Wired country

Barry, this cuts to the bit that never seems to be put into the advertising ... when did you see anyone's oversubscription target or CIR? Have you ever seen a guaranteed minimum end-to-end speed? This headline style advertising must drive the callcentre staff nuts. Lots of customers must feel shortchanged.

Your test idea is relevant to all networks and ISPs, not just Wired Country. For example, if Telecom get their 250k broadband customers and they all have a 1 Mbit service (to make the Math easy!). Do you really expect them to have 250 Gbit of international capacity? Of course not, some will sleep, some will be reading the pages, etc. It would be great to find out how small the pipes are into some towns.

On wireless, WC definitely do have a finite resource which could constrain customers. However it is unlikely to do so often as the rest of the Internet does a pretty good job of doing it first.

According to the nzdsl pipe, I am only achieving 4.5 Mbit at present ... but I have a 5 Mbit pipe. I think I'll let ICONZ off with that, especially since it might be that another staff member is using it too.

NeilS

However I do find Barry exp interesting. Although I wouldn't always expect maximal d/l speeds especially during peak times, if Barry did several tests at offpeak times, preferbly early morning (3 am) on weekdays, I would def expect max speed on local sites, probably international as well.

I think Barry is probably getting service from Sky Tower (which is where APE is if I'm not wrong). There's no current FTP server there I believe but if there was, I would expect maximal speed from there most of the time too.

Also looking back (page 4) there was one user with ICONZ on 256k who did get expected speeds.

P.S. Barry you might want to make sure your max MTU is 1492 or lower. Some PPPoE software does it automatically but some doesn't. Windows XP (assuming you're using that) should auto adjust to find the best MTU I think but since you can never get over 1492, there is no reason to let it try...

[quote="NeilS"]Name a town and I can find out for you...

As for international capacity, we should be totalling 960Gbps by now (takapuna to hawaii, and the round trip via aus/fiji), take out of that however much Aussie has reserved, and Fiji, then god knows how much Hawaii and the USA are spitting between one another... Hawaii has something like 1280Gbps between them and the USA by memory...

TMYK

For kicks and giggles, here's a map of most of our trunk infrastructure, I dont think it takes into account Telecom's "ladder" trunk though, it's dated circa mid 90's



For POTS/PSTN, Telecom assumes 70% of theoretical capacity peak and designs for that. I'd assume something similar for their IP services

960gbps? Are you sure?

According to the SCC homepage, their capacity is still at 240gbps (with the capability to reach 480gbps quite easily, based on current tech anyway). Shin satellite is supposedly going to provide about 90gbps I think but I don't see how there is 960gbps.

At least that is assuming I'm understanding the SCC website correctly which I may not be

the SCC site is fairly outdated, we should be up to 480 to hawaii by now.. as for the 960 figure, assume our hawaii link is 480 and read my post again

It's the theoretical maximum available to us, and we'll never see that figure over SCC dedicated for just widdle old NZ - we have to share it with Aussie and Fiji

That's interesting. When was it upgraded?

I'm just a bit surprised because the SCC page seems to suggest the whole SCC is limited to 240gbps (not just the NZ-Hawaii part) but upgradable to 480gbps. Does it have something to do with the fully protected status?

I see Wired Country have installed new locations in Awhitu Peninsular for probe. Good on ya!

Hi Folks
Been Pretty Busy recently and after a week of no replys to my original post , I gave Up.
Thanks for the Feedback.
Some Facts.
I'm Coming off a Rural repeater that has Shitloads of Unused Banwidth.
The HUGE number of Tests I Carried Out Were Done at variing Hours to compensate for ISP workload.
Telecom/Xtra Adsl 128k ALWAYS gave me resultls of 129K..131K
The Ethereal samples I have captured, Have (IMAO) Nothing to do with the Network But Have Everything to do with HOW the ISP's do their Limiting .
Pinging an IP will prob give you your max Rate But gives No indication of how a bunch of packets will be treated.

I've tried multiple MTU's to try and fix this prob.
It's Not My Problem as far as I can See

ISP's Help Desk go's SILENT when they get to see my Results.
Why Might that be .........


Please Stop bending over .
If We Are Paying for a service & getting 75% of it . Pay 75% of the Bill.

Please Post any Results of your current connection to this list or email me.
It's Simple.
Go To The Speed Test Pages and Test.


Regards
Barry Parr

Well I could answer that, but it would be a lot of typing... I assume you've never worked on a helldesk?

Anyway, it sounds like you're being a bit of a prat towards them, and trust me.. that wont incite them to bother taking the effort.

Suggestion: "Hi, I've been doing some tests of your services and I dont think I'm getting what I paid for. Here's how I tested:
*list how you tested*
*wop
*bop
*a
*loo
*bop
and here are my results:
*list results*
*a
*wop
*bam
*boom
Can you please ensure that these are forwarded to your network engineers for analysis? I'm sure you can agree that your clients deserve the product they pay for, not a product that performs at x% of the advertised performance.

I look forward to your response and thankyou for your time and efforts"

Make sure you use the word "client" instead of "customer." Unlike a customer, a client has a service agreement and keeps coming back... Companies can afford to lose customers, they dont like losing clients

In other news, I recall some dude on pressf1 looking at those speedtests and finding that they were flawed. He hacked together a fixed version and results were different... Unfortunately he was hosting them on a paradise.net site so results would have been different...

I have just had a thought though.. the point of having speedtests on servers sitting on megabandwidth is because the hopcount is reduced. With depeering going on, hopcounts are going to increase, links between ISP's are going to get slower and so that could affect results.. In short, take the speedtests with a lick of a grain of salt.

What would be good would be to get a speedtest on say WIX or APE and then test the differences between a peering speedtest and a nonpeering speedtest... hmmm

whetu.
Thanks For Your Responce.
My First Enquiries to the ISP were done using the approach you sugested.
With No Mention of Not getting a fair Go.
All I wanted was to get the problem fixed.
Twice they said that they would look into it. Then Silence.

It Seems that Every one else is happy with their lot.
This Prat will just go away.

I'm in Te Atatu (south, next to Glendene). And this is the summary of my wireless attempts.

WC = -82db(you need -78 or below) = FAIL (I have perfect LOS to skytower, and its roughly 10km in distance, GPS measured).

NZWireless = Fail, no signal at all

Woosh = Yup, all good. Works anywhere in my house, and speed is
decent. (to my suprize, considering what I have heard).

Avg ping is 70-120ms ... and the fact I can drive down the northern mtrway to work and be on msn is g33k.



As for WC failing, the install tech said the technogloy does not fly
over water very well (BS ... Taka and Deveonport get it FFS)

But if you goto ihugs connect pages/coverage/akland central at the
moment, you will see their saying some of the sectors are at
capacity.... *sigh*