Cable Forum - View Single Post

notmuffy · 23-03-2004, 11:59

Please don't shoot the n00b.

I live in Harlow, Essex (large town 25ish miles from London).
NTL 150 k connex...
External modem which is called "NTL Home 100"... it is light grey.
I use ethernet connection (instead of USB).
I am not connected to a proxy according to various links found here.

REMOTE_ADDR..............................**.***.** *.**
CLIENT_IP.....................................
HTTP_X_FORWARDED_FOR.............
. .
REQUEST_METHOD........................GET
SERVER_NAME..............................romulas.z mnt.co.uk

SERVER_PORT..............................80

Here is my result of Robin's speedtest. It is the same type of results I always get at these test sites.

Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:43:02 GMT
1st 128K took 12500 ms = 10486 Bytes/sec = approx 87 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 12265 ms = 10687 Bytes/sec = approx 89 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 9766 ms = 13421 Bytes/sec = approx 112 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 14734 ms = 8896 Bytes/sec = approx 74 kbits/sec

Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:56:05 GMT
1st 128K took 12625 ms = 10382 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 9859 ms = 13295 Bytes/sec = approx 111 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 12078 ms = 10852 Bytes/sec = approx 90 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 12063 ms = 10866 Bytes/sec = approx 90 kbits/sec

After disabling Kerio Firewall and Trillan (the only things accessing the web besides the test page)

Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:57:50 GMT
1st 128K took 12235 ms = 10713 Bytes/sec = approx 89 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 12734 ms = 10293 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 12656 ms = 10357 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 12735 ms = 10292 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec

Ok time for some questions!
I realize that this is an appalling speed now that I have benchmarked it with others on this site. For the past 1.5 years of service, I thought that was how the service worked for everyone.

1. Would finding a proxy help my speed?
2. Is my modem too outdated?
3. How do I get modem service through my STB? I have noticed that there is an ethernet jack at the back of my STB.
4. How do I find out if my area is too "clogged" with other cable users? (Maybe this is my problem?)

I am moving shortly, I want to get a 500-600k connex, and I am seriously thinking of turning to SKY and some kind of DSL connex. Has anyone done this?

Why I like NTL so far:
I am a music downloader. (Yeah, yeah, buy me a Parrot.) My point is that I have heard of BT customers (and others) getting a lot of flack for connecting to Kazaa, BT, DC, etc, but it appears Ntl has adopted the "don't ask - don't tell" policy. I like that a lot and would rather have a cap than Big Brother breathing down my neck.

Reasons I would think of switching to DSL:
I want a bigger down/up speed proportion. I'm a professional graphic artist and I upload TONS of very large images + image archives. I am also concerned about the cable service bottleneck possibity.

Thoughts?:o

[Edit] (Neil)-I've removed your I.P address.

23-03-2004, 11:59	#1
notmuffy Inactive Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 7	various questions.... NTL 150k Please don't shoot the n00b. I live in Harlow, Essex (large town 25ish miles from London). NTL 150 k connex... External modem which is called "NTL Home 100"... it is light grey. I use ethernet connection (instead of USB). I am not connected to a proxy according to various links found here. REMOTE_ADDR................................* .* CLIENT_IP..................................... HTTP_X_FORWARDED_FOR............. . . REQUEST_METHOD........................GET SERVER_NAME..............................romulas.z mnt.co.uk SERVER_PORT..............................80 Here is my result of Robin's speedtest. It is the same type of results I always get at these test sites. Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:43:02 GMT 1st 128K took 12500 ms = 10486 Bytes/sec = approx 87 kbits/sec 2nd 128K took 12265 ms = 10687 Bytes/sec = approx 89 kbits/sec 3rd 128K took 9766 ms = 13421 Bytes/sec = approx 112 kbits/sec 4th 128K took 14734 ms = 8896 Bytes/sec = approx 74 kbits/sec Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:56:05 GMT 1st 128K took 12625 ms = 10382 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec 2nd 128K took 9859 ms = 13295 Bytes/sec = approx 111 kbits/sec 3rd 128K took 12078 ms = 10852 Bytes/sec = approx 90 kbits/sec 4th 128K took 12063 ms = 10866 Bytes/sec = approx 90 kbits/sec After disabling Kerio Firewall and Trillan (the only things accessing the web besides the test page) Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:57:50 GMT 1st 128K took 12235 ms = 10713 Bytes/sec = approx 89 kbits/sec 2nd 128K took 12734 ms = 10293 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec 3rd 128K took 12656 ms = 10357 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec 4th 128K took 12735 ms = 10292 Bytes/sec = approx 86 kbits/sec Ok time for some questions! I realize that this is an appalling speed now that I have benchmarked it with others on this site. For the past 1.5 years of service, I thought that was how the service worked for everyone. 1. Would finding a proxy help my speed? 2. Is my modem too outdated? 3. How do I get modem service through my STB? I have noticed that there is an ethernet jack at the back of my STB. 4. How do I find out if my area is too "clogged" with other cable users? (Maybe this is my problem?) I am moving shortly, I want to get a 500-600k connex, and I am seriously thinking of turning to SKY and some kind of DSL connex. Has anyone done this? Why I like NTL so far: I am a music downloader. (Yeah, yeah, buy me a Parrot.) My point is that I have heard of BT customers (and others) getting a lot of flack for connecting to Kazaa, BT, DC, etc, but it appears Ntl has adopted the "don't ask - don't tell" policy. I like that a lot and would rather have a cap than Big Brother breathing down my neck. Reasons I would think of switching to DSL: I want a bigger down/up speed proportion. I'm a professional graphic artist and I upload TONS of very large images + image archives. I am also concerned about the cable service bottleneck possibity. Thoughts?:o [Edit] (Neil)-I've removed your I.P address.