Afrihost Uncapped ADSL Feedback (Pt2)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Indeed. Down to 50/50 myside.

Again. Downloads ya ya...but my youtube is also taking a bit of a beating...but that I expect is due to my exchange and people being home and using the net...

Hmmm. As the need for bandwidth increases so to must the IPC :D
 
snapple said:
shaping removed from about midnight last night. Yay.
Click to expand...

ugh. Didn't last long. Shaping Policy: 25% Download/ 12.5% P2P. Surely the recent pattern of shaping is more than just a temporary capacity issue?
 
Getting amazingly poor speeds at the moment on my 4 meg line. Neighbour who uses an MWeb account is having no issues at all. According to the Client Zone, I currently have no shaping applied.



2316900434.png


Code: 
PING google.com (74.125.233.36) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=1 ttl=53 time=216 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=2 ttl=53 time=33.7 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=3 ttl=53 time=103 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=4 ttl=53 time=499 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=5 ttl=53 time=315 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.233.36: icmp_req=6 ttl=53 time=269 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=7 ttl=53 time=277 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=8 ttl=53 time=565 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=9 ttl=53 time=262 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=10 ttl=53 time=246 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=11 ttl=53 time=533 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=12 ttl=53 time=364 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=13 ttl=53 time=463 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=14 ttl=53 time=334 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=15 ttl=53 time=394 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=16 ttl=53 time=588 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=17 ttl=53 time=336 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=18 ttl=53 time=164 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=19 ttl=53 time=309 ms
64 bytes from jnb01s01-in-f4.1e100.net (74.125.233.36): icmp_req=20 ttl=53 time=354 ms
^C
--- google.com ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 38324ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.728/331.675/588.389/143.860 ms

Code: 
[silvercode@silvercode-home:local/bin]$ tracepath google.com                                                                                                                                               (24-09 12:31)
 1:  silvercode-home.local                                   0.124ms pmtu 1500
 1:  192.168.1.1                                           1.748ms 
 1:  192.168.1.1                                           2.094ms 
 2:  105-236-148-222.access.mtnbusiness.co.za              1.975ms pmtu 1492
 2:  105-236-8-193-esr-lo.mtnbusiness.co.za              369.801ms 
 3:  ipc-send-tb-3a.mtnbusiness.net                      231.890ms asymm  7 
 4:  tb-dca-2.za--qux-c.za.mtnbusiness.net               225.992ms asymm  6 
 5:  compj-cpt-1.mtnns.net                               448.636ms asymm  6 
 6:  ct-cr-2.za--tb-cr-1.za.mtnns.net                    320.886ms asymm  7 
 7:  ct-cr-2.za--rb-cr-1.za.mtnns.net                    435.878ms asymm  8 
 8:  41.181.139.109                                      212.130ms asymm 10 
 9:  no reply
10:  no reply
11:  no reply
12:  no reply
13:  no reply
14:  no reply
15:  no reply
16:  no reply
17:  no reply
18:  no reply
19:  no reply
20:  no reply
21:  no reply
22:  no reply
23:  no reply
24:  no reply
25:  no reply
26:  no reply
27:  no reply
28:  no reply
29:  no reply
30:  no reply
31:  no reply
     Too many hops: pmtu 1492
     Resume: pmtu 1492
 
snapple said:
ugh. Didn't last long. Shaping Policy: 25% Download/ 12.5% P2P. Surely the recent pattern of shaping is more than just a temporary capacity issue?
Click to expand...

I tend to agree here.

This being a holiday and a lot of people using the net etc is a definite contributor, but it is becoming clear that the need for more capacity is there during the waking hours.

I would not be surprised if we receive some form of official communication to this effect.

As it stands though currently Afri would need to;
1) upgrade capacity which would mean a product cost increase,
2) change AUP perhaps to say that p2p will by default by shaped in business hours?,
3) use magic

I personally am in favour of 3...

Awaiting some form of official comms.
 
froot said:
On the contrary.
View attachment 72399
Today's usage requirements is actually suprisingly low.
Click to expand...

:eek::what:

Colour me intrigued. Well then...something else is clearly up here.

I just hope that with Mwebs recent policy shift the other ISPs are not of the opinion that they can follow suite in a similar fasion now that one has changed the playing field...:o
 
Yeah, I don't get it. No shaping applied, supposedly, but I've been waiting near 8 minutes for an XBMC skin to finish downloading.

Afrihost, stop sucking please...
 
Even if shaped, streaming is supposed to go at 100% - right?

Youtube was fine this morning, but now it's completely borked. :(
 
froot said:
On the contrary.
View attachment 72399
Today's usage requirements is actually suprisingly low.
Click to expand...

Isn't this a graph of JINX?

I'm sure if we could see one of AH JHB IPC it would be a different picture.

The shaping today makes me think that AH have more consumers than businesses, in which case, an IPC upgrade is required.
 
OK, Officially tired of this shaping.

@AfriMan - Could you please organize my account to be moved to 6Mbps Business Uncapped Immediately? Not sure why I have to wait till 01-Oct-2013 for the account to be active.
 
wingnut771 said:
Isn't this a graph of JINX?

I'm sure if we could see one of AH JHB IPC it would be a different picture.

The shaping today makes me think that AH have more consumers than businesses, in which case, an IPC upgrade is required.
Click to expand...

Yeah it would look different, because then you're looking at AH's traffic alone instead of JINX as a whole... but this is just to give an idea. Also true is that the majority of AH's traffic is home traffic and probably minimal business traffic. That pushes the home-work ratio up a bit.
 
Conack said:
Even if shaped, streaming is supposed to go at 100% - right?

Youtube was fine this morning, but now it's completely borked. :(
Click to expand...

Yes, the shaping should only effect downloading..
Could you post some traceroutes to youtube...so we could see whats happening please? :-)
 
my traceroute to Youtube is fine, i'm not sure about twitch.tv (ive never run a traceroute to it before)


C:\Users\Chris-home>tracert www.youtube.com

Tracing route to youtube-ui.l.google.com [74.125.233.69]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms dsldevice.wl2500 [192.168.0.1]
2 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms 105-236-9-65-esr-lo.mtnbusiness.co.za [105.236.9.65]
3 10 ms 13 ms 8 ms ipc-recieve-tb-2a.mtnbusiness.net [41.181.54.86]
4 29 ms 34 ms 30 ms tb-dca-2.za--qux-c.za.mtnbusiness.net [41.181.198.188]
5 13 ms 10 ms 10 ms compj-cpt-1.mtnns.net [196.44.18.2]
6 14 ms 10 ms 9 ms ct-cr-2.za--tb-cr-1.za.mtnns.net [196.44.31.134]
7 52 ms 52 ms 53 ms ct-cr-2.za--rb-cr-1.za.mtnns.net [196.44.31.69]
8 35 ms 30 ms 31 ms 41.181.139.109
9 37 ms 33 ms 30 ms 72.14.194.74
10 31 ms 33 ms 30 ms 64.233.174.57
11 30 ms 30 ms 30 ms jnb01s02-in-f5.1e100.net [74.125.233.69]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Chris-home>tracert www.twitch.tv

Tracing route to cdn.justin.tv.c.footprint.net [4.23.39.254]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms dsldevice.wl2500 [192.168.0.1]
2 6 ms 6 ms 5 ms 105-236-9-65-esr-lo.mtnbusiness.co.za [105.236.9.65]
3 8 ms 8 ms 7 ms ipc-recieve-tb-2a.mtnbusiness.net [41.181.54.86]
4 28 ms 31 ms 28 ms tb-dca-2.za--qux-c.za.mtnbusiness.net [41.181.198.188]
5 12 ms 15 ms 10 ms compj-cpt-1.mtnns.net [196.44.18.2]
6 186 ms 154 ms 152 ms ls-cr-2.uk--tb-cr-1.za.mtnns.net [196.44.31.113]
7 165 ms 167 ms 167 ms am-cr-1.nl--ls-cr-2.uk-a.mtnns.net [196.44.31.183]
8 161 ms 161 ms 162 ms am-tpr-1.nl--am-cr-1.nl-a.mtn.net [209.212.111.141]
9 199 ms 198 ms 199 ms xe-4-1-0.edge5.Amsterdam1.Level3.net [212.72.41.89]
10 194 ms 184 ms 189 ms 4.69.162.157
11 200 ms 201 ms 226 ms ae-2-52.edge3.Amsterdam1.Level3.net [4.69.139.169]
12 * * * Request timed out.
13 * * * Request timed out.
14 * * * Request timed out.
15 ^C
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X