Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

The proxies have been off for months in North and South Manchester. Any that shows they are proxied should check there browser to see if they have a manual proxy set :).

for instance this is Warrington Which is served from South Manchester Cams

You appear to be on a Virgin Media Connection
Your IP address is 81.102.**.***
Host cpc2-warr1-0-0-cust***.bagu.cable.ntl.com

However if you are on a proxie you would see something like this.

You appear to be on a Virgin Media Connection
Your IP address is 81.102.**.***
Host cpc2-warr1-0-0-cust***.bagu.cable.ntl.com
Your Proxy IP address is 213.107.**.***
This is a Luton Proxy Server

---------- Post added at 18:01 ---------- Previous post was at 17:55 ----------



No your not :)

---------- Post added at 18:02 ---------- Previous post was at 18:01 ----------

Agreed :tu:

Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

I'm still on a proxy, a Middlesborough one. Browsing has been painful today, websites opening slowly, no chance of watching streaming video. Removing the proxy makes no difference, tech support say there is no problem and my speedtest is fine.

What else can I try?

Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

At last! No proxy for portsmouth area, previous cosham proxy. And no changes to the speedhttp://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/im...ons/icon14.gif

Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

Actually on a direct connection you will not use a proxy at all. But you can still have a proxy put in and it will work. I can still use the Cosham proxies if manually put in. Or quite a few different ones come to that. So the proxy cache are still there.:)

Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

The only good thing is now i can use rapidshare. That was my only concern about proxies :)

Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

true, Alan York could try setting a manual proxy, in another area, to see if that improves the connection :)

Re: Are VM about to drop proxy servers?
 

Im not really sure whether no proxy is good or bad tbh.

When direct connection and no proxy specified i get these speedtest results.

NO PROXY

Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:10:17 UTC

1st 512K took 625 ms = 819.2 KB/sec, approx 6750 Kbps, 6.59 Mbps
2nd 512K took 641 ms = 798.8 KB/sec, approx 6582 Kbps, 6.43 Mbps
3rd 512K took 672 ms = 761.9 KB/sec, approx 6278 Kbps, 6.13 Mbps
4th 512K took 625 ms = 819.2 KB/sec, approx 6750 Kbps, 6.59 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 6590 Kbps, 6.44 Mbps

But when using the number 12 Luton Proxy I ALWAYS get this, faster speeds.

Mon, 23 Apr 2007 21:11:21 UTC

1st 512K took 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 Mbps
2nd 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps
3rd 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
4th 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9650 Kbps, 9.42 Mbps

So the end of Proxies could be bad for me and many others no doubt :(

If anyone can shed some light on the Cr*P performance when not using a proxy in Hemel Hempstead and the massive performance boost when using the Luton 12 Proxy, I would be very interested ;)

PS Thank god for Giganews tho ;)