Extremely Slow

[Tacitus]

.......... if ye got paid even 10p per post, ye would have earnt nearly 6 and half grand from Idnet. Even if they paid ye 50p per post they still would be onto a good thing heh.

TBH, iDNet should employ someone with technical knowledge based at iDNet Towers and therefore in constant contact with events, to constantly monitor this forum and comment as appropriate.  Not as a substitute for support, but as an addition.  That way everybody is kept in the loop, rather than Simon and Tim having to react to events once the lid is threatening to blow off.

Over on TB, Zen's systems engineers get a pretty free rein to comment as appropriate.  No reason I can see why someone at iDNet shouldn't be doing the same. 

[jaydub]

I have also seen a return to form, which is either down to an IDNet fix or down to the fact that I didn't have a registry setting for MTU, so it was defaulting to 1500.

Having tried both 1478 and 1492, I've seen much better results since on TBB, which are near optimal for my sync speed.

Whilst it was set at 1500, I was getting very good BT test results, but much poorer TBB results, so I suspect IDNet doesn't like an MTU of 1500.

In reality, I suspect the improvement is more to do with IDNet tweaks rather than my own, but you never know.

I do have a lingering suspicion that the Zens of this world would have picked up the issue, but fair dos to IDNet.  They appear to have fixed the problem pretty quickly once they recognised there was one.

[vitriol]

After two weeks of poor speeds, things seem to be looking up

29/08/08 @ 17:35

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7150 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 5534 kbps

29/08/08 @ 22:46

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7150 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 5853 kbps


Thats the highest it's been for the last two weeks.

[Steve]

I agree today's seems almost perfect
 
1745 27 August

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8096 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7000 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 2154 kbps

0745 29 August

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7000 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 6439 kbps


1100 29August
Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7000 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 5708 kbps


1430  29 AugustTest1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7000 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 4929 kbps


1800 29 August
Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7000 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 5368 kbps

2130 28 August
Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7000 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 6262 kbps

[Simon]

Glad to hear things seem to be improving, guys. 

[Inactive]

Ditto Simon..  At least they seem to have got to grips with things today, well done all concerned..

[Dopamine]

At last, significant improvement in speed here too since early evening, and an admission by IDNet that they had a problem. I was an inch away from migrating this afternoon, so the explanation bought them sufficient time to remedy the problem. Customer centred service - it works wonders

..... and I hope that some of the fully brainwashed and paid up members to the "Cult of IDNet" will now accept that some problems really aren't the fault of BT or exchanges after all. Such blind worshipping of IDNet has occasionally made this forum less useful than it might otherwise have been.

[Inactive]

..... and I hope that some of the fully brainwashed and paid up members to the "Cult of IDNet" will now accept that some problems really aren't the fault of BT or exchanges after all. Such blind worshipping of IDNet has occasionally made this forum less useful than it might otherwise have been.

I suppose that I was part of that " Cult of IDNet " Dopamine, however I did agree with much of your post of last night and stated so loudly and clearly throughout the day, it seems to have brought results, which at the end of the day, is all that really matters. I agree that " blind worshipping " as you put it, can on occasions have an adverse effect.

Anyway the last 24 hours have seen a dramatic improvement in the service that we all pay for and expect, so my thanks to all involved in achieving this.

[David]

It surely reinforces the fact that once a problem has been established,the sheer speed of quality service,Im not really convinced about the "cult"of Idnetters,I think I know a lot of regular users of this forum and to be balanced,I have read constructive critism from the moderators to the users,so I do appreciate but imo a little harsh and unfair.
I can only compare with the likes of Tis....i and how this would have been handled and although I appreciate we pay top money the service shown today has been faultless,I have not commented through all of this.I Emailed support and  had replies within hours>there was some confusion on the Email address which has been cleared up.
So from my point of view ,and I would say my speed has not improved yet I am happy with them.
I refrain from using names but there is not a cult of Idnetters that has been shown.
From a point of view of a light hearted user I just hope we can move on and enjoy the diverse range of topics and Im pleased that everyone seems to be happy again.This takes nothing away from your comments you had an issue and posted them and they were acted upon,in my view cant ask for more.

IN some cases though a lot of speed problems can be traced to a local issue,god I proved this a few times,and yes Bt are not always to blame so a lot of what you have said has proved correct,so evryone has contributed,and a great out come......so karmas all round....

My optimism with Idnet remains and if anything this shows me I was right to stay here,amongst friends and like minded folk........Idnet in my mind have redeemed themselves and all connected from the people on this forum have handled it very well,The moderators can only pass on things and they are in the same boat as users in lots of ways,maybe under pressure to assist and do what they can but I believe they have OUR interests at haert and do a very challenging job......I couldnt do it.I hope my speed improves and Im sure it will.......................lots of luck  

[David]

I suppose that I was part of that " Cult of IDNet " Dopamine, however I did agree with much of your post of last night and stated so loudly and clearly throughout the day, it seems to have brought results, which at the end of the day, is all that really matters. I agree that " blind worshipping " as you put it, can on occasions have an adverse effect.

Anyway the last 24 hours have seen a dramatic improvement in the service that we all pay for and expect, so my thanks to all involved in achieving this.

Not often I disagree with you In but Im sure you showed disatisfaction and some doubt so in my book this does not make you part of a cult which I cant agree exists and if it does then its very small,and Im not enroled.

Lets get back to having a laugh.......when we have time which in my case sadly isnt often 

[Inactive]

Not often I disagree with you In but Im sure you showed disatisfaction and some doubt so in my book this does not make you part of a cult which I cant agree exists and if it does then its very small,and Im not enroled.

Lets get back to having a laugh.......when we have time which in my case sadly isnt often 

I suppose really that all boils down to how anyone defines the " Cult of Idnet " David, yes I have openly promoted IDNet on other forums, I have defended them when perhaps it wasn't justified, so I guess I did kind of fall in to that camp.

However Dopamine's comments really made me think that he did have some valid points that needed addressing, and quickly.

Anyway, they all seem to be resolved now, so time to get back to " normal ".. 

[Dopamine]

I suppose that I was part of that " Cult of IDNet " Dopamine, however I did agree with much of your post of last night and stated so loudly and clearly throughout the day, it seems to have brought results, which at the end of the day, is all that really matters. I agree that " blind worshipping " as you put it, can on occasions have an adverse effect.

Anyway the last 24 hours have seen a dramatic improvement in the service that we all pay for and expect, so my thanks to all involved in achieving this.

lol. No In, you weren't on my list, even though you have done a good PR job in the past for IDNet. As you say, your post last night was in some ways critical of IDNet, so that would have disqualified you as a cult member!

My post was meant partially in jest, but prompted by the ridiculous response to a complaint by someone on the Thinkbroadband forum (which I looked at for the first time today), where the responder - who also posts here - dismissed a legitimate complaint as being rubbish.

Whatever, society is made up of all kinds of people, and I can live happily with them all.

[Tacitus]

..... and I hope that some of the fully brainwashed and paid up members to the "Cult of IDNet" will now accept that some problems really aren't the fault of BT or exchanges after all. Such blind worshipping of IDNet has occasionally made this forum less useful than it might otherwise have been.

Don't you think a lot of this might have been avoided if as I suggested earlier, iDNet had someone whose job included monitoring this forum and responding accordingly.  A simple response along the lines of, 'it may be load balancing issues but we're looking into it', would reap wonders in PR terms. 

Not only that but it would relieve Simon and Tim to do what they do best, running the business and planning for the future.  Might save a lot of stress all round. 

It comes down to communication something which became very apparent at the time of the mail problems.   iDNet are a good ISP, but if they were more proactive in communicating with their customers rather than always having to react to events at the point where people start threatening to leave, it would do them a world of good.

I don't belong to the 'Cult of iDNet' - I don't even use them - but like a lot of people on this forum I do appreciate good service and a quality product.  As evidenced by this forum and TB, you can't buy the sort of loyalty offered by iDNet users, it has to be earned by offering good products with good support.  OK it may fall short from time to time but, more often than not, customers will forgive you if you explain what's happening in a timely manner, and apologise where necessary.

The flip side is that you cannot take loyalty for granted and, within reason, need to take your customers into your confidence.  They are in a sense iDNet partners - iDNet depend on them for a living, customers depend on iDNet to deliver the service without hassle.  Once customers begin to think that loyalty is being taken for granted it can rapidly turn to outright opposition. 

And that would be a great shame.

[Rik]

Well said, Tac. You've summarised the position perfectly, imo. Yes, we do tend to be loyal to IDNet, but that loyalty has been earned by the company. However, it is not unconditional, and can also be lost. Most people would not expect the service to be 100% perfect, things will and do go wrong, but when that happens, I think all of us would look to IDNet to tell us what is wrong as soon as possible, and explain how they intend to put things right and how long they expect it to take. That simple act of communication can quell a lot of the angst we have seen on the forum in the past couple of weeks. The staff try to get as much information as we can and relay it, but there are definitely occasions when we all need to hear the word direct from Letchworth.

Part of the problem with regard to this issue has been that very few customers have actually contacted IDNet about it, which has delayed the process of them tracking down the cause. It's why the staff have been banging on about people letting IDNet know. Of course, it may be that this issue has revealed a shortcoming in the monitoring tools that IDNet are using. If so, I am confident that they will look to deal with that too.

[Inactive]

Of course, it may be that this issue has revealed a shortcoming in the monitoring tools that IDNet are using. If so, I am confident that they will look to deal with that too.

Well said Tac and Rik,

It seems quite obvious to me what is required, one member of the IDNet Staff to be specifically tasked to check on here on a daily basis, they only need read the IDNet Support Thread/s, that together with keeping the " Status " page on the IDNet Web Site updated..it ain't rocket science. 

[Steve]

I suppose what I find difficult to grasp is that we are telling them that there is something not quite right with their network and not the other way round.One downside of the forum is perhaps they would have had a lot more phone calls had it not existed however on the upside it displayed a picture of a wider issue and certainly proved to me that my usual excuse of BT Exchange congestion was not valid on this occasion. My last set of BT speedtests posted earlier are as good as I have had for a long time.

[Rik]

The forum can be a two-edged sword, Steve. With a general problem, such as a router failure, it can do a good job of identifying an issue. With a more specific problem, it doesn't provide enough evidence, because we don't know who is on what central (in this case) and IDNet really need to hear from those affected.

[vitriol]

30/08/08 @ 11:18

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7150 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 6053 kbps

Certainly a great improvement so far

[Pistol]

Yep, im also seeing the improvement continue which is great   As someone above said, communication is key. If  customers are treated like royalty they will in fact be loyal subjects ;P

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 7616 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  832 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 6500 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 6065 kbps

[Rik]

If  customers are treated like royalty they will in fact be loyal subjects ;P

Eloquently and karmically put. 

[Tacitus]

Part of the problem with regard to this issue has been that very few customers have actually contacted IDNet about it, which has delayed the process of them tracking down the cause. It's why the staff have been banging on about people letting IDNet know. Of course, it may be that this issue has revealed a shortcoming in the monitoring tools that IDNet are using. If so, I am confident that they will look to deal with that too.

A very good point Rik and it may be a case where this forum actually works against iDNet solving problems.  Agreed that people should definitely contact them to explain the problem so they have the data to nail it down.  However it doesn't alter the fact that if someone at iDNet Towers was monitoring the forum they could pick up on this rather than allow it to develop. 

To be honest it is unfair to iDNet in that they can't sort problems they a) don't know about and, b) don't have the data to pinpoint the problem.  You could apportion blame equally between forum members and iDNet; the former for preferring to vent here rather than contact iDnet, the latter for not having someone monitoring the forum to pick up on problems before they develop into major issues. 

IDNETTERS is a voluntary forum.  If iDNet hope/want/expect it to be an extension of their support, the least they can do is assign someone to work with it properly on a proactive basis.  It's no good expecting some form of Chinese Whispers to get the message out. 

If either Simon or Tim read this I hope they'll take it in the spirit it's meant.  They have a b...y good business which tries it's best to deliver a quality product at a fair price.  What it is lacking is consistently good communication and PR.  Get that right and the dividends would be enormous, not only in PR terms, but in freeing management time to deal with management issues. 

[/rant]

[Rik]

I can't argue with that, Tac.

[Steve]

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 7616 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  832 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 6500 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 6065 kbps

Quote from kitz.Pistoleer I don't know whether your interleaved or not but if you are this maybe of interest

It should also be pointed out that whilst BTw state that applying interleaving shouldn't reduce your line speed, it does reduce the maximum line rate achievable from 8128kbps to 7616kbps due to the additional overhead required for check bytes.
Note: although BT state 7616 is maximum sync speed with Interleaving, many instances of higher sync speeds have been reported by users. This is dependent upon your router being able to support S=1/2 mode which effectively combines two RS code words into a larger logical code word of 510 bytes (ANSI T1.413).

If you want a bit more try 585v6,wag54gs or dg834n The latter gives me a full sync with interleave on the other two one notch down. Whilst the 2wire and zyxel P660hw give me a sync of 7616

[Tacitus]

I can't argue with that, Tac.

One thing the latest posts do prove is that iDNet is responsive to customers.  They've obviously done some tweaking to good effect.

They just need to improve communications somewhat.  Customers can be your best friend or your worst enemy.  Good communication goes a long way to making sure it's the former  

[MO]

I don't post on here but often have a browse, but feel the need to make the honcho's aware that I am really considering a move if the dire speeds are not rectified by next week. I also have had very poor speeds for the last few weeks and the last 3-4 days especially.....I could have received faster dial-up. The last two years have been pretty good at IDNet but you've set a precident which unfortunately is now slipping.

Yes I have emailed support and yes I have done the usual reboots etc, but I'm not at all happy with the current level of service.

Over to you..........