Thread: General Oversubscribed areas?
View Single Post
Old 13-08-2015, 08:59   #73
qasdfdsaq
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,207
qasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronze
qasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronze
Re: Oversubscribed areas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis View Post
It also was 80% once upon a time. It may have been lower than that before.

95% is just plain stupid, only makes any sense if your only concern is cost.
If your only concern is cost you'd run it at 100% and let congestion self-limit.

Quote:
Funny the two largest transit providers in the UK for broadband both dont have a clue on capacity planning, BT and VM.
In my personal experience BT have been far better. Over the most recent 3 years with each ISP I've experienced a sum total of 4 weeks' of congestion on BT and about 24 months on VM.
qasdfdsaq is offline   Reply With Quote