Traffic Shaping - Page 15

Frank · 06-04-2006, 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rik

I was hitting 800kB/s on a "LEGAL" Linux Torrent!!!!

This traffic shaping is good sh*t lol!!

You won't be saying that when it is going at 20KBs

Chrysalis · 06-04-2006, 21:32

you guys going on about the shaping and high speeds, the shaping probably isnt active yet.

I get 50kB right now

RonJon · 06-04-2006, 23:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

you guys going on about the shaping and high speeds, the shaping probably isnt active yet.

I get 50kB right now

QoS shaping not set up, 256 QAM currently only on Langley Platform, 100Mb trials underway.......... slow speeds at peak time... not rocket science guys & gals.....probably bandwidth utilisation, don't forget the kids are on holidays!!

Chrysalis · 07-04-2006, 01:15

Interesting you say 256QAM only on langley does that mean all of langley? which would mean no 27meg downstream channels left, or as I expect its not fully rolled out on the platform.

James Henry · 07-04-2006, 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonJon

QoS shaping not set up, 256 QAM currently only on Langley Platform, 100Mb trials underway.......... slow speeds at peak time... not rocket science guys & gals.....probably bandwidth utilisation, don't forget the kids are on holidays!!

256QAM isn't completely rolled out on Langley, although Bromley platform offers same bandwidth on 64QAM roughly as Langley does on 256.

Kids being on holiday will bring more usage in the day doesn't make a *huge* difference to util in peak times.

100Mbit trials underway, not 100% sure what relevance this has dude. Ashford trial's traffic will be controlled and certainly won't be heavy enough to upset the local area or the national core.

Do you have explanation for those areas where the speeds are poor but there is no congestion either on core or access networks, and uBRs are not overstretched in terms of processor?

Can you also explain why some people are seeing really insanely low speeds even though there isn't a clear fault present on the network or their equipment?

Chrysalis · 07-04-2006, 05:38

James I dont know even tho you are reffering to RonJon, ever since monday this week which I think is when the school holidays started my peak time speeds took another nosedive and I am getting around 50kB (under 0.5mbit) on my 10mbit. Usually I could hit 10mbit between 1 and 2am depending on how busy that day is but now have to wait till after 4am, it does speed up at 1am but only to about 3mbit. There has been investigations on my speeds but no fault was found although it does appear to be congestion related due to the time of day occurances, if I run a traceroute or ping test at 5am I can get better pings whilst I am maxing my line at 5am then I do on a idle line at 7pm, so at least in my case it appears contention is involved. It also appears to be very heavy contention as I am seeing speeds as low as 1/20th of my max speed and can only currently max out for under 1/4 of the day.

I have been trying to confirm if I am langley or bromley and the references I found reffered to langley digital platform, bromley digital tv platform and analogue platforms. As I am in a analogue only area is it the case I am on neither or am I on langley? I am fairly sure it isnt bromley.

As you appear to be in the know on their current network status could you be kind enough to comment on if their is going to be any extra download channels opened up especially on langley ubrs since they offer significantly less bandwidth then bromley.

jtwn · 07-04-2006, 13:16

You are in a Langley area if your downstream frequency on your modem syncs at 402750000 hz.

Graham M · 07-04-2006, 13:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

*snip*

What was your Cable Co called before it was NTL?

Derek · 07-04-2006, 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeph

What was your Cable Co called before it was NTL?

Leicester was Diamond cable which i'm 99% sure comes under the Langley side of things.

monkey2468 · 07-04-2006, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by dezzo

Leicester was Diamond cable which i'm 99% sure comes under the Langley side of things.

He's Langley, old old Langley!

Chrysalis · 07-04-2006, 23:42

also confirmed on the downstream frequency so we have someone saying most of langley is upgraded but not all and surprise surprise my area isnt upgraded, wow we getting somewhere, its like withdrawing excalibur getting information on ntl's network.

So 27mbit downstream which appears to be a minority of ntl's network this is explaining why performances are so different on different postcodes and I have such big problems.

I still think ntl dont realise the true extenct of the problems their is some serious downstream contention going on the most I have ever experienced on broadband since I started using it in 2000.

monkey2468 · 07-04-2006, 23:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

also confirmed on the downstream frequency so we have someone saying most of langley is upgraded but not all and surprise surprise my area isnt upgraded, wow we getting somewhere, its like withdrawing excalibur getting information on ntl's network.

So 27mbit downstream which appears to be a minority of ntl's network this is explaining why performances are so different on different postcodes and I have such big problems.

I still think ntl dont realise the true extenct of the problems their is some serious downstream contention going on the most I have ever experienced on broadband since I started using it in 2000.

If by upgraded you mean 256qam, then not many areas have been upgraded yet.

Chrysalis · 08-04-2006, 00:11

Ok what about channel bonding? any plans?

jtwn · 08-04-2006, 00:15

Quote:

I still think ntl dont realise the true extenct of the problems their is some serious downstream contention going on the most I have ever experienced on broadband since I started using it in 2000.

Chrysalis, I'm willing to bet my mum that we know bugger all compared to the people who actually run the show, I'm sure they are more then fully aware of the situation, they probably just can't deal with the situation for one reason or another...money, already pushing the tech too far, coffee machine broken down etc..

Higher order modulation will ease the pain, but really, channel bonding is where its at in improving the situation wholeheartedly. We can be rest assured though, that the speeds would be upped, hopefully not to the extent that it would negate the greater available bandwidth to give some kind of marketable return to the peeps up top. Its going to be an every man for himself if if they offer 100mb over 4 bonded channels but then its not like we are going to get those kind of speeds from anywhere anyway.

James Henry · 08-04-2006, 02:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtwn

Chrysalis, I'm willing to bet my mum that we know bugger all compared to the people who actually run the show, I'm sure they are more then fully aware of the situation, they probably just can't deal with the situation for one reason or another...money, already pushing the tech too far, coffee machine broken down etc..

Higher order modulation will ease the pain, but really, channel bonding is where its at in improving the situation wholeheartedly. We can be rest assured though, that the speeds would be upped, hopefully not to the extent that it would negate the greater available bandwidth to give some kind of marketable return to the peeps up top. Its going to be an every man for himself if if they offer 100mb over 4 bonded channels but then its not like we are going to get those kind of speeds from anywhere anyway.

Dude I can see you have an interest and need to get a job with a cable company to use that interest a bit and see how things work in the real world. What you're discussing is still experimental technology and no standard has been finalised and ratified.

Bonded channels aren't necessary to run 10Mbit, in Sweden UPC are delivering 24/8 without bonding channels, and in Chrysalis' case the performance issues are I believe a bit of a mystery and the situation isn't nearly as bad as he thinks.

A part of the reason for it being easier there is I guess that UPC don't feel the need to fill their entire downstream spectrum with crap DTV multiplexes full of ****e that hardly ever gets watched, and instead save channels here and there to shove some of that lovely stuff that really makes the money, broadband, down.

If you're that interested ntl could remove congestion issues in some areas overnight without resegmentation if there's a channel free and a card available, no need to do any physical work outside of the headend. I guess there are certain reasons why they aren't, probably procedural / managerial actually.

I would imagine if it weren't for having to get things signed off in blood by about 10 different departments they could quite effectively resolve most issues through a combo of 2nd downstreams and 16QAM returns. Only areas where the upstream is incapable of supporting the additional power demands of the 16QAM, the channel plan is so full there's not even a single channel available for another DOCSIS downstream, or there's not an MC28U card available would this potentially be an issue.

BTW network condition is in most cases not an excuse for 16QAM being an 'issue', considering that I know of operators in Europe and North America who run 6.4MHz wide 64QAM upstreams with DOCSIS 2 which are far more demanding on the network.

With your allergy to contention you'd be scared if you knew how many 512k, 1Mbit and 2Mbit home users BT have been able to cram onto a 4Mbit pipe in the past with no issues