesting. I wonder how many other municipal fiber networks would like Google to come and expand/upgrade their networks.

There is a town in the metro Kansas City area called "North Kansas City" that already has a fiber network, but will begin leasing their fiber net to Google Fiber. Somewhat similar situation that was just official yesterday. Not getting the same press since it's in the KC Metro area, but it shows (like the Provo situation) that municipalities have an option here to let Google either buy or lease/run their network for them.

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascit...ease-with.html

[Gustovier]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

My Charter service is 30Mbps down, 4Mbps up. That's just a limitation with cable. It is, from it's base, a single-directional broadcast system. There simply isn't enough bandwidth (or transmit power) in the upstream direction. They key advantage of cable, though, is that it's downstream is very good, and is just as good on 30 year old infrastructure.

Comcast just increased my speed here in Chicago to 105Mbps down and 20Mbps up with no increase in price! Real world speeds I'm seeing are about 90Mbps down and 22Mbps up. Loving it especially the up-speed. If only the transcoder used for placeshifting would use better quality, the max quality you can set is horrible. But I've just moved on to other solutions for watching video remotely

[wayner]

This is more in response to the post by Fuzzy but I don't think that really low upload speeds are insurmountable. With DOCSIS 3.0 modems they are able to do more channel-bonding, or something like that, to get more upload speed. In my part of Toronto the best service is now 150/10 although it costs $120 per month.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by wayner

This is more in response to the post by Fuzzy but I don't think that really low upload speeds are insurmountable. With DOCSIS 3.0 modems they are able to do more channel-bonding, or something like that, to get more upload speed. In my part of Toronto the best service is now 150/10 although it costs $120 per month.

The limitation in upstream isn't about channel bonding - it's the fact that the standard in-place distribution amplifiers support downstream through a large spectrum (full CATV spectrum), but upstream path amplification is limited to a very small frequency spectrum. Bonding more than one upstream channel (which wasn't possible until DOCSIS3.0) won't help much if there are only 8 upstream sub-band channels very low in the spectrum available for a given neighborhood. To work with the higher bandwidth, and higher modulation types used in DOCSIS 3, it takes, at a minimum, changing out the distribution amps for the affected neighborhood, if not major changes the entire way to the head-end. Also, do to the upstream losses being so high, noise makes a much larger impact on upstream channels, meaning they rn at most 64QAM modulation, while downstream is run at 256QAM.

DOCSIS 3.1 will change the modulation scheme away from CATV based QAM, to the much more advanced OFDM into many much smaller datastreams, which will not only make it more agile, but be able to compress a LOT more data into the same bandwidth (but require, most likely, a LOT of network changes to implement). OFDM/DOCSIS3.1 could theoretically get it up to Gb speeds, but only if they devote a LOT of the spectrum to it.

[bcjenkins]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

The limitation in upstream isn't about channel bonding - it's the fact that the standard in-place distribution amplifiers support downstream through a large spectrum (full CATV spectrum), but upstream path amplification is limited to a very small frequency spectrum. Bonding more than one upstream channel (which wasn't possible until DOCSIS3.0) won't help much if there are only 8 upstream sub-band channels very low in the spectrum available for a given neighborhood. To work with the higher bandwidth, and higher modulation types used in DOCSIS 3, it takes, at a minimum, changing out the distribution amps for the affected neighborhood, if not major changes the entire way to the head-end. Also, do to the upstream losses being so high, noise makes a much larger impact on upstream channels, meaning they rn at most 64QAM modulation, while downstream is run at 256QAM.

DOCSIS 3.1 will change the modulation scheme away from CATV based QAM, to the much more advanced OFDM into many much smaller datastreams, which will not only make it more agile, but be able to compress a LOT more data into the same bandwidth (but require, most likely, a LOT of network changes to implement). OFDM/DOCSIS3.1 could theoretically get it up to Gb speeds, but only if they devote a LOT of the spectrum to it.

Nice post!

[Gustovier]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

The limitation in upstream isn't about channel bonding - it's the fact that the standard in-place distribution amplifiers support downstream through a large spectrum (full CATV spectrum), but upstream path amplification is limited to a very small frequency spectrum. Bonding more than one upstream channel (which wasn't possible until DOCSIS3.0) won't help much if there are only 8 upstream sub-band channels very low in the spectrum available for a given neighborhood. To work with the higher bandwidth, and higher modulation types used in DOCSIS 3, it takes, at a minimum, changing out the distribution amps for the affected neighborhood, if not major changes the entire way to the head-end. Also, do to the upstream losses being so high, noise makes a much larger impact on upstream channels, meaning they rn at most 64QAM modulation, while downstream is run at 256QAM.

DOCSIS 3.1 will change the modulation scheme away from CATV based QAM, to the much more advanced OFDM into many much smaller datastreams, which will not only make it more agile, but be able to compress a LOT more data into the same bandwidth (but require, most likely, a LOT of network changes to implement). OFDM/DOCSIS3.1 could theoretically get it up to Gb speeds, but only if they devote a LOT of the spectrum to it.

I wonder what comcast did in my area to upgrade a big majority of folks to 20Mbps up. You are right in that upload speeds are really acceptable to line noise. One of my neighbors about a couple of blocks away had caused some line noise impacting my upgrade speed greatly a few months back

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Gustovier

I wonder what comcast did in my area to upgrade a big majority of folks to 20Mbps up. You are right in that upload speeds are really acceptable to line noise. One of my neighbors about a couple of blocks away had caused some line noise impacting my upgrade speed greatly a few months back

My most likely guess? Get rid of the analog broadcasts clogging up the bottom end of the spectrum, and enable more channels for upstream traffic. You can find out why channels/frequencies are being used by connecting to your cable modem's web interface. It should list what downstream and upstream channels/frequencies are being used, and how many are being bonded together.

[Gustovier]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

The limitation in upstream isn't about channel bonding - it's the fact that the standard in-place distribution amplifiers support downstream through a large spectrum (full CATV spectrum), but upstream path amplification is limited to a very small frequency spectrum. Bonding more than one upstream channel (which wasn't possible until DOCSIS3.0) won't help much if there are only 8 upstream sub-band channels very low in the spectrum available for a given neighborhood. To work with the higher bandwidth, and higher modulation types used in DOCSIS 3, it takes, at a minimum, changing out the distribution amps for the affected neighborhood, if not major changes the entire way to the head-end. Also, do to the upstream losses being so high, noise makes a much larger impact on upstream channels, meaning they rn at most 64QAM modulation, while downstream is run at 256QAM.

DOCSIS 3.1 will change the modulation scheme away from CATV based QAM, to the much more advanced OFDM into many much smaller datastreams, which will not only make it more agile, but be able to compress a LOT more data into the same bandwidth (but require, most likely, a LOT of network changes to implement). OFDM/DOCSIS3.1 could theoretically get it up to Gb speeds, but only if they devote a LOT of the spectrum to it.

I wonder what comcast did in my area to upgrade a big majority of folks to 20Mbps up. You are right in that upload speeds are really acceptable to line noise. One of my neighbors about a couple of blocks away had caused some line noise impacting my upgrade speed greatly a few months back