More speed problems today

Simon_idnet · Nov 12, 2013, 16:10:56

I have now placed yet another bandwidth upgrade order with BT!

Bill · Nov 12, 2013, 16:18:50

Thanks Simon.

that it fixes it, and

that BT don't have another "System Error"

sobranie · Nov 12, 2013, 16:39:10

Thanks Simon. I share your frustration at IDNet It's almost as if BT are deliberately sabotaging your efforts.

Simon · Nov 12, 2013, 16:43:15

Quote from: Simon_idnet on Nov 12, 2013, 16:10:56
I have now placed yet another bandwidth upgrade order with BT!

What, so the second one failed as well?

jane · Nov 12, 2013, 23:14:53

Too preoccupied with their own goalposts to worry about moving ours

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/6149-bt-sport-wins-rights-to-show-350-uefa-matches-live.html

Gary · Nov 12, 2013, 23:49:24

Quote from: Simon_idnet on Nov 12, 2013, 16:10:56
I have now placed yet another bandwidth upgrade order with BT!

Bit confused, did IDNet need yet more, of did the one that was said to have gone though last week fail in actuality? $:-\$

Tacitus · Nov 13, 2013, 07:16:19

Quote from: Gary on Nov 12, 2013, 23:49:24
Bit confused, did IDNet need yet more, of did the one that was said to have gone though last week fail in actuality? $:-\$

This confused me as well. Are IdNet experiencing a massive unexpected increase in demand for bandwidth or are BT failing miserably in dealing with their requirements? Or both?

Simon's updates are welcome but there does seem to be more to the problems than just BT incompetence in failing to execute their order in a timely manner.

Reya · Nov 14, 2013, 19:35:43

Well, that was fun

QuoteC:\Users\Reya>ping bbc.co.uk
Ping request could not find host bbc.co.uk. Please check the name and try again.

C:\Users\Reya>ping google.com
Ping request could not find host google.com. Please check the name and try again.

C:\Users\Reya>tracert google.com
Unable to resolve target system name google.com.

I guess an early night is called for. I could do with the extra sleep

Bill · Nov 14, 2013, 20:19:33

Just for a change, mmy BQM is fine, just a few red dots along the top

(Though even they shouldn't really be there}

Speed test is a bit wobbly:

davecollins · Nov 14, 2013, 20:24:29

Quote from: Bill on Nov 14, 2013, 20:19:33
Just for a change, mmy BQM is fine, just a few red dots along the top

(Though even they shouldn't really be there}

Same here. Could be better but not too bad.

davecollins · Nov 15, 2013, 14:04:23

And today the packet loss continues. Again. Will this ever be resolved?

Hint: idnet support are free to contribute their thoughts. Especially as they suggested that I use this forum.

Steve · Nov 15, 2013, 14:06:50

True! There was a brief spurt about 11 ish and it's lurking still.

Simon_idnet · Nov 15, 2013, 16:18:21

We have traced the cause of this problem to a corporate customer who supplies video content to marketing kiosks installed at several large supermarket chains. The kiosks are connected by broadband lines, supplied by us, back to their content server. Whenever new content is 'published' on the server several hundred kioks all start to immediately download the new content, at the same time!

With thier consent we are going to rate-limit the content server so that the content is installed at a more measured pace.

Bill · Nov 15, 2013, 16:39:36

I thought it seemed an odd traffic pattern, but I never thought of supermarkets

Thanks Simon.

Lance · Nov 15, 2013, 16:43:12

Quote from: Simon_idnet on Nov 15, 2013, 16:18:21
We have traced the cause of this problem to a corporate customer who supplies video content to marketing kiosks installed at several large supermarket chains. The kiosks are connected by broadband lines, supplied by us, back to their content server. Whenever new content is 'published' on the server several hundred kioks all start to immediately download the new content, at the same time!

With thier consent we are going to rate-limit the content server so that the content is installed at a more measured pace.

Thanks Simon. Amscreen by any chance?

Tacitus · Nov 15, 2013, 18:23:40

Quote from: Simon_idnet on Nov 15, 2013, 16:18:21
We have traced the cause of this problem to a corporate customer who supplies video content to marketing kiosks installed at several large supermarket chains.

Thanks Simon. It's not a problem that has affected me directly but it's good to know that you've found the source.

Do you have another date from BT for the additional bandwidth installation?

Kobe · Nov 17, 2013, 16:46:47

think once our year is up (FTTC) we'll be switching to Zen.

Bill · Nov 17, 2013, 21:40:29

Mine's been fine, and so have the others I've been able to look at:

Your's may have been something comparatively local, but I'll wait for the graphs for a few weekdays before passing judgement.

Steve · Nov 17, 2013, 21:48:47

I've only seen it on one of the admins graphs today all the other show no packet loss.

Simon_idnet · Nov 18, 2013, 09:24:00

Kobe, the timings on your BQM graphs match exactly to periods of very high usage on your broadband line: between 2pm and 4:30pm - 15,840MB down and 14,486MB up. Between 9pm and 10pm - 4,420MB down and 5,324MB up. Those periods of heavy upstream utilisation would have caused your graph spikes.

Tacitus, the BT lead-time is 5 working days so that should take effect tomorrow.

Gary · Nov 18, 2013, 10:04:02

Quote from: Simon_idnet on Nov 18, 2013, 09:24:00
Kobe, the timings on your BQM graphs match exactly to periods of very high usage on your broadband line: between 2pm and 4:30pm - 15,840MB down and 14,486MB up. Between 9pm and 10pm - 4,420MB down and 5,324MB up. Those periods of heavy upstream utilisation would have caused your graph spikes.

Tacitus, the BT lead-time is 5 working days so that should take effect tomorrow.

Not the packet loss though surely, Simon. That's local to Kobe by the looks of things.

Bill · Nov 18, 2013, 10:15:00

Quote from: Gary on Nov 18, 2013, 10:04:02
Not the packet loss though surely, Simon. That's local to Kobe by the looks of things.

The high data rate (it's ~14Mbps) could cause that- they're only ping packets that are being lost, and if the router is working hard it may well not respond to them before tbb's pingbox gives up. Iirc it only waits 500mSec.

Gary · Nov 18, 2013, 13:06:24

Quote from: Bill on Nov 18, 2013, 10:15:00
The high data rate (it's ~14Mbps) could cause that- they're only ping packets that are being lost, and if the router is working hard it may well not respond to them before tbb's pingbox gives up. Iirc it only waits 500mSec.

Cheers Bill

Simon_idnet · Nov 18, 2013, 13:21:35

Quote from: Bill on Nov 18, 2013, 10:15:00
The high data rate (it's ~14Mbps) could cause that- they're only ping packets that are being lost, and if the router is working hard it may well not respond to them before tbb's pingbox gives up. Iirc it only waits 500mSec.

I can't tell the data rate but over 14GB was uploaded in around 2 hours. That level of saturation will cause packets to be dropped.

Bill · Nov 18, 2013, 13:35:37

Quote from: Simon_idnet on Nov 18, 2013, 13:21:35
I can't tell the data rate but over 14GB was uploaded in around 2 hours. That level of saturation will cause packets to be dropped.

I just used a simple calculation from the download of ~16GB in 2½ hours to get a rough idea of the speeds involved- 16,000/150/60*8 is about 14Mbps. Close enough for what I wanted

Odd that up- and download speeds and volumes are similar... p2p?