Afrihost POC Network - Afrigreen Feedback

[LaraC]

Super consistent results those

Were the network guys able to find the reason why business and uncapped customers had unsatisfactory throughput during evenings?

 

[AfriGuy]

Were the network guys able to find the reason why business and uncapped customers had unsatisfactory throughput during evenings?

Demand generally increases in the evenings - so we're reaching some limitations on the network which causes slow throughput.
This should only really be affected P2P and downloads though.

 

[LaraC]

Thank you, this test was done during contentious time.

 

[Igor III]

I think let it run for at least 30 seconds to a minute a minute or so, we want to be able to identify clearly if the ping is consistent and what that ping response is in general.

For starters, I must say that my connection tonight is much better than the last two weeks (and I really mean much better).

Out of 5 ping plotter tests one shows a high latency spike on hop 3, making the average out of 5 runs only 50 ms.

This can also be seen in the ping test as every once in a while there is one that runs around the 300 ms mark, whilst most is more around the 200 mark.

As I said this is the best connection I had on AfriGreen in two weeks, not sure what has changed (nothing on my side is altered in anyway).

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\Mine> ping fweu1.en.perfectworld.eu -t

Pinging fweu1.en.perfectworld.eu [95.172.91.23] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=210ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=209ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=221ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=238ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=252ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=231ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=223ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=213ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=225ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=212ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=317ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=229ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=268ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=273ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=244ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=210ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=250ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=247ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=225ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=222ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=222ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=277ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=212ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=207ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=212ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=252ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=266ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=207ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=218ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=252ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=234ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=215ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=217ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=212ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=227ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=236ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=311ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=37

Ping statistics for 95.172.91.23:
Packets: Sent = 112, Received = 112, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 197ms, Maximum = 317ms, Average = 211ms
Control-C

 

[AfriGuy]

Thank you, this test was done during contentious time.
View attachment 303854
View attachment 303856

Doesn't look bad at all.
Would you be able to run another test at around 8pm tonight?

 

[AfriGuy]

For starters, I must say that my connection tonight is much better than the last two weeks (and I really mean much better).

Out of 5 ping plotter tests one shows a high latency spike on hop 3, making the average out of 5 runs only 50 ms.

This can also be seen in the ping test as every once in a while there is one that runs around the 300 ms mark, whilst most is more around the 200 mark.

As I said this is the best connection I had on AfriGreen in two weeks, not sure what has changed (nothing on my side is altered in anyway).

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\Mine> ping fweu1.en.perfectworld.eu -t

-snip

Not looking too bad, much better compared to the results you've previously posted

 

[Igor III]

Not looking too bad, much better compared to the results you've previously posted

Agreed, it is no way near as stable as what it used to be, but it certainly is a huge improvement to what it was

 

[LaraC]

Doesn't look bad at all.
Would you be able to run another test at around 8pm tonight?

I shall.

 

[KillerBOB]

Were the network guys able to find the reason why business and uncapped customers had unsatisfactory throughput during evenings?

Good question, LaraC.

 

[electrofreeze]

i would say not enough ipc for peak times as the problem is still there

 

[LaraC]

Good question, LaraC.

Wow! A kind word from you. I'm almost speechless.

 

[AfriGuy]

Good question, LaraC.

I answered a little earlier

 

[AfriGuy]

i would say not enough ipc for peak times as the problem is still there

Also answered on the previous page, specifically for Afrigreen.

Demand generally increases in the evenings - so we're reaching some limitations on the network which causes slow throughput.
This should only really be affected P2P and downloads though.

 

[jmacc]

i would say not enough ipc for peak times as the problem is still there

I would say this sounds about right. There is an interesting post on MBB "Detecting-a-congested-ADSL-exchange-Guide"
The part in this post that I find particularly interesting is this: ".. technically a bad ISP can affect the first hop too since ISP IPC congestion will look the same. The easiest way around this is to re-do the test with a different ISP."

Most of us, at some point were told by Afrihost staff that when you run a tracert and the round trip times on the first hop (outside your walls) exceeds a certain millisecond count that it is Exchange congestion. This is obviously not correct.

 

[jmacc]

Account type: 10Mbps Home Capped.

Still very happy with AfriGreen’s performance.

View attachment 303834
View attachment 303836

Lara, would you mind running a tracert and posting your results.

 

[LaraC]

Lara, would you mind running a tracert and posting your results.

Is there a specific site I should test?

 

[Dianysis]

Demand generally increases in the evenings - so we're reaching some limitations on the network which causes slow throughput.
This should only really be affected P2P and downloads though.

Yeah but why does it seem to affect mostly uncapped and business uncapped?

 

[jmacc]

tracert www.google.co.za should be fine

 

[Igor III]

Agreed, it is no way near as stable as what it used to be, but it certainly is a huge improvement to what it was

Eeeeek, guess it was short lived



C:\Users\Mine> ping fweu1.en.perfectworld.eu -t

Pinging fweu1.en.perfectworld.eu [95.172.91.23] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=324ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=214ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=239ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=220ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=197ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=333ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=312ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=235ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=242ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=212ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=274ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=264ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=300ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=252ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=209ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=331ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=207ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=297ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=241ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=241ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=234ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=209ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=343ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=240ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=313ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=251ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=235ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=231ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=198ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=292ms TTL=37
Reply from 95.172.91.23: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=37

Ping statistics for 95.172.91.23:
Packets: Sent = 73, Received = 73, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 197ms, Maximum = 343ms, Average = 223ms

 

[Dianysis]

I answered a little earlier

You still didn't answer why mostly uncapped and business uncapped seems to be affected.