Traffic Shaping

[Fawkes]

Originally Posted by AbyssUnderground

NTL must have known this would happen. If there is only around 33Mbps on a UBR then 3 and a bit people maxing out their 10Mbps is going to kill it. Surely they knew that?

It was a marketing decision, not a technical one.

[jtwn]

Originally Posted by bobna

this is taking the Pi** now, earlier i was downloading some music from itunes fine at about 8mbps now just ran a speed test and got this

Mon, 03 Apr 2006 20:39:28 GMT

1st 512K took 5531 ms = 92.6 KB/sec, approx 763 Kbps, 0.75 Mbps
2nd 512K took 7703 ms = 66.5 KB/sec, approx 548 Kbps, 0.54 Mbps
3rd 512K took 6687 ms = 76.6 KB/sec, approx 631 Kbps, 0.62 Mbps
4th 512K took 7547 ms = 67.8 KB/sec, approx 559 Kbps, 0.55 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 625 Kbps, 0.62 Mbps



To repeat this test from the source server click here.





this is on a 10mb line
so they deff are shaping now

If they were shaping your results would look BETTER (then that) not worse.

[AbyssUnderground]

Originally Posted by Fawkes

It was a marketing decision, not a technical one.

Still, they should have known it would happen. They are just trying to be better than everyone else for speed.

[etccarmageddon]

they should have gradually increased the 3meg tier - e.g. upped it to 4meg and then waited a few months to increase it to 5meg etc.

[swapshop1]

I'm all for shaping. If your a heavy downloader then you will likely already leave your machine on all day..... So wheres the harm? I would be grateful to Ntl's efforts in maintaining a speedy responsive network.

I currently limit my download speed from 7 am to 12 midnight

Originally Posted by swapshop1

I'm all for shaping. If your a heavy downloader then you will likely already leave your machine on all day..... So wheres the harm? I would be grateful to Ntl's efforts in maintaining a speedy responsive network.

I currently limit my download speed from 7 am to 12 midnight

So should a user be allowed to pay less for the period per day that NTL intensionaly drops the speed down ?.

[jtwn]

I still think the whole shared community thing sucks. What somebody else does with their connection has got nothing to do with me and should not affect my service. So maybe its unfortunate it cannot be that everybody has enough bandwidth to max their connections but soon / one day it will I'm sure.

...even though I don't suffer from such problems

[etccarmageddon]

it will affect your service though if a number of users on the same UBR as you are maxing their connections out all the time. I'm in favour of traffic prioritisation - eg. voip first, web pages second, p2p 3rd. provided it isn't used as a way of cramming as many users as possible onto the network with the min of investment in upgrades.

ie. it's obvious my VOIP phone call shouldnt go tits up just cos there's a temporary surge of use on the network - that should be managed by traffic prioritisation BUT... the prioritisation should be for surges of use not for managing usage.

[Griffin]

As far as i am concerned if you pay for a service thats what you should receive, not a diluted excuse for a service. Could you imagine if you paid for a bus pass & did a regular journey of say 10 miles each day, but then got told you would have to walk the last 2 miles because the bus was packed

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Griffin

As far as i am concerned if you pay for a service thats what you should receive, not a diluted excuse for a service. Could you imagine if you paid for a bus pass & did a regular journey of say 10 miles each day, but then got told you would have to walk the last 2 miles because the bus was packed

On the bus your pass doesn't guarantee you a seat though does it? Especially at peak times when it takes a lot longer to get where it is going.

Originally Posted by dezo

On the bus your pass doesn't guarantee you a seat though does it? Especially at peak times when it takes a lot longer to get where it is going.

But when does a lot longer due to shaping where they purposely slow your traffic become a rip off to save spending on upgrades ?

[Griffin]

yes i know that but i said walk the last 2 miles besides that, that is natural congestion not artificial. traffic shaping is more like the driver going down the road with his foot on the brakes

[Derek]

Originally Posted by unlimited

But when does a lot longer due to shaping where they purposely slow your traffic become a rip off to save spending on upgrades ?

I suppose. There isn't much point in upgrading roads to 5-6 lane monsters purely to cope with the rush hours though is there

Nah I can see good and bad points of shaping. Right now I'm fairly lucky and have decent speeds so don't really see any bad points from congestion etc. but if this changes I'd be wanting Ntl/Telewest/Virgin to get the chequebook out and start upgrades.

[quote=dezzo]

Originally Posted by unlimited

but if this changes I'd be wanting Ntl/Telewest/Virgin to get the chequebook out and start upgrades.

dont we all

[brundles]

Originally Posted by Fawkes

It was a marketing decision, not a technical one.

Gotta love those marketing guys - making a decision (that looks like it was made) without technical input and then wondering why they have bad publicity