ISP Be admits crippling iPlayer demand burst its pipes ISP Be admits crippling

[.Griff.]

Not that this affects Idnets LLU users it's a newsworthy article all the same.

ISP Be Broadband has admitted demand for iPlayer jammed its punters' net connections - leaving parts of the web unusable and subscribers fuming.

For weeks customers of Be - an O2-owned company with up to 600,000 users - were unable to visit some websites, including the BBC's telly streaming service, because the ISP's link to the Akamai content distribution network was saturated. A full fix isn't due until the end of April.

More - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/01/be_internet_bbc_connection_problem/

[Rik]

It seems some ISPs are failing to take streamed video fully into account when planning their networks, Griff. The results are either throttling or a log jam.

[.Griff.]

The Register seems to focus in on iPlayer for some reason but Be customers are having all sorts of problems of late, two months and counting, with packet loss affecting almost every aspect of their internet use.

[Rik]

Reputations are lost more quickly than they are gained. I wonder how they'll come out of this?

[.Griff.]

If the 51 page, 768 replies, thread on their forum is anything to go by there's lots of very unhappy people. It's a shame as in the early days Be was an excellent ISP but they've been stagnant for too long.

[Rik]

Isn't that true of the industry in general, Griff. BT, in particular, have a stranglehold on pricing which gives smaller ISPs little leeway to meet higher demand except with higher costs. Telefonica is not a perfect alternative, as we have learned in recent weeks. The wholesale side of the industry don't seem to be looking to the future, except in their bottom lines. That leaves the retail ISPs strait-jacketed in what they can do to offer customers the bandwidth they want at the price they want.

[sobranie]

IMHO BT would sweep the board if their call centres were UK based and manned my knowledgeable people that did not rely on scripts.
Fat chance eh?

[pctech]

A big ISP failing to invest in its network to maximise profits, main reason I abandoned the 'big boys'

All the more reason to stick with the likes of IDNet, Zen and AAISP who have more of an idea about how to build, operate and manage access networks it seems.

[cavillas]

I believe streaming tv programmes and films was something the net was not designed for.  It is this take over by commercial intersts that will lead to the collapse of the net in the future.

[Simon]

It's chicken and egg, isn't it?  If we were all still on dial up, would the likes of iPlayer even exist, I wonder?  The faster the Internet goes, the more streaming there will be.

[psp83]

And its going to get worse in the summer 

[pctech]

It's router and optical transceiver processing speed that govern how fast a connection can go.

ISPs can trunk as many 10 or 40 Gig connections together as they like to give them the required bandwidth, an optical transceiver capable of 100 Gig has been created but it'll be a while before it becomes affordable for ISPs.

[zappaDPJ]

I was with Be for a few months prior to joining IDNet. I had a baseline ping of 250+ ms and permanent 10-12% packet loss. Although my sync speed was a steady 14.5 Mb/s, I saw a lot of buffering and at peak times I found their service completely unusable. Their support infrastructure insisted everything was fine for a while but finally admitted to a congestion issue. They had plans to address it but the time frame given of 6-9 months was unacceptable so I left.

[pctech]

Smaller ISPs seem to respond much quicker don't they

[Technical Ben]

I was with Be for a few months prior to joining IDNet. I had a baseline ping of 250+ ms and permanent 10-12% packet loss. Although my sync speed was a steady 14.5 Mb/s, I saw a lot of buffering and at peak times I found their service completely unusable. Their support infrastructure insisted everything was fine for a while but finally admitted to a congestion issue. They had plans to address it but the time frame given of 6-9 months was unacceptable so I left.

Was that LLU or BT resellers? I had perfect connections off peak on BT resell, but 90% packet loss at peak times when I was with them (O2 that is, not Be).

[zappaDPJ]

That was LLU. The packet loss during peak to some destinations was of a similar measure though, 90% and up.

[mervl]

It'll be interesting to see what happens to the performance of Sky backhaul (who took over the old Easynet backhaul network and according to publicity have recently been investing heavily in it) when they introduce FTTC. I know a lot of people hate even the mention of the name, but my recent experience of their backhaul network (on a small local network - they don't wholesale) is that it's darned good and virtually trouble-free unlike Be/O2s and of course BT Wholesale (see Idnet FTTC). It'll also be interesting to see what happens to the quality of the local loop part of my connection though if there's a local mass Sky migration! Must say I too prefer the company of winners to saints.

PS And yes I know Sky had a good start in broadband life with Easynet, but so did O2 with Be.