I am curious to know what modems are available to support the Shaw Internet 150 service. I am currently on the Internet 60 plan using the Cisco DPC3825.
If you upgrade to WO 150 you will get a Hitron CGNM-2250.
Hitron is the only option?
I tried a Hitron modem when Shaw was first providing them a few years ago. I tried it for 2 weeks and returned it for a Cisco.
Yeah, Shaw made it that way, so not much you can do. I would prefer an Arris modem over Hitron but they do not allow us to get our own modems like what US does.
Good morning flavius
There are currently two modems that support our Internet 150 - the Hitron CGNM-2250 and the Cisco DPC3848-V.
Hope this helps!
I've had both. There's not much to choose between them. The Hitron is a little smaller. I think technically it offers the ability to use more bonded channels than the Cisco, but it makes no practical difference to most people. Unfortunately they both have the defective Intel Puma 6 chipset that affects performance.
Depending on the network congestion I would use nether of them because they both do not offer DFS. For personally I have I would go bridge mode with my own networking hardware and go on a clean channel (DFS) for my wireless, which no one is on.
Hello, I requested a 150Mbps upgrade through a third-party ISP.
I was told my Technicolor 4300 was insufficient, yet the upgraded modem they want to send out (Technicolor 4350) is almost identical: only supporting 4x the number of bonded channels.
Both modems support 108 - 1002 MHz, with QAM 64 or QAM 256 downstream. In ideal conditions, my existing modem supports up to 340Mbps downstream (8 - 42Mbps channels). I think I am reasonably close to the distribution point; since the technician installed an 8dB attenuator when the service was initially set up.
Does your service only supports QAM 64? I would understand the need for a new modem if you were rolling out Docsis 3.1 for 4x the spectral density (up to QAM 1024 apparently).
Edit: I think I figured it out -- Cable is still a shared medium up to the premises.
Because it is essentially impossible to constantly saturate your connection, the service is over-subscribed. This is good, because it allows high burstable speeds, for less than the raw back-haul bandwidth would otherwise cost.
If we assume an over-subscription ratio of 10:1: 20 people can share a bonded group of channels with my old modem (assuming 150Mbps plans for simplicity). However, if one person does a bandwidth test, everybody else will experience slow Internet for about 30 seconds.
With the new modem, you would have 80 people sharing 1.2Gbps for the same subscription ratio. Now if one person does a bandwidth test, the others are unlikely to notice a slow-down. Of course, more people may mean more people doing a bandwidth test at once. However, even if you assume 4 people saturating 150Mbps: the other subscribers still have 600Mbps to share between them (about 7.8Mbps each: enough to stream about 4 1080p movies IIRC)
Looks like I can't edit my posts anymore.
I can estimate the actual over-subscription ratio based on the "The guidelines for Bandwidth Usage" in the Acceptable use policy.
Internet 5 -> 65GB/mo -> works out to: 250kbps, or ratio of 20:1
Internet 30 -> 300GB/mo -> works out to 1.16Mbps, ratio of 26:1
Internet 150 -> 1TB/mo -> works out to 3.86Mbps, ratio of 39:1
Because the modem supported upload ratios (5:1 and 3:1 (for the slower one)) are not as extreme as the 10:1 ratio provided by Shaw: I can conclude that the upload bandwidth is not oversubscribed nearly as much (divide those numbers by 2-3).
phillipsjk wrote: I can estimate the actual over-subscription ratio based on the "The guidelines for Bandwidth Usage" in the Acceptable use policy. Internet 5 -> 65GB/mo -> works out to: 250kbps, or ratio of 20:1Internet 30 -> 300GB/mo -> works out to 1.16Mbps, ratio of 26:1Internet 150 -> 1TB/mo -> works out to 3.86Mbps, ratio of 39:1 Because the modem supported upload ratios (5:1 and 3:1 (for the slower one)) are not as extreme as the 10:1 ratio provided by Shaw: I can conclude that the upload bandwidth is not oversubscribed nearly as much (divide those numbers by 2-3).
I'm not even sure what your ratios are showing.. From experience, the upload bandwidth usually gets saturated before downstream traffic.
Possibly confusing because I am talking about 2 different ratios in that post:
First: how many people are sharing the bandwidth (over-subscription ratio).
Second: the Download/Upload ratio.
They appear to use a lower over-subscription ratio for the lower bandwidth plans. That makes some intuitive sense: it is hard to saturate 150Mbps for long.
A 4-way splitter could make that up too (7db on a 4-way).
I lack such a slitter: and that sounds *very* close to 8dB.
I lack such a slitter: and that sounds *very* close to 8dB.
Indeed.. If you had TV service and needed a 4-way splitter, as I believe most homes are TV and internet, there would be the 7db drop from the splitter. Because you don't have TV, so the 7db drop from the splitter isn't there, a attenuator is installed instead.
But how many people are sharing the bandwidth is everybody, on all speed plans.. I believe the magical over-subscription ratio is around 1:20 for an ISP. Different speed plans don't have an effect on the over-subscription ratio.
You calculated how much constant bandwidth is needed to hit each data cap, in one direction.. 10mbps is 3.3TB per month, in one direction, this doesn't say anything about the internet packages though. I also believe the data cap has been lifted on all 150 accounts now, so all 150 accounts have unlimited transfer.
phillipsjk wrote: I was told my Technicolor 4300 was insufficient, yet the upgraded modem they want to send out (Technicolor 4350) is almost identical: only supporting 4x the number of bonded channels. Both modems support 108 - 1002 MHz, with QAM 64 or QAM 256 downstream. In ideal conditions, my existing modem supports up to 340Mbps downstream (8 - 42Mbps channels). I think I am reasonably close to the distribution point; since the technician installed an 8dB attenuator when the service was initially set up.
Yes.. Spectrum rage, 108-1002 MHz, however the 4300 will at most use 48MHz at any one point in time.. The 4350 can use 192MHz, that is a substantial difference.. Allows load distribution on more channels, increasing efficiency.
I'm waiting for the mythical 4400 modem...
Close to the distribution point doesn't matter.. Near or far it is all the same on cable. All depends on the tap your drop uses. You have internet only? A 4-way splitter could make that up too (7db on a 4-way). Much easier to drop the signal on location than raise it.
I currently am on Shaw's older Broadband 60 service using the Cisco DPC3825. Oddly enough, what I am paying right now is more expensive than the Internet 150 service.
Since I recently moved into my first house from a condo, the wireless signal strength across 3 different floors is poor and inconsistent. I am looking at overhauling my home network which includes replacing my internet modem.
I am strongly considering bridging my modem as geopro1 suggested, getting a robust PoE router and use 3 wireless access points (not wireless extenders). The wireless functionality on the Cisco DPC3848-V isn't essential. Configuring the wireless will be a bit of a pain though.
The reason why I haven't changed over is that the Cisco DPC3825 solved my NAT issues as I have multiple gaming consoles on my network.
I am of the philosophy, if it's not broken don't fix it. Hopefully the Cisco DPC3848-V can provide the same functionality.
There isn't a lot of network congestion as it is only shared between my wife and I. She streams lots of YouTube and I game a lot online with my Xbox and PC.
The wireless shouldn't be that hard. What would be your challenges?
Just curious, which PoE router are you referring to? I am thinking you could go with a Security Gateway and a PoE switch.
Hi sango, the only really challenge is the setup of the WAPs. The wireless should be on a channel unique to the surroundings to minimize any interference. Signal strength has to be strong on all 3 levels of my home. If configured properly the wireless devices should be able to roam to the strongest signal.
I haven't identified any equipment yet, still researching what I need to purchase. I am willing to spend some $ on the equipment setup. I like the idea of the security gateway and a PoE switch. That way I am not limited to a handful of ports. I have a lot of feeds from my house to my utility room.
Does all your tv cables/network jacks/phone, all converge to a structured media enclosure? That would be the idea as all your equipment can go inside there.
You have the correct idea about the channel planning. For 2.4 Ghz, it's 1, 6 and 11 since these are the only 3 non overlapping channels. For 5 Ghz, select a different channel for each one.
This my current setup.
UniFi Cloud Key
UniFi Security Gateway
UniFi Switch 8 60W
UniFi AP AC PRO
Since you showed me yours, I had to show you mine. Lots of work needed here.
It's a start. Have a look at other users who did Ubiquiti UniFi setups in their home below. You will be able to get a better idea your setup as users there have their own setup and network complexities.
UniFi - Stories
I run a similar setup using a UAP-AC-PRO, ERL-3 for a router (instead of USG), and an Intel NUC with Debian instead of the Cloud Key for a controller.
Very happy with Ubiquiti.
Are you running a UniFi 8 port switch as well?
Yes, I have the UniFi US-8-60W inside the enclosure. I also have the the US-8-150W as well (not shown).
sango Looks like this is from your Comcast account you've mentioned before, as Shaw doesn't use that modem.
Yes this is correct, the setup in the picture shown is with Comcast. The one for Shaw is essentially identical setup to my Comcast; just imagine a Shaw modem there in its place of my own modem.
1. Can I use my own Hitron CDA3 with Shaw Internet 150?
2. Is there any difference b/w the Hitron CDA3 and the Shaw model in performance, bugs, etc?
3. Which routers work best with the Hitron CDA3 for Shaw 150 (assuming yes to quest #1)?
Retrieving data ...