iburst out of bandwidth?

B

blobbyunhappyness

New Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I hope noone else fell for the trap - my internet slowed down to a new level of slow, assumed I was capped and bought a booster... guess what - I wasn't capped. Lesson learned. Anyway, the support guy was generally pretty useless except that he mentioned that they were getting a lot of similar calls.

So has iburst capped themselves maybe?
 
supposed to be a fibre break or something like that. I just think they cant afford to maintain their infrastructure anymore, with all the cheap prices they were force to adopt in early 2010
 
blobbyunhappyness said:
I hope noone else fell for the trap - my internet slowed down to a new level of slow, assumed I was capped and bought a booster... guess what - I wasn't capped. Lesson learned. Anyway, the support guy was generally pretty useless except that he mentioned that they were getting a lot of similar calls.

So has iburst capped themselves maybe?
Click to expand...

didnt you check your bandwith before buying a booster?
 
Yeah, so you'd think I would have checked. As I said, last time I'll do that.

Anyway, Wolfy seems to be correct. There is some kind of failure in one of ibursts 2 undersea cables. Get this tho' (I have no idea how accurate this is, but it sounds reasonable) - they have 2 links, 1 up each coast of Africa, with enough capacity over both links combined. The thinking is: this is fiber, it will never break nd even if it does it can be fixed relativly quickly... then they find out that an undersea breakage takes at best a week to fix.

All this means is that when a link fails, and I do mean when not if, then there is severe congestion as they only can provide for half the capacity requirements; is this poor planning or a product of the pricewar?

Either way - it is as it is - the best thing for them (iburst in this case) to do would be to come clean on it - leaving users guessing is only going to make me want to move service providers so much quicker.
 
Forgot to mention that speeds seem a bit better in the last day or so, nowhere close to what they usually are imho. From some traceroutes it looks like they are using Neotel as an upstream while the cable break is being addressed.
 
blobbyunhappyness said:
Yeah, so you'd think I would have checked. As I said, last time I'll do that.

Anyway, Wolfy seems to be correct. There is some kind of failure in one of ibursts 2 undersea cables. Get this tho' (I have no idea how accurate this is, but it sounds reasonable) - they have 2 links, 1 up each coast of Africa, with enough capacity over both links combined. The thinking is: this is fiber, it will never break nd even if it does it can be fixed relativly quickly... then they find out that an undersea breakage takes at best a week to fix.

All this means is that when a link fails, and I do mean when not if, then there is severe congestion as they only can provide for half the capacity requirements; is this poor planning or a product of the pricewar?

Either way - it is as it is - the best thing for them (iburst in this case) to do would be to come clean on it - leaving users guessing is only going to make me want to move service providers so much quicker.
Click to expand...

You can view http://twitter.com/iBurstNotices for the status of the network.

Yes, we do have two fibres, one west coast and one east coast. Under normal operating conditions the links have more than a third capacity of their capacity still available and during failure 1 to 1.5 (with our previous upstreams this ratio was 1 to 3) The results is international latency conditions during submarine cable outages. To all practical purposes it is not feasible to leave a fibre cable idle unless we double all subs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X