Profiles

psp83 · Mar 29, 2008, 13:31:10

Well i had a problem in the house yesterday which caused the router to go down and this dropped my sync down to just over 2000kbps.

This put my profile at 2000.. When i rebooted the router i re-sync'd 4000kbps+ higher..

Isn't the equipment in the exchange meant to change the profile within a few hours if its a big jump in speed?

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test: -provides background information.
IP profile for your line is - 2000 kbps
DSL connection rate: 448 kbps(UP-STREAM) 6208 kbps(DOWN-STREAM)
Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 1824 kbps

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 13:34:23

Hi Paul

It depends...

If there was a single low-sync event and your connection recovered quickly, then the profile is also meant to recover quickly. However, in my experience, if there are multiple low-syncs or it takes a while before the recovery, then the 6 hour rule seems to go out the door, and it can take the full five days.

psp83 · Mar 29, 2008, 13:38:19

Arghhhh!!! I've got some big downloading to do this week for work

Do you wreckon support will get BT to nudge it back up?

Also, what will cause slow loading forums? it seems to be only affecting forums as general sites are fine.
idnetters takes a good few secs to load a page, same as my own forum.

Sebby · Mar 29, 2008, 13:40:47

It all depends on the percentage increase, Paul (we're into Adaptive Max Logic territory now). I would class this as a large % increase (though there are no set thresholds, AFAIK, and it depends on how busy BT's sytems are) and so it should take significantly less than the 5 days. In my experience, AML hasn't actually done all that much to help, so you may have to wait the full 5 days.

I know this is a bit vague, but BT's systems are very difficult to predict, so your best bet is to just sit tight and not think about it.

The slow forum is being looked into.

psp83 · Mar 29, 2008, 13:44:03

Quote from: Sebby on Mar 29, 2008, 13:40:47
The slow forum is being looked into.

Its not just this forum for me, its my own forums aswell.. its like all forums on the net are on a go slow today.

Sebby · Mar 29, 2008, 13:45:37

It is a strange one. IDNet have been made aware.

Inactive · Mar 29, 2008, 13:47:29

It is just this forum that is running like treacle for me, it only seemed to happen when the Mods turned up, I have a theory..

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 13:49:10

I think Orange Bikes are doing good business this weekend.

psp83 · Mar 29, 2008, 13:49:49

try http://www.team-gash.co.uk

Thats slow for me aswell.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 13:50:44

OK here, Glenn as is PC Pals.

Inactive · Mar 29, 2008, 13:52:40

And OK for me, as is ISPReview, tis just this forum for me.

Sebby · Mar 29, 2008, 13:53:22

Quote from: Inactive on Mar 29, 2008, 13:47:29
It is just this forum that is running like treacle for me, it only seemed to happen when the Mods turned up, I have a theory..

Simon · Mar 29, 2008, 13:57:08

PC Pals is OK at the moment, but was sluggish earlier. Not as bad as here though.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 13:57:52

Things seem to have improved for the moment...

Inactive · Mar 29, 2008, 13:59:55

Glad they have for you, mine is still on a go slow.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:02:07

Gorn slow again.

Inactive · Mar 29, 2008, 14:03:04

It seems to be sporadic Rik.

(Another bit of poetry ).

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:03:49

You're excelling yourself, In.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:04:41

Can people being affected by the slow forum run a ping and post the result please, preferably ping www.idnetters.co.uk -n 20, to get a better picture.

Inactive · Mar 29, 2008, 14:06:47

No good asking me Rik, I wouldn't know what a ping was if one run me over.

Sebby · Mar 29, 2008, 14:07:49

Code Select

Pinging www.idnetters.co.uk [212.69.36.28] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=209ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=265ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=143ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=87ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=161ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=81ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=134ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=130ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.28:
    Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 19, Lost = 1 (5% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 43ms, Maximum = 265ms, Average = 90ms

madasahatter · Mar 29, 2008, 14:08:20

Here's mine - like running through very thick treacle at the moment:

Pinging www.idnetters.co.uk [212.69.36.28] with 32 bytes of

Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.28:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 15, Lost = 5 (25% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 22ms, Maximum = 36ms, Average = 24ms

Simon · Mar 29, 2008, 14:08:25

Pinging www.idnetters.co.uk [212.69.36.28] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=242ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=260ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=134ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.28:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 19, Lost = 1 (5% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 33ms, Maximum = 260ms, Average = 73ms

Sebby · Mar 29, 2008, 14:08:37

Quote from: Inactive on Mar 29, 2008, 14:06:47
No good asking me Rik, I wouldn't know what a ping was if one run me over.

Click Start then Run, type in cmd and hit enter. On the command prompt, type ping www.idnetters.co.uk -n 20 and hit enter again. Voila.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:09:40

Mine's looking better now:

ping www.idnetters.co.uk -n 20

Pinging www.idnetters.co.uk [212.69.36.28] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.28:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 22ms, Maximum = 28ms, Average = 23ms

Cookiemonster · Mar 29, 2008, 14:10:04

Pinging www.idnetters.co.uk [212.69.36.28] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.28:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 18, Lost = 2 (10% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 33ms, Maximum = 57ms, Average = 47ms

Slow forum affecting me too Rik

Inactive · Mar 29, 2008, 14:12:00

Quote from: Sebby on Mar 29, 2008, 14:08:37
Click Start then Run, type in cmd and hit enter. On the command prompt, type ping www.idnetters.co.uk -n 20 and hit enter again. Voila.

Thanks Seb, but I will leave it those that know better.

Simon · Mar 29, 2008, 14:27:35

Just out of curiosity, what's the 'n 20' bit?

Mine's looking better now too:

Pinging www.idnetters.co.uk [212.69.36.28] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=66ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=190ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=229ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=243ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=220ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.28: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.28:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 30ms, Maximum = 243ms, Average = 102ms

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:29:00

Normally a ping sends 4 packets, Simon. The -n switch allows you to run a longer test, 10-100 will show up more issues than just 4, or you can use Ping Graph instead...

Simon · Mar 29, 2008, 14:32:20

Oh right.

madasahatter · Mar 29, 2008, 14:37:40

Much better here as well

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:38:37

Simon has a way with Samson.

Cookiemonster · Mar 29, 2008, 14:39:46

Quote from: madasahatter on Mar 29, 2008, 14:37:40
Much better here as well

Yup i concur a marked improvement!

madasahatter · Mar 29, 2008, 14:52:04

.......until it wnt down altogether - did Samson decide he didn't want to play at all?

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:52:30

Just had a complete 'down' on the forum, and email is currently down.

Cookiemonster · Mar 29, 2008, 14:52:53

madasahatter · Mar 29, 2008, 14:53:13

that's not good

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:54:47

Indeed...

Cookiemonster · Mar 29, 2008, 14:55:11

Looks like customer login is down too! Can't access my account.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 14:57:55

I suspect that there's an issue affecting a number of servers, hence I'm guessing it's a router.

psp83 · Mar 29, 2008, 18:32:21

Everything is backup to speed now.. well except my pesky profile

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 18:33:10

The difference is, Paul, that that's under BT's control.

Malc · Mar 29, 2008, 19:25:56

Next time you want a rest Rik, please leave the PC on.

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 19:27:05

It was, I was pinging the site until the graph changed from red to blue.

Malc · Mar 29, 2008, 19:30:16

I hope they paid the electric bill

Rik · Mar 29, 2008, 19:31:42

I haven't sent it yet, I was trying to calculate my profit margin.

psp83 · Mar 30, 2008, 12:35:42

Quote from: Rik on Mar 29, 2008, 18:33:10
The difference is, Paul, that that's under BT's control.

Its backup to 5000 now

Rik · Mar 30, 2008, 12:36:33

Blip is working. Wow!