Slow speeds - am I wasting my money?

[Dopamine]

This post is borne of frustration really, but I don't know what to do.

I joined IDNet at the beginning of February, hoping to end the nightmare that my Pipex connection had become following Tiscali's ruination of it, but with a super stable line and an IP profile of 7150, my daytime and evening download speeds have got slower and slower, fluctuate quite considerably but now average around 2mbps; usable, but frustrating, especially when they drop below 1mbps. In the middle of the night I get 6.5+mbps.

IDNet tech support say that the slow/fluctuating speeds are a result of contention at the BT exchange, and that the problem will only be solved when BT upgrade something within the exchange, which they apparently do if/when contention reaches a critical mass. BT consider speeds above 400kbps acceptable, so it doesn't look like I'll be seeing an improvement anytime soon.

In the meantime, I'm paying a premium for a service that, through no fault of IDNet, is effectively restricted at peak times to 2mbps by BT, and getting slower. I might just as well migrate to another provider and pay less for a fixed 2mb line, as IDNet's service and capacity is not getting past the block that is BT.

Has anyone any advice? IDNet say they have no way of improving my situation with BT, BT as usual just tell me to speak to my ISP.

[Rik]

You are caught in the traditional hard place between BT and an ISP I'm afraid. If it's congestion, no ISP can do a thing about it, they have to wait for BT to act, and BT do say that speeds can fall as low as 2Mbps at peak times (talk about covering themselves!).

IDNet can put you on a fixed-rate connection, but if BT is slowing everything then you might just as well migrate to a low cost provider, just avoid getting hooked into a lengthy contract or any penalties if you leave.

Do you have an LLU option at your exchange?

[Dopamine]

No, no LLU on my exchange - except Tiscali!

I'm reluctant to leave IDNet, as after all it's not their fault, and I like to support one of the few remaining operators that provides a good, honest service. But equally, spending money unnecessarily is daft.

I suppose I'll just have to sit it out and hope that other ISPs are also receiving similar complaints from their customers so will start putting a bit of pressure on BT.

Maybe this is a sign that BT's infrastructure really is creaking at the seams now and usage is reaching capacity in some parts of the country.

[Rik]

I think it is, tbh. The work BT have done and are continuing to do appears to be about increasing their capacity. Sadly, unlike IDNet, they have always waited for the demand and then provided capacity, by which time demand has already increased, so they play constant catch up.

[Sebby]

I can only echo what Rik has already said. Unfortunately, there seem to be a few users who are experiencing slow speeds with no apparent reason. It looks like it's probably exchange congestion, which BT do seem to eventually sort out. All I can really add is that you won't find a better IPStream ISP than IDNet, and if LLU isn't an option, you might just have to live with it for a little while and hope that BT act.

[Simon]

I'm not saying they would do so, but I wonder if it might be worth chatting to IDNet, and see if they can offer you an acceptable deal to stay with them on a 2Mbps fixed rate, on the understanding that you would move to one of the regular packages once BT upgrade your line?

[plugwash]

is cable availible in your area?

[colirv]

Following on from what plugwash suggests, I'm in a similar situation as you but not nearly as bad. I sync at 2500MB and can achieve this some of the time, less than half this at other times - due to exchange congestion. I would try Virgin cable or an LLU alternative if there was one available, but there isn't. So, being stuck with a BT line, I stay with IDNet - on the basis that at least I know I'm getting as much speed as possible, plus the reliability and customer service that I value.

[Rik]

I sync at 2500MB

And you're complaining Colin!

[colirv]

Not really - my cup is half full!

[Sebby]

Ah, an optimist. 

[Dopamine]

I have an update on my speeds that I hope someone can explain.

In another thread here, someone noted that if he disconnected and reconnected his connection, his pings would often improve, so I've been experimenting too. If I keep my router synced, but just "disconnect" (don't know the technical term; PPP session?) and then reconnect after 10 or so seconds, my speeds immediately go up to 6.5mbps+ where they'll stay for 5 minutes or more before gradually falling again, usually to 2mbps or slower. 9 times out of 10 this works at increasing speeds. Occasionally I find a connection that doesn't drop below 3mbps.

Can anyone explain how this is happening, and it is something to do with BT or IDNet?

[Rik]

By speeds, do you mean as measured by speed test sites? These can vary hugely according to BT & ISP congestion, or by server load. I'd suggest you make a note of the times at which your drop/re-connect the PPP sessions and then ask support to have a look.

[Dopamine]

I know of no other way to measure speed than by using a speedtest site. I use several, preferring those with large downloads than those that give a very quick result, and I always do three or four tests back to back to account for congestion.

If speedtest sites really are that useless though, then surely we're all wasting our time even talking about speeds.

For reference, I use the BT Speedtester, (but that can only be used every three hours - if it works at all); ThinkBroadband's site; Speedtest.net; speedtest.bbmax.co.uk; dslzoneuk.net; tstools.co.uk (another that requires a 5 minute gap between tests). All these sites give me pretty similar results.

[colirv]

Ah, an optimist. 

And someone who doesn't proof-read his posts - I meant, of course, 2500Mb! Which I imagine was what Rik, with untypical subtlety, was getting at.

[Rik]

I know of no other way to measure speed than by using a speedtest site. I use several, preferring those with large downloads than those that give a very quick result, and I always do three or four tests back to back to account for congestion.

If speedtest sites really are that useless though, then surely we're all wasting our time even talking about speeds.

For reference, I use the BT Speedtester, (but that can only be used every three hours - if it works at all); ThinkBroadband's site; Speedtest.net; speedtest.bbmax.co.uk; dslzoneuk.net; tstools.co.uk (another that requires a 5 minute gap between tests). All these sites give me pretty similar results.

IMO, most speed test sites are, at best, indicators. Some will show a speed above my profile, others vary tremendously. In practice, the only one that counts is the BT one. I generally test by downloading a reasonably large file from a 'known good' server, stopwatch in hand.

I tend to only worry about speed if it impacts on what I'm doing, which rarely happens. There are too many variables across the net to ever really tie down the issues, which is why I say the only tester which counts is the BT one as that's the only one which BT will accept.

[Rik]

And someone who doesn't proof-read his posts - I meant, of course, 2500Mb! Which I imagine was what Rik, with untypical subtlety, was getting at.

[Niall]