Pathetic excuse.

[BenMcr]

Or maybe the people that design uBRs think that will be used to route internet traffic rather than to be queried directly and constantly, and build appropriately?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Or maybe the people that design uBRs think that will be used to route internet traffic rather than to be queried directly and constantly, and build appropriately?

Or they design and build them to be used to cleanly route appropriate amounts of internet traffic, rather than overloaded through being made to monitor and control the traffic of thousands of customers.

If the uBRs are using the recommended hardware for their loading and whatever monitoring VM are using, and they are queried regularly in many other ways, it shouldn't be an issue.

It's either a lame excuse sent down from on high to stop the techs querying for whatever reason, maybe while certain managers carry out their latest trial to 'improve' our service, or there's some kit that's badly underspec.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by r00t

As with Gary. Show us your proof.

/me un-subscribes from thread until someone posts something more than just thin air.

Show us your proof then. show us the proof that it puts a strain on the network in the few seconds it takes to make the query, and then we'll know that we are not being fobbed off with what the title of the thread says. a pathetic excuse.

---------- Post added at 17:15 ---------- Previous post was at 17:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Broadbandings

As with your constant requests for proof, show me a show proc cpu history output from one of these alledgedly under strain uBRs. You're the one who said they couldn't be queried as it puts stress on them.

Evidently you have none either, beyond rote repeating of what you were told.

He hasn't answered any of my questions put to him either. I think he's expecting me to let him do all the invisible facts and figures, and just believe them

---------- Post added at 17:17 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Originally Posted by r00t

Evidence of these claims made by others, day in and day out. If you please...

Here's a fresh one. it's only 30 mins old.
posted in the virginmedia.support.broadband.cable group.

Yet again for the squillionth time i have been STM'd before i have really
downloaded anything. Noticed i've downloaded the huge total of 32meg but it
most probably kicked in at 4pm like it has done on the other (i think) 10
occasions - all on a sunday. Can someone PLEASE do something about it
instead of the usual "we'll pass it on". And can you please switch STM off
on my connection as you and i know it has been done incorrectly.

[Jonathan90]

don't think he is allowed to post that kind of stuff gary but i am kind of getting it simple command can put load on the server and btw i am all up for auto email if being stm'd lol not gonna happen but would cut down the random calls saying have i been stm'ed

[Ignitionnet]

I would actually like to see comprehensive usage stats by the day, month and for each STM applicable period along with notice of if / when and for how long STM'd.

Not too much to ask from an ISP of VM's size imho.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Jonathan90

don't think he is allowed to post that kind of stuff gary but i am kind of getting it simple command can put load on the server and btw i am all up for auto email if being stm'd lol not gonna happen but would cut down the random calls saying have i been stm'ed

I know it's not possible for him to post that kind of stuff. that's why he can say what he says without having to back it up. he just wants everyone to back up their counter claim, and if they don't then what he says is right

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by Broadbandings

Is there not enough CPU spare on the uBRs to cope with this command being run here and there?

I'm sure that plenty of CPU would be freed up on them by turning STM off

There is and checking to see if someone is STM'd using very very very very little resources so wont really add to load.

[Jonathan90]

on another point i think less tech savvy users don't no the difference between stm and over subscription and also this is a Sunday were most people are on the net. thats why i think they think they have been capped wrongly

[Fatec]

Originally Posted by Jonathan90

don't think he is allowed to post that kind of stuff gary but i am kind of getting it simple command can put load on the server and btw i am all up for auto email if being stm'd lol not gonna happen but would cut down the random calls saying have i been stm'ed

After working on network hardware for VM for quite a few years to say the least, it will barely put any load on at all.

Only reason not to do it is if the UBR is already over subscribed/utilized, which some (well..alot these days) are...

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Broadbandings

If the uBRs are using the recommended hardware for their loading and whatever monitoring VM are using, and they are queried regularly in many other ways, it shouldn't be an issue.

It's either a lame excuse sent down from on high to stop the techs querying for whatever reason, maybe while certain managers carry out their latest trial to 'improve' our service, or there's some kit that's badly underspec.

That is a very good point you have made there. they have to be monitored and queried very regulary, so 8 or so queries for the benefit of the customer shouldn't be a problem, but it is a problem becuse it's the customer who wants the information and not themselves.

[Jonathan90]

sorry trax came out wrong

"but i am kind of getting it can a simple command put load on the ubr imo i don't think so"

dam man rushing thngs don't help lol backwards and forwards between forums doesn't help either.

[Ignitionnet]

If the kit isn't going to be placed under excess duress by these queries being run we can only assume that people are playing games with the STM again and don't want people finding out that they've been STM'd as part of one of these trials.

I really don't understand why they'd not want people to know though, considering STM improves our service.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by r00t

Wrong again Gary. The command used to query the uBR to give you the start and end time of STM puts load on the uBR.
Go download netlimiter or some other such tool.

Now I've lost all credibility in you.
The command doesn't put any load on the UBR as it's not the UBR that's queried, instead it's the authentication server.
you surely should know the difference between the two, and you could have told me all this in the first place

I'm more convinced now that this is all being made up as we go along

Is these the same authentication servers that are being asked thousands of times a day, Hello, cable modem here. how are you, can I have an IP please?

[Jonathan90]

Gary L that does make sense tbh did r00t get busted lol.


edit

actually quick google search isn't it the dhcp server which give the ip out after being verified through Some sort then getting the config file through t ftp or am i completely wrong?

[BenMcr]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Broadband_Router

A typical CMTS allows a subscriber's computer to obtain an IP address by forwarding DHCP requests to the relevant servers. This DHCP server returns, for the most part, what looks like a typical response including an assigned IP address for the computer, gateway/router addresses to use, DNS servers, etc.

The CMTS may also implement some basic filtering to protect against unauthorized users and various attacks. Traffic shaping is sometimes performed to prioritize application traffic, perhaps based upon subscribed plan or download usage. However, the function of traffic shaping is more likely done by a Policy Traffic Switch. A CMTS may also act as a bridge or router