Cable Forum - View Single Post

Chrysalis · 04-11-2010, 04:43

As I predicted I think VM have dug themselves a hole.

previously the situation was the majority of UBR ports were not congested and as such gave people good performance. So the only complaints were price related or from congested areas.

Now we in a situation where in these area's people are been shaped when isn't actually needed, and I would imagine VM's complaints could well have quadrupled overnight. It previously had a medal for resisting traffic shaping which it has now lost.

On the other side of the coin the shaping is probably ineffective in the worst areas (not doing enough due to simply not enough capacity). So on top of low speed complaints they now gettng complaints in relation to shaping.

Of course finally even to customers who dont bother with speedtest's and downloading they may find their game has broke eg. WoW due to traffic shaping false positives and another source of new complaints from previously happy customers.

It is clear using a one size fits all approach to congestion is not a good idea for VM. I still have entanet's ALT system in my head and I would suggest this.

1 - scrap STM in its current form. Similiar to the shaping either not doing enough or throttling when not needed.
2 - scrap the shaping.
3 - add a global anti packet loss script to each UBR so it reserves unused capacity to maintain jitter, so if eg. 80% upstream utilisation causes jitter then cap entire utilisation to that level.
4 - add a script that throttles users based on following rules.
(a) check if anti packet loss tool is in use, ie. limit hit.
(b) look for top 5% of users on daily usage (last 24 hours, not from start of day), and decrease available throughput BOTH ways by 25%, this is regardless of protocol used.
(c) if limit still been hit thottle the same users by a 2nd 25% to make 50%, and repeat to 75% if required.
(d) if limit still been breached repeat for next 5%.
(e) run it 24/7 not just on peak.

This should be more effective for congested areas (throughput low anyway), and not kick in for good areas and as such keeping customers happier.

Interested in thoughts.

04-11-2010, 04:43	#1
Chrysalis cf.mega poster Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 12,048	an idea for VM on traffic management As I predicted I think VM have dug themselves a hole. previously the situation was the majority of UBR ports were not congested and as such gave people good performance. So the only complaints were price related or from congested areas. Now we in a situation where in these area's people are been shaped when isn't actually needed, and I would imagine VM's complaints could well have quadrupled overnight. It previously had a medal for resisting traffic shaping which it has now lost. On the other side of the coin the shaping is probably ineffective in the worst areas (not doing enough due to simply not enough capacity). So on top of low speed complaints they now gettng complaints in relation to shaping. Of course finally even to customers who dont bother with speedtest's and downloading they may find their game has broke eg. WoW due to traffic shaping false positives and another source of new complaints from previously happy customers. It is clear using a one size fits all approach to congestion is not a good idea for VM. I still have entanet's ALT system in my head and I would suggest this. 1 - scrap STM in its current form. Similiar to the shaping either not doing enough or throttling when not needed. 2 - scrap the shaping. 3 - add a global anti packet loss script to each UBR so it reserves unused capacity to maintain jitter, so if eg. 80% upstream utilisation causes jitter then cap entire utilisation to that level. 4 - add a script that throttles users based on following rules. (a) check if anti packet loss tool is in use, ie. limit hit. (b) look for top 5% of users on daily usage (last 24 hours, not from start of day), and decrease available throughput BOTH ways by 25%, this is regardless of protocol used. (c) if limit still been hit thottle the same users by a 2nd 25% to make 50%, and repeat to 75% if required. (d) if limit still been breached repeat for next 5%. (e) run it 24/7 not just on peak. This should be more effective for congested areas (throughput low anyway), and not kick in for good areas and as such keeping customers happier. Interested in thoughts.