Superhub : Can Someone Explain WHY the SuperHub is so...bad?

[ethan103]

Originally Posted by TJS

Considering a good chunk of the argument people have against the superhub is that it makes the latency poor; then yes it is.

The fact that a good majority of websites you visit and game servers you use are outside of the U.K. also makes it a good test of how the isp performs.

Edit: that came across ruder then intended sorry

I agree!!

Not being rude but from what I would call "bad" is that pretty much everyone says the SuperHub adds about 10ms to Latency.


As you can see from the speedtests and pinging vaerious servers around the UK and even as far as New Zealand,

The Superhub does indeed add around 10ms or even more in some cases....


I dont understand why it does this, even on a wired connection??

[Kymmy]

Originally Posted by TJS

Considering a good chunk of the argument people have against the superhub is that it makes the latency poor; then yes it is.

Once past the reaches of the UBR latency of the superhub is irrelavent so pings half way round the world won't make any difference and is more likely to skew any results. So please keep the posts relevant to the topic..

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Once past the reaches of the UBR latency of the superhub is irrelevent so pings half way round the world won't make any difference and is more likely to skew any results. So please keep the posts relevant to the topic..

Well, that isn't true for the following reasons:

1/
Routing issues in the VM network can be spotted or at least suspected in the tracert

2/
Peering issues can be spotted or at least suspected in the tracert whether or not the rest goes round the world

3/
The above can exonerate the SH or by converse reinforce suspicion of the SH.

Exploring avenues is what this seems to me.

[imranm]

Originally Posted by internetuser

I agree!!

Not being rude but from what I would call "bad" is that pretty much everyone says the SuperHub adds about 10ms to Latency.


As you can see from the speedtests and pinging vaerious servers around the UK and even as far as New Zealand,

The Superhub does indeed add around 10ms or even more in some cases....


I dont understand why it does this, even on a wired connection??

I agree the SuperHub does add at least 10ms minimum in comparison to the VMNG300 at least from my observations.

[Kymmy]

Routing and peering is not the topic of this thread.. Exploring is one thing but if you want to explore world wide pings in the hope that it may be effected by the superhub is stretching the reasoning a bit. All I'm suggesting without going into mod mode again is to keep it relevant and don't overstretch the topic too much Perhaps the creation of a new thread exploring world wide pings would be a better option

[Sephiroth]

That's your opinion - and you have the power to go into mod mode and dow whatever you want.

But the question is about "Why the SH is so bad" and added latency is an accusation. So bottoming out whether or not that is a reason why the SH is so bad is indeed a valid part of the discussion.

I can't see why you'd get so officious about this.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Once past the reaches of the UBR latency of the superhub is irrelavent so pings half way round the world won't make any difference and is more likely to skew any results. So please keep the posts relevant to the topic..

not entirely true

you suggesting eg. if I ping bbc.co.uk or some other random place that the difference wont be noticeable. It is.

Can you verify you are saying discussing the higher latency of the superhub is no longer allowed in this thread?

[Kymmy]

What I'm suggesting is that unless you can ping the exact same site from the exact same location using the two different set-ups (superhub and non-superhub) then the result will be skewed by the differing states of the existing traffic/route for the difference in either time or location.

You can talk all you want about latency but pinging round the world and constantly posting said results doesn't add anything relevant to the latency discussion.. Or is anyone suggesting that skewed results are relevant or that the pings are static depending on route???

What really needs to be done is close local pings that can be done with minimum effect from other internet traffic which will measure the latency of the devices involved otherwise you're just measuring the variability of the routes..

So please guys keep it relevant

[Chrysalis]

Ok so if I post say 2 tracert's form here a single location, one from the superhub and one from the vmng300 at the same time of day that is allowed?

[qasdfdsaq]

We should all be pinging the local UBR/gateway since that's the only hop the Superhub (in theory) should be affecting. That said it's also concievable that there's a bug that delays packets that have travelled, e.g. over a certain number of hops for some reason. Anything's possible. But 10ms is a lot of latency to add and I quite doubt the SH is that bad.

[Chrysalis]

why would it only affect 1 hop? there is nothing special about the gateway.

I have posted numerous tbb graphs which show the endpoint and as such the entire route is affected. I also see it on smokeping graphs I have at 3 different locations.

As a % the affect on USA endpoints is less as the base latency is much higher, so it would be less noticeable.

I personally have never said base latency goes up by 10ms, I think the affect on base latency at least for me is about 1-2ms, but jitter and as such average latency is significantly higher.

I also believe the effect is dependable on UBR utilisation, some people are able to get sub 3ms jitter on their superhub's. So it will be in my view more noticeable when on a higher utilised port.

[Kymmy]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Ok so if I post say 2 tracert's form here a single location, one from the superhub and one from the vmng300 at the same time of day that is allowed?

Only if you can do the pings both at exactly the same time is the result relevant The internet traffic along said route can change from second to second changing your results..

[Nopanic]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Only if you can do the pings both at exactly the same time is the result relevant The internet traffic along said route can change from second to second changing your results..

but surely if you do it at the same time one will take priority or follow a different route..

[Kymmy]

Which is the whole point... You can't measure latency accurately over an ever changing medium...

[Nopanic]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Which is the whole point... You can't measure latency accurately over an ever changing medium...

I was siding with you

Which when you think about it, means there is no real fair test online, you would need a test lab, with excellent equipment.