[c-nsp] video,voip and internet over DSL (converged)

[Dracul]

Thanks all! I'll take into consideration all your inputs. Another thing.
will the CPU processing power of each DSLAM be enough or do I also need to
distribute its load, like not filling up a DSLAM's ports to its limit, maybe
70% only per floor of the building?

regards,
chris

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Scott Granados <gsgranados at comcast.net>wrote:

> DSL will work but you'll need the right flavor.
>
> You could set different PVC's with different QOS and characteristics but
> bottom line you'll need enough pipe to make this work.  I believe it's
> something on the order of 6 - 8 megabits for HD and 1-3 for sd.
>   I've heard although I've never used it personally that the ATT Uverse
> offering works similar to this with ADSL2+ on the last few feet in to the
> home.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dracul" <chris.garzon at gmail.com>
> To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 7:22 PM
> Subject: [c-nsp] video,voip and internet over DSL (converged)
>
>
>  Hi list,
>>
>> is it feasible to broadcast video/voip + internet  over DSL like lets say
>> I
>> deploy a cisco DSLAM infra in a 20 storey building. It would run over a
>> media server solution and a VOIP network. I am not sure if this would be a
>> stable solution considering I want to broadcast HD and SD alike plus VOIP
>> and internet to boot.
>>
>> Any cons? like noise level or quality of the video or quality of bandwidth
>> etc. because DSL transport is just running over copper right? Or would I
>> be
>> better off running fibre? But of course cost will then quantify the use of
>> DSL.
>>
>> regards,
>> Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>> signature database 3995 (20090408) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>