Some tests. blah [Archive]

Karnaugh

14-12-2003, 12:10 PM

Apparently the beta testers cant disclose their tests anyway.

I didnt sign any contracts, so here are some reversed tests...

international:

14 internet-solutions-ltd.Londonlnt.cw.net (166.63.223.178) 17.850 ms 15.996 ms 17.408 ms
15 168.209.247.158 (168.209.247.158) 17.732 ms 12.805 ms 12.615 ms
16 168.209.100.30 (168.209.100.30) 160.293 ms 81.359 ms 84.342 ms
17 168.209.0.85 (168.209.0.85) 329.617 ms 332.316 ms 334.381 ms
18 isl.nmszone.is.co.za (196.26.0.3) 330.819 ms 332.499 ms 329.953 ms
19 168.209.18.62 (168.209.18.62) 331.339 ms 329.775 ms 331.515 ms
20 gige-0-0-22.stpcr01.infosat.net (66.18.65.206) 334.664 ms 336.300 ms 339.740 ms
21 [A mywireless router] (xx.xx.xx.xx) 333.334 ms 338.460 ms 341.595 ms
22 [A mywireless IP] (xx.xx.xx.xx) 421.358 ms 421.581 ms 422.992 ms

Local (From IS's core)

Tracing the route to [some wireless oke]

1 196.34.7.194 [AS 3741] 0 msec 4 msec 4 msec
2 isl.nmszone.is.co.za (196.26.0.3) [AS 3741] 4 msec 4 msec 4 msec
3 168.209.18.62 [AS 3741] 0 msec 4 msec 4 msec
4 gige-0-0-22.stpcr01.infosat.net (66.18.65.206) [AS 22572] 4 msec 8 msec 8 msec
5 [A mywireless router] [AS 22572] 8 msec 8 msec 8 msec
6 [A mywireless IP] [AS 22572] 100 msec 88 msec 100 msec

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

Cerberus

14-12-2003, 06:14 PM

damn if that is the case then it's really nice 400-500 ping? omw sat signals are faster than I thought:)

jus

14-12-2003, 06:41 PM

If that's the case, then the actual wireless portion of the link introduces 80-90 ms of latency to the connection.

-jus

Cerberus

14-12-2003, 07:08 PM

my guess is it depends probably on distance from the tower ?? could be wrong :)

jus

14-12-2003, 07:21 PM

I doubt it, seeing as the cell size is only anticipated to be a radius of 3-5km.. (radio travels at the speed of light).. latency may be affected by distance if you are at the edge of the service area and receiving bad signal, and hence you'll get a lot of error correction, etc.

-jus

sybawoods

14-12-2003, 08:59 PM

And I wonder if this is by design - Cape Town ADSL was down for most of today. It came back up, only with blistering international latency. Let's see how long it lasts, but currently getting sub 200ms to Europe:

Pinging clarity.jolt.co.uk [195.149.21.11] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=207ms TTL=56
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=56
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=56
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.11:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 198ms, Maximum = 207ms, Average = 200ms

ProAsm

15-12-2003, 12:12 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">latency may be affected by distance if you are at the edge of the service area and receiving bad signal<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Latency on Wireless transmissions is very dependant on distance.
Like ADSL, anything after 8 km of copper wire = bad pings + some packet loss.
Wireless example:
Person (A) lives 3 km from cell = good ping, no packet loss.
Person (B) lives 10 km from cell, but is a rich guy and has a 3 meter dish, receives a better and cleaner signal than Person (A) but his ping will suck and he will experience some packet loss.

Btw, current cells going up in Durban:
Durban North, Bluff, Overport, Springfield Park, SunningDale, Gateway (near hospital).

chopsky

15-12-2003, 12:19 AM

Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=625ms TTL=56
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=857ms TTL=56
Request timed out.
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.11:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 2, Lost = 2 (50% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 625ms, Maximum = 857ms, Average = 741ms

I'm also a Cape Town ADSL user. Can't say my tests were quite as pleasing as yours.

sybawoods

15-12-2003, 01:10 AM

1.15am, and still going strong here. Rondebosch exchange, Cape Town.

Target Name: clarity.jolt.co.uk
IP: 195.149.21.11
Date/Time: 15 Dec 03 01:13:45 AM

1 10 ms 10 ms wblv-224-01.telkomadsl.co.za [165.165.224.1]
2 232 ms 164 ms [196.43.10.138]
3 196 ms 196 ms london-dir-telecity-pos-8-0-0.telkom-ipnet.co.za [196.43.9.50]
4 196 ms 196 ms pos2-1.cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [63.218.52.17]
5 199 ms 196 ms pos5-1.br01.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [63.218.12.130]
6 202 ms 197 ms lon1-9.nildram.net [195.66.224.59]
7 196 ms 197 ms jolt-gw.nildram.net [195.149.20.126]
8 198 ms 197 ms clarity.jolt.co.uk [195.149.21.11]

Ping statistics for clarity.jolt.co.uk
Packets: Sent = 2, Received = 2, Lost = 0 (0.0%)
Round Trip Times: Minimum = 197ms, Maximum = 198ms, Average = 197ms

grubman

15-12-2003, 09:31 AM

9:30, Monday ( during business hours )

1 18.514 ms 18.151 ms 18.058 ms wblv-224-01.telkomadsl.co.za (165.165.224.1)
2 18.390 ms 19.045 ms 18.635 ms 196.43.10.138 (196.43.10.138)
3 205.489 ms 204.511 ms 206.805 ms london-dir-telecity-pos-8-0-0.telkom-ipnet.co.za (196.43.9.50)
4 204.448 ms 209.175 ms 205.565 ms pos2-1.cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net (63.218.52.17)
5 208.420 ms 205.009 ms 206.581 ms pos5-0.br01.ldn01.pccwbtn.net (63.218.12.90)
6 206.544 ms 205.363 ms 206.925 ms lon1-9.nildram.net (195.66.224.59)
7 212.130 ms 206.047 ms 207.322 ms jolt-gw.nildram.net (195.149.20.126)
8 205.718 ms 205.104 ms 208.390 ms clarity.jolt.co.uk (195.149.21.11)

hmmm, u think telskum is *fixing* ADSL because of competition? Oh well, too late ... they'll loose me as a customer for good.

AcidRaZor

15-12-2003, 09:41 AM

ProAsm, I understand that RadioKop and parts of Roodepoort is covered, would you care to mention exactly which parts like you did for Durban just now?

Thanks man... If I have to move closer to a tower then so be it ;) Just before I sign my new lease I would like to know, hehehe

ProAsm

15-12-2003, 10:56 AM

noone, I believe there are 63 cells earmarked for Gauteng but exactly where they are or how many will be up for the launch I'm not sure.
But where you mention is currently up at Helderkruin which I believe will cover Roodeport and Krugersdorp.

AcidRaZor

15-12-2003, 12:21 PM

It's cool, I spoke to some guy over the phone (think Carl) and he lives really close to me and said that the probability of coverage for me would be very good, as well as a good signal.

So now I'm just waiting for the release date... tell me, if I slip you a six pack and an extra 500, would you come install me on the 5th of Jan? [:D]

ProAsm

15-12-2003, 01:47 PM

[^][:D]

AcidRaZor

15-12-2003, 02:04 PM

Seriously now.. [}:)][:D]

Karnaugh

16-12-2003, 04:07 AM

can someone tell me what the **** these ADSL traceroutes have to do with anything in this discusion?!

I think the node that I tracerouted did have bad reception at the time.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

sybawoods

16-12-2003, 12:15 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Karnaugh
 can someone tell me what the **** these ADSL traceroutes have to do with anything in this discusion?!

I think the node that I tracerouted did have bad reception at the time.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Mmm - it has plenty to do with the discussion from where I am coming. One of the things that has disappointed me about ADSL is the extent to which international latency has deteriorated since port shaping was introduced. One of the deciders for me, is how Sentech's option will improve on international latency. I will therefore be looking very closely at the traceroutes posted by the beta testers.

I found it noteworthy that almost on the same day that Sentech's testing started, that my ADSL international latency is suddenly back where it was 12 months ago (sub 200ms to the UK is pretty awesome i.m.o.). I'm not sure how long it will last, but am still getting the same response for the last 3 days.

I posted my traceroute so that that others who have similar needs can have some frame of reference to compare the Sentech traceroute. On what basis do we decide whether it's good or bad if we don't have something to compare it against? Make sense?

Andre

16-12-2003, 12:40 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by sybawoods
 And I wonder if this is by design - Cape Town ADSL was down for most of today.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Not all of Cape Town. I spent hours playing Freelancer on SAIX with no problems. I'm in Muizenberg.

Andre

16-12-2003, 12:44 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by sybawoods
Let's see how long it lasts, but currently getting sub 200ms to Europe:
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My goodness. I didn't read this part of your post properly.

This is the lowest latency I've ever seen (Wed. 16 Dec).

Pinging clarity.jolt.co.uk [195.149.21.11] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=55

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.11:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 203ms, Maximum = 205ms, Average = 204ms

sybawoods

16-12-2003, 01:32 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Andre
 <blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by sybawoods
Let's see how long it lasts, but currently getting sub 200ms to Europe:
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

My goodness. I didn't read this part of your post properly.

This is the lowest latency I've ever seen (Wed. 16 Dec).

Pinging clarity.jolt.co.uk [195.149.21.11] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=55

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.11:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 203ms, Maximum = 205ms, Average = 204ms
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

And withour belaboring the point - 1.30pm Tuesday - and still going strong:

Target Name: clarity.jolt.co.uk
IP: 195.149.21.11
Date/Time: 16 Dec 03 01:36:01 PM

1 11 ms 12 ms wblv-224-01.telkomadsl.co.za [165.165.224.1]
2 12 ms 12 ms wblv-ip-er-1-fe-11-1-0.telkom-ipnet.co.za [196.43.10.138]
3 198 ms 198 ms london-dir-telecity-pos-8-0-0.telkom-ipnet.co.za [196.43.9.50]
4 198 ms 200 ms pos2-1.cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [63.218.52.17]
5 199 ms 198 ms pos5-1.br01.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [63.218.12.130]
6 198 ms 198 ms lon1-9.nildram.net [195.66.224.59]
7 199 ms 199 ms jolt-gw.nildram.net [195.149.20.126]
8 200 ms 199 ms clarity.jolt.co.uk [195.149.21.11]

Ping statistics for clarity.jolt.co.uk
Packets: Sent = 2, Received = 2, Lost = 0 (0.0%)
Round Trip Times: Minimum = 199ms, Maximum = 200ms, Average = 199ms

chopsky

16-12-2003, 01:51 PM

Ok, I agree with Karnaugh. These tests have absolutely no relavence to Sentech AT ALL. They belong in the ADSL forums. Continue the posting there.

sybawoods

16-12-2003, 02:04 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by chopsky
 Ok, I agree with Karnaugh. These tests have absolutely no relavence to Sentech AT ALL. They belong in the ADSL forums. Continue the posting there.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> Ok... but how do we evaluate the Sentech option if we can't compare it to ADSL. There's a *very* direct link, i.m.o. I'm an ADSL user contemplating moving to Sentech, so it's obvious that we should compare. What am I missing?

Karnaugh

16-12-2003, 04:13 PM

No but it seems to be more like people are comparing their ADSL pings to each other like a cock mesuring contest, the international pings are pretty much going to be the same wherever by design of the network. 1 ADSL traceroute was enough, lets leave it at that now. Its gone compleately off topic imho

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

sybawoods

16-12-2003, 05:25 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Karnaugh
 No but it seems to be more like people are comparing their ADSL pings to each other like a cock mesuring contest, the international pings are pretty much going to be the same wherever by design of the network. 1 ADSL traceroute was enough, lets leave it at that now. Its gone compleately off topic imho

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Karnaugh... international latency is mine and many others' daily bread and butter - I am a participant in quite a few international simulation leagues. I have specially needed to install an ISDN line with low latency over and above ADSL to be able to participate. For the first time in more than 18 months with ADSL, we are getting sub 200ms pings to Europe. That happens in the same week that Sentech starts their testing... co-incidence? Anyone who knows anything about international latency - will tell you that sub-200ms to Europe has been pretty much impossible until this week. In the context of you posting your first unofficial mywireless tests, using an internartional traceroute - I showed what ADSL international latency currently looks like. It has nothing to with a *** measuring context, and everything to do with showing that *perhaps* Telkom is responding to mywireless's go-live.

Karnaugh

16-12-2003, 08:22 PM

against my better judgement I'll try to explain again.

This topic is tests of Sentech's MyWireless service, not a comparison or anything else. Your ADSL tests can go in the ADSL forum.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

sybawoods

16-12-2003, 09:44 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Karnaugh
 against my better judgement I'll try to explain again.

This topic is tests of Sentech's MyWireless service, not a comparison or anything else. Your ADSL tests can go in the ADSL forum.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Ok, not wanting to use up valuable forum space over how to best manage the forums :) - so this will be my last contribution to this topic. But I think it's fair to say that 99% of people here will be comparing any Sentech tests, to their own experience with ADSL.

So the next time a Sentech test is posted, let's say download speed, or local latency, or peer to peer experiences - what we should do is run our own private ADSL tests, and then either post our results in the ADSL section, or keep it to ourselves. I'm not quite sure how that adds value to the Sentech tests (a bit like testing one brand of Wine but refusing to compare it to any other).

Personally - my need (and I'm sure many others) is to see how Sentech shapes up in relation to their ADSL experience. That will determine how we make a product choice. And while this forum is not associated with any one product, or provider, I would hope that independent user comparisons would be welcomed.

That said... my apolgies if I have misunderstood your topic. From now I guess we should keep the tests completely seperate and make users navigate between the two sections to do their own comparisons.

Karnaugh

17-12-2003, 12:28 AM

Apparently there are some changes to MyWireless.

1) There will not be a static IP, and there will not be the option of one "at the moment"
2) You will be limited to the speed of the package you buy.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

Perdition

17-12-2003, 02:09 AM

Hi, first time poster but been reading for a while.

Firstly I agree that there should be comparisons between ADSL and MyWireless as for the most part they are competing for the same market segment i.e. those requiring a 24/7 "broadband" connection. Perhaps once Sentech have officially launched, a new forum section could be created specifically for comparison between these two products (or any others that may arise).

On the topic of international latency, the Sentech product cannot compete as they are using satellite. It's physically impossible (as stated in other topics) for satellite to compete with terrestrial cable. Unless at some point Sentech decide to move entirely to terrestrial cable (SAT-3) you can't expect pings better than 600+ms, thus for those wishing to connect to international game servers MyWireless is probably not an option. Local latency is a different issue as I believe they are using terrestrial links so hopefully local latency will be comparable with ADSL and ISDN.

Karnaugh:

1. It is unfortunate that Sentech have decided against issuing a static IP as I'm sure a lot of people (myself included) would like to access their home computer remotely without the need of a dynamic IP web service. Even if you had to pay a little extra a month I believe it should still be an option.

2. I can understand Sentech's decision in this regard as it's easier to manage bandwidth and QOS when you have definite metrics to work with. Also people would not pay for the 512k package if they knew their 128k package could burst beyond 512k anyway. Rather Sentech put this in place now than pull a Telkom and adjust it after being released [;)]

AcidRaZor

17-12-2003, 08:52 AM

this topic makes me want to go on a binge drinking weekend... who is with? [xx(]

Karnaugh

17-12-2003, 10:46 AM

Yes well we spoke with the dude I assume is heading up the testing or something at Sentech last night, we discussed it at length and basicly the response to "can we have a static IP" will be "no" and there are no plans to offer it in the package but "our suggestion has been noted"

They made some comments about insufficent IP space, but with a 24/7 service 90% of the people will be using an IP all the time anyway, so not to alocate at least a B block to the service anyway (static or dynamic) would be cripiling to its success at this stage.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

AcidRaZor

17-12-2003, 11:54 AM

Exactly my point! (in my head at least)

If the IP's are dynamic, which means they don't expect you to be online 99.97% of the time (they claim to have 99.97% uptime), which means you probably will get disconnected every 24hours like telkom, which means that a 3 gig cap is somewhere in the future as well.... wireless.... but wif a cap.... aka telkom wifout wires yo

And like you said, if they expected everyone to be online ALL their claimed uptime, it will mean that everyone is going to be issued at least ONE dynamic IP, might as well make it static ffs!

Perdition

17-12-2003, 02:24 PM

I don't think Sentech will implement a cap anytime soon as they have already factored high utilisation into the price i.e. you're paying 50% more for the 512k package than you would for ADSL. It would also create legal havoc for them given that people will be signing a 24 month contract based on the service description given at this point in time. I'm sure Sentech have noted the amount of heat Telkom has received for changing the specification of the agreed service and being new to the industry it would be financial suicide to follow suit.

On the static IP issue I really hope that someone at Sentech can fill us in on why they've decided to go the dynamic IP route since most people will be constantly connected. Perhaps, like Telkom, they don't want MyWireless to compete with their VSTAR products (where you do get issued a block of static IPs)? Still I think it isn't too much to ask for one measly static IP [;)]

celeborn

17-12-2003, 03:49 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Perdition
 I don't think Sentech will implement a cap anytime soon as they have already factored high utilisation into the price i.e. you're paying 50% more for the 512k package than you would for ADSL. It would also create legal havoc for them given that people will be signing a 24 month contract based on the service description given at this point in time. I'm sure Sentech have noted the amount of heat Telkom has received for changing the specification of the agreed service and being new to the industry it would be financial suicide to follow suit.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

What heat have Telkom taken ? A few people have bitched and moaned. Big deal. What difference has it made - in the bigger picture. Have the things that we've been whining about been rectified? No. There has been smokescreen after smokescreen and at the end of the day, after all our ranting and moaning - "telkom are illegal", "telkom misadvertised", "telkom are milking us dry", there has been no clear breach of contract. Unless Sentech stipulate - in the contract - that a cap will not be implemented you dont really have a leg to stand on, and even then it'll be rather shakey. Always read the fine print. 24 months x R1400 (or whatever it costs) is a lot of $$$.

AHehAHEAHEhHHe
Celery

Perdition

17-12-2003, 07:21 PM

My point was that Sentech cannot afford the kind of bad publicity that Telkom have received. I agree that in the bigger picture it hasn't affected their bottom line at all given that ADSL users account for such a small percentage of their total revenue. Sentech on the other hand have invested a huge amount in making their venture a success, plus a large part of their target market is the current ADSL user base. Why would ADSL users move over to another service if they are just going to be stuffed around again?

I also agree that one should read the fine print. I hope for both the sake of Sentech and their future clients that it does not state they can do whatever the hell they please without repercussion. There are enough jaded ADSL users that the fine print will be scrutinised very closely and I hope Sentech is well aware of this.

Staind

17-12-2003, 11:45 PM

i will be highly pissed off if there is fine print that says they're able in any way to change the package, u know where it says (shareD) they coood work that into saying u r not sharing fairly thus we are lowering. just read first ppl cause i can just see ppl crying. i donno if this is speculation but at the moment i think its safe to say the closer u r literally to the tower the better lancey ull get (ie ull get a lower ping if u closer) u might beable to get a good signal but that means stuff all to do with ur latency. latency to international servers have pleased many people. I have spoken to a few people who play online at battle.net and i told them a vague figure and they were plessed emensly by it.
I hope that there will be a way in which users will beable to see how close they are to a tower. maybe there will be a map up with distinct locations cause i know cs people will complain if they over 10km from their tower.
evaluate to yourself why you want this product. It can't meet everyones needs. ive heard theres no static ip's atm as its still not on ipv6 or something but there'll be business packages in late march.
the 24/7 is awesome, today it rained and i had no problems. the download speeds are typical towards your package, and as far as i can see there isnt specific port shaping like adsl with kazaa etc...
pings, yes everyone is DYING TO find out. from what ive heard from all the techies ive spoken to and stuff, the tower is the only issue with ur ping, if u within the given radius u should get a ping <5ms, as you go out your ping should range between 5 and 80ms, the people far away getting signal will NOT get a pinger higher than 150. as i was told (remember this is just to the tower, ie first hop).

All what i have said is speculation, nothing is fixed, everything is possible to change, this service has over a month left of testing and tweeking and yes everything can change, until u see your contract in your face things will change, things will stay, and hopefully from all your research into how good this product is going to be for you, you should be able to make a good decission into whether or not you should get this product. just remember R1449x 24 = almost R35 000.

Staind

17-12-2003, 11:56 PM

as far as i know here are where some of the towers are:
Sandton (not active yet)
Randburg
Cresta
Brixton
Honeydew
Roodepoort

those are the 1's i can remember off hand by the launch there should be a lot more towers so don't worry if u don't fit into that spectrum

Perdition

18-12-2003, 01:38 AM

Thanks for the update Staind. I'm sure they will have some form of "fair use/abuse" clause in the contract, which most broadband providers around the world have. Hopefully they only consider it abuse if you max your line for months on end. Besides even on the 128k package you could pull 40GB a month and most people would run out of things to download after a month or two.

If they were running IPv6 I would expect to have a static IP. Even running IPv4 I don't buy the argument of address shortage as if all their users were to be connected 24/7 they would need enough IP's to accommodate them anyway. Now that there is mention of business packages in the future I think they've decided if people want a static IP badly enough they will upgrade to the business package... very sly.

AcidRaZor

18-12-2003, 08:13 AM

There are 63 towers in gauteng and this is only with launch I think, there's a tower on radio kop, close to some pub thingy, I forget the name. I spoke with someone at Sentech who lives in Weltenvreden park (same are as me, I'm just on top of the hill) and he told me he gets 4 signals which is = to 100% signal strenght just about.

I wonder what they'd charge if I want to upgrade my package, I was thinking of getting the 512k one but to test I reckon the 128k is enough? Although... I'm a speed freak...ARGH! the decisions!!!

LOTR3 rocked ;)

Perdition

18-12-2003, 12:12 PM

I'm also in Weltevreden so glad to hear that it's covered [:)] There are a couple of pubs near Radiokop, there's Shamrock and a Keg.

noone, at this point the 256k package looks to be the best deal for the price unless you really need to pull 160 gigs a month! [:0]

chopsky

18-12-2003, 12:39 PM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Besides even on the 128k package you could pull 40GB a month and most people would run out of things to download after a month or two.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You'd be very suprised.

November : 26.4633 GB downloaded, 37.8888 GB uploaded, 64.3522 GB used
October : 23.8873 GB downloaded, 19.6491 GB uploaded, 43.5364 GB used

And that is mild usage.

Perdition

18-12-2003, 07:13 PM

That's a fair amount of uploading... does your "mild usage" include P2P and/or DC? [;)]

Karnaugh

18-12-2003, 07:47 PM

I dont see where IPv6 comes into this. In IPv6 standards you should be alocated at least a /64, the recomended prefix is a /48 address space, not just a single static IP. Anyway, this is a new standard that is reletivly far off from implementation as it is not backward compatible with the current internet in many ways.

Anyway, Sentech should have absolutly no problem getting sufficient address space. I'd rather they just stoped that nonsense excuse and told us the real reason, which is quite obviously marketing or forcing it on home users/"consumers" only.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

ProAsm

18-12-2003, 08:40 PM

I received the complete list of current and future cells for JHB, DBN and CT this afternoon, and although I'm still waiting permission to post it, I can assure you the whole of Gauteng and CT is very well covered. Durbs, from the airport right through the city, the beach front and right up and including Pheonix and Umhlanga rocks are very well covered.

Staind

18-12-2003, 08:59 PM

btw 4 bars on the modem doesnt mean 100% signal, im getting 4 bars with the modem at the top of my cupboard and my signal is 17% ;/ i think it also has to do with how close you are.

Proasm, does your list have the basestation numbers? cause every time i call seems they have no idea. (We'll phone you back) etc..

ProAsm

18-12-2003, 10:50 PM

Not sure what you mean by the base station numbers ?

AcidRaZor

19-12-2003, 08:02 AM

not 4 bars, signals, 4 signals....well, thats what i heard....

anyway... ProAsm, care to comment on the static IP issue?

ProAsm

19-12-2003, 08:30 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">ProAsm, care to comment on the static IP issue?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">No [:(]

Doomy

19-12-2003, 08:32 AM

Hi.
Base Station numbers range from 101 at the moment upwards etc.
You will find it in the software showing the range of the signal if you move your mouse over it.
...(this information may change at any time)

Doomy out

AcidRaZor

19-12-2003, 08:35 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by ProAsm
 <blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">ProAsm, care to comment on the static IP issue?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">No [:(]

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

*slap* [:D] why not?

silversurfer

19-12-2003, 08:42 AM

Proasm, whens capetown gonna be ready? Can you post that list of towers yet ?

thankz dewd

AcidRaZor

19-12-2003, 09:06 AM

according to sentech they want 99% coverage of south africa by end of march 2004, or was that only gauteng? but yea, I reckon they'd have some sites up and running in cape town by then, seeing as there's a list and everything [:D]

ProAsm

19-12-2003, 11:45 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">according to sentech they want 99% coverage of south africa by end of march 2004,<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Ouch... We're trying our best to achieve the impossible but miracles take a bit longer [:D]

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Commercial availability of MyWireless services will begin in January in the Gauteng province, which includes the metropolitan areas of Johannesburg, Midrand, Pretoria, and Soweto, followed by Durban in February, Cape Town in March, with coverage to most of South Africa by the second half of the year. The service brings consumers and businesses in South Africa a high-speed Internet access service that will work from home, work, or on the road, all without wires. MyWireless offers speeds as fast or faster than fixed-wire options like DSL, and provides an instantaneous, "plug-and-play" Internet connection that is affordable, reliable, and cost-effective.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">http://www.ipwireless.com/press_120903.html

AcidRaZor

19-12-2003, 12:37 PM

yea, i think it's 99% of gauteng by march 2004 [:p]

i want a static ip

MOnk

19-12-2003, 08:48 PM

Do you know if The Pinetown/Kloof/Hillcrest/Gillits Area will be covered in Durban ?

ProAsm

20-12-2003, 12:56 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Do you know if The Pinetown/Kloof/Hillcrest/Gillits Area will be covered in Durban ?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">As things stand atm, probably not in the first phase, but will follow soon afterwards.

GuLdaN

20-12-2003, 11:03 PM

What about Vanderbijlpark ?

<img src="http://w

ProAsm

21-12-2003, 12:32 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What about Vanderbijlpark ?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Sorry I cannot help with Gauteng district names as I dont know the area at all, maybe Doomy can [^]

freeek

21-12-2003, 02:04 AM

Where you from ProASm ??

..- dot dot dash ;)

Riaan Burger

21-12-2003, 06:28 PM

The support guy currently online at Sentech 0860 736 832 mentioned that one's IP will stay fixed for however long you leave your device switched on and do not leave your cell.

DarkLight Nocturnal Entertainment (darklight.co.za)

Karnaugh

21-12-2003, 10:20 PM

that is absolutly stupid.

that is NOT a static IP. That just means they wont force it to change, an IP that changes *ever* be it every 5 mins or every 10 days is not static!

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

Riaan Burger

27-12-2003, 01:17 AM

;-) Yup, not static. I just mentioned it because it may mean that the decision has something more to do with the way the system is being implemented and related costs than with simple forced structuring to distinguish MyWireless from VSTAR.

DarkLight Nocturnal Entertainment (darklight.co.za)

Perdition

28-12-2003, 03:17 AM

It is a bit premature to knock Sentech's decision without knowing the full reasoning behind it, however the only benefits of using dynamic IP in a mostly "always on" environment are a) a slight increase in the number of users you can assign to an IP block as perhaps a small percentage of users will not be connected 24/7 and b) slightly less administration of IP addresses, though to track available static IP's is not excessively complicated so no excuse there.

At the end of the day I hope Sentech delivers, static IP or not. The market is in dire need of of decent competition even if the competition isn't a magic bullet. I hope they prove to be that kick in the colon that Telkom sorely needs.

Angstrom

29-12-2003, 11:52 AM

Surely the most obvious reason for not providing static IPs is that it limits a user's ability to host various services, be it HTTP, FTP, email, etc. I would imagine that the thinking is that a significant amount of bandwidth can be saved if this is the case.

Andre

29-12-2003, 12:34 PM

It's been rather quiet from the testers. When can we expect to hear some reports?

timo

29-12-2003, 08:07 PM

hello,

personally i dont think there are too many people out there that require static ip's.

myself i'd prefer NOT to have one for the following reasons:
1) if you get hacked it makes it SLIGHTLY more difficult for the guy to find you again
2) someone decides to flood your connection for no apparent reason, (this does tend to happen on irc) all you have to do is reconnect.

maybe they should offer the option of a static ip at a higher price for ex. maybe R100 extra per month or something. its not something EVERYBODY wants.. just the minority.

Perdition

29-12-2003, 08:48 PM

I don't think running a web site or mail server will create nearly as much traffic as people using their connection for P2P networks. I agree that not many people require a static IP but you can use dynamic DNS web services to get around the dynamic IP issue, so rather just offer a static IP and be done with it.

timo :

1) Get a firewall... if you have a 24/7 connection and retarded enough not to have a firewall you deserve to get hacked.

2) Most IRC servers these days mask your IP so it would have to be a really lucky guess on the flooder's part.

And yeah where did those testers disappear to, have they been silenced for some reason?

freeek

29-12-2003, 10:53 PM

They have disappeared! I remember they had a post on what they should test. I don't see none on the results! I wanna see the results!

..- dot dot dash ;)

timo

30-12-2003, 12:44 AM

Perdition

1) Show me a firewall thats 100% secure that doesnt cost a fortune
2) Being a 128, 512K line, ***********NO************* firewall will be able to stop someone on a 10mbit + line flooding you.

This doesnt happen every day, but you never know. As I said, personally I prefer a dynamic ip.

On top of that its only the small irc networks that mask your ip

antowan

30-12-2003, 10:44 AM

Good day

As far as I know, to flood somebody takes resources. The flooder will have to sacrifice his own internet access speed in order to flood you. You will seriously have to anger somebody for them to do this. If not and the flooder does it purely because he can, then you can be sure it won't last.

If it does...

There are many ways to remedy this. Firstly you can block the port he is attacking. He will "shoot blanks" so to speak. And if all else fails and you for some reason managed to seriously p*** somebody off (which would make him/her that persistent), then get a new IP and let the administrators handle it... ;o) (With dynamic IP this would not be necessary) But pitty the person that gets assigned that IP after you...

Cheers

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by timo
 Perdition

1) Show me a firewall thats 100% secure that doesnt cost a fortune
2) Being a 128, 512K line, ***********NO************* firewall will be able to stop someone on a 10mbit + line flooding you.

This doesnt happen every day, but you never know. As I said, personally I prefer a dynamic ip.

On top of that its only the small irc networks that mask your ip
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous

Perdition

30-12-2003, 08:51 PM

1) No firewall is 100% secure else they would never need to upgrade them, however even the freeware firewalls provide enough protection that a casual hacker will have no chance. You can also use an old PC and set up a linux firewall, granted this isn't an option for most people but it is free. A skilled hacker determined to get into your machine will easily find you again, static ip or not. With Sentech your IP changes only when you disconnect or change cells which will be very seldom, so you basically have a semi-static IP... why not just provide fully static IP?

2) Adding to what antowan said, don't piss people off on IRC [;)]

reech

30-12-2003, 10:47 PM

Just being on a static ip does't mean that you won't get hacked, hell, I'd still use a firewall at the very least. I use static in the uk for an extra £2 a month I need to connect via radmin and ftp from work and if you want to run a mailserver for *small* business purposes it's ace!!

Karnaugh

31-12-2003, 08:39 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">1) Show me a firewall thats 100% secure that doesnt cost a fortune<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

IPFW and IPTABLES are free. See, Smoothwall as well.

If you have number 1 then you dont have a problem with number 2, most people are put off by a firewall when selecting someone to flood. The general script kiddie pattern is portscan first, try some exploits then give up and flood. If you setup default drop rules it takes them so long to portscan you which comes up dry anyway that they move on (Generaly).

True static IP's would actualy require more work by Sentech to implement. They would have to respond to issues such as DoSes black holing attackers on a regular basis etc.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

Doomy

31-12-2003, 11:34 AM

Hi Karny,
Actually, remember that Sentech Already has a vast corporate client base with Static IP's so it ain't about the DoS "issues", but rather a means to rapidly deploy the technology. I can say this much: Sentech is willing to give routable IP addys to 512k users who show a viable need to have them. aDSL in this county does not at the present. That to me is a big difference. Also to note that the large majority of users will not need this capability. So It aint about the ability, but rather about the rapid deployment needs.

Doomy out.

mbs

01-01-2004, 01:18 AM

For Doomy - so what's your definition of a 'viable need'? Is Sentech going to play a consumer arbitration role and arbitrarily decide whether the need is 'viable' or not? How about providing some insight into why allocation of static IP's would affect the speed of rollout?

Doomy

01-01-2004, 04:39 AM

Viable Need is simple. This product is targeted at Residential up to SOHO users. SOHO will get preference( This here being an unsubstantiated opinion). If you can give a good enuff reason why you need a static IP, be it Mail/etc Server, vpn solution, Security Solution, etc. As long as you require an static IP solution in your use of the Internet, it should qualify you. The vast Majority of Internet home users do not need this. so it does make it easier to role out as the IP management tools, Potential DNS/MX records/Domain management issues no longer associated cuts cost in maintaining a non fixed IP solution.

Make sense?

Doomy out.

mbs

01-01-2004, 10:48 AM

For Doomy - OK, makes sense. Now I (as a residential user), want to remotely interrogate my home-based webcam-based security system. Does this qualify as a viable need entitling me to a static IP?

Karnaugh

01-01-2004, 01:58 PM

No it wouldnt really because you can use a Dynamic DNS service for such a system without any problem ;)

If you were hosting your own domain then a dynamic IP creates problems. As with tunnels (VPN, GRE etc) that have to be setup with static end points.

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

mbs

01-01-2004, 06:39 PM

For Karny - yep, that's precisely the problem, as remote interrogstion is and will never be accessible through anything except via tunnelled comms. Ah well - when the service is finally available, I'll have to negotiate appropriately (read - scream and shout?!) with Doomy/ProAsm or whoever the Sentech decision-makers are... [V]

Karnaugh

01-01-2004, 08:02 PM

I think Doomy and Pro will be more likely just to hang up :P

<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."

NetLink Research

Perdition

02-01-2004, 08:38 PM

At least it appears there is an avenue to obtain a static IP. I personally require one for business purposes so hopefully I will be able to negotiate one. It's good to see that Sentech are listening to (potential) customers even if they don't implement everything we want at this stage... certainly more refreshing than Telkom's "get bent" attitude.

mbs

02-01-2004, 10:26 PM

Too true... Let's hope that Sentech will be amenable and receptive to the powers of my persuasive charm... Maybe a first step would be a response from Doomy/ProAsm to my previous posting about remote interrogation of my home-based webcam-based security system via tunnelled comms?

Doomy

02-01-2004, 10:33 PM

Hi guys...
As not all things are equal, I have taken the liberty of escalating your request to Sentech's support. This will hopefully mean some detailed feedback. I myself have never delt with such security video feedback technology. So I passed it on to the pro(erm)fessionals.

Will get back to youo guys as soon as I have more info.

Doomy out.

mbs

02-01-2004, 11:04 PM

Thanx Doomy - just to reinforce understanding, the basis of my query is that remote interrogation of my security system demands tunnelled comms via a static IP, and I would like to know if Sentech would supply a static IP for this need, without difficulty/penalty/hassle: the technical details of my system will, however, remain private (otherwise it would not be much of a security system, obviously)...

freeek

03-01-2004, 12:31 AM

I Don't see what all the fuss is about getting a static ip. If we get one, kewl, if not oh well, its not like you get one with adsl.

I would want one to host my own site with what ever space i desire but if I can't broadband internet will just be fine!

..- dot dot dash ;)

Perdition

03-01-2004, 01:04 AM

The "fuss" has already been stated. There are a fair number of users out there that would like to use their connection as an extension to their business or for an application that does not work well with dynamic IP. This could either be hosting a small mail/web server or connecting remotely to fetch mail, documents etc.

Most people who run a SOHO cannot justify the 3-4g's a month for Diginet just to get a static IP, thus they put up with ADSL and dynamic DNS services because there is no alternative. I bet a large portion of the ADSL SOHO market would move over to Sentech knowing they could get a static IP (plus having no cap helps) [;)]

Doomy

03-01-2004, 02:18 AM

Hi
Just so you guys are aware. The procedure is kinda painless. Sentech will at no extra cost provide the fixed IP addy. The only requirement as stated b4 is fair use and one other minimum requirement. That of a 512k Mywireless connection. SOHO is logically the intended market for this special "Service". What I have to confirm is the definition of fair use.

That said. I can only provide Sentech's decision on the matter. What we are talking about here are semantics. The service as a whole is deliverable. The specific client needs are more a posititional product marketing service. Compare the VSTAR 512/50 and the VSTAR/Custom solutions and you will see that the Custom solution is a negotiated one between the potential client and Sentechs service line capabilities.

but, Enough Pre-sales technobabble. :)

Doomy out.

chopsky

03-01-2004, 02:54 AM

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If we get one, kewl, if not oh well, its not like you get one with adsl.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Mate, we dont get MUCH with adsl, so using that as an argument just aint gonna cut it. I sure as hell hope Sentech isn't just another Telkom, but rather a company who is going to try produce a package that works for both them and us, the consumers.