-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What's the most interesting small town you've visited in South Africa?
Base station locations
- Thread starter Shad66
- Start date
No, not I, Tshepo @ WBS told me that "only the technicians know the tower locations", Tshepo suggested contacting Luis (aka Anakin) for this info.Shad66 said:
No, you cannot choose, and so far there is no advantage even if you could, iBurst uses ArrayComm's IntelliCell, which is a sort of dynamic load-balancing where your connection & traffic gets handed off to another tower when there is congestion.Shad66 said:
I would also like to know- GPS co-ordinates that I can put in my eTrex Legend & measure distances etc.
When I asked Tshepo where the Bryanston basestation was, his reaction & reply left me with the distinct impression that I had just been added to a terrorist-watch-list or something...
When I asked Tshepo where the Bryanston basestation was, his reaction & reply left me with the distinct impression that I had just been added to a terrorist-watch-list or something...
Thanks, but I'd prefer actual GPS co-ordinates for a sense of accuracy.
8321, I think the coverage map on wbsmobile.co.za only relates to the Uthingo National Lottery network- I don't think it has much, if anything to do with WBS' iBurst network.
I would like some clarification from WBS on this though- Sihen/Anakin?
8321, I think the coverage map on wbsmobile.co.za only relates to the Uthingo National Lottery network- I don't think it has much, if anything to do with WBS' iBurst network.
I would like some clarification from WBS on this though- Sihen/Anakin?
Last edited:
Yes, but not much, it is raining here now, and no problem at all.
I have noticed that when there is a lot of lightning the connection usually drops- maybe the basestation gets hit or something.
Apart from that I'm quite impressed with iBurst's performance during adverse weather.
I have noticed that when there is a lot of lightning the connection usually drops- maybe the basestation gets hit or something.
Apart from that I'm quite impressed with iBurst's performance during adverse weather.
CyberMatix
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 405
- Reaction score
- 0
I just have to wonder why it's such a big f@cking secret where the base stations are. Sentech keeps it a secret and WBS keeps it a secret. Why? What are they hiding?
Mercury
Well-Known Member
Shad66 said:
I can't help with the exact location but, as has been mentioned, fiddling around with http://www.iburst.co.za/rolloutpics/consol_coverage/johannesburg_consolidated.htm and the clickable sub maps should get you close.
I am also in Illovo. The primary base station I connect to (whichever one it is) gives me 4 signal LEDs in idle and 5 when connected. The alternate base station gives me 2 in idle and 2-3 when conneccted. The speed difference is quite noticeable. The best throughput I have achieved on the primary base station was 1Mbps when my personal news server was fetching news headers from a local server. This is as good as it gets.
I am on the primary base station at the moment and just tried the HTTP Telkom speed test. Mmm. 327kbps.
I have also noticed a signal drop during the one thunderstorm I was online since I got my UTD. Of course, if you have overhead telephone cables - as many of us here do - and you had ADSL, you would run the risk of an unlucky strike frying your equipment despite the surge protectors... A slightly longer term signal drop!
anakin
Well-Known Member
ic said:
That is right - wbsmobile.co.za coverage refers to the National Lottery network, not iBurst.
sihen
Well-Known Member
for view iburst coverage maps go to www.iburst.co.za > get iburst > roll out plans.
MrGray
Honorary Master
Just thought I should add some info about the way iBurst coverage works as folks seem to be stuck in the Sentech mindset of one tower per area.
iBurst basestation location is not as critical an issue as it is with Sentech.
Firstly, on flat land, an iBurst tower has a theoretical range of up to 13km, unlike Sentech which is effectively about 5km.
Secondly, the iBurst system works completely differently to Sentech. Sentech requires a stable connection to a single tower, which is why Sentech antennaes are directional, and Sentech has to go to great lengths to ensure that towers don't overlap too much as it causes connection problems with modems trying to authenticate to towers that are too far away.
The iBurst modems are capable of multipath signalling and the towers can hand off between each other - which is why iBurst antennaes are NOT directional and a directional iBurst antenna will actually degrade your service. This system is much better than Sentech's as it means that the modem can dynamically switch between multiple towers, and all of iBurst's towers within range know about your iBurst modem and can hand off your connection to another tower if congestion occurs on that particular tower - or if you are moving. This is the same way the GSM cellphone network operates. iBurst is literally mobile - it will work from a moving vehicle because of this, whereas Sentech modems will lose their connection as they require a stable connection to a single tower.
It also means that as iBurst rolls out, they can stick as many towers as they want in a certain area, without causing connectivity issues, and the theoretical sum of available bandwidth to all the users within an area is the sum of all the bandwidth on the towers within range which alleviates the problem Sentech has whereby they can only put up one tower in each 5km radius and it needs sufficient bandwidth for everyone in the area.
With iBurst, tower location is not that important provided there are one or more towers within a (max) 13km range. With Sentech, tower location is critical as you have to be within 5km of one single tower.
iBurst basestation location is not as critical an issue as it is with Sentech.
Firstly, on flat land, an iBurst tower has a theoretical range of up to 13km, unlike Sentech which is effectively about 5km.
Secondly, the iBurst system works completely differently to Sentech. Sentech requires a stable connection to a single tower, which is why Sentech antennaes are directional, and Sentech has to go to great lengths to ensure that towers don't overlap too much as it causes connection problems with modems trying to authenticate to towers that are too far away.
The iBurst modems are capable of multipath signalling and the towers can hand off between each other - which is why iBurst antennaes are NOT directional and a directional iBurst antenna will actually degrade your service. This system is much better than Sentech's as it means that the modem can dynamically switch between multiple towers, and all of iBurst's towers within range know about your iBurst modem and can hand off your connection to another tower if congestion occurs on that particular tower - or if you are moving. This is the same way the GSM cellphone network operates. iBurst is literally mobile - it will work from a moving vehicle because of this, whereas Sentech modems will lose their connection as they require a stable connection to a single tower.
It also means that as iBurst rolls out, they can stick as many towers as they want in a certain area, without causing connectivity issues, and the theoretical sum of available bandwidth to all the users within an area is the sum of all the bandwidth on the towers within range which alleviates the problem Sentech has whereby they can only put up one tower in each 5km radius and it needs sufficient bandwidth for everyone in the area.
With iBurst, tower location is not that important provided there are one or more towers within a (max) 13km range. With Sentech, tower location is critical as you have to be within 5km of one single tower.
Garp, very succinctly explained & others will definitely benefit from your explanation 
I investigated all that before getting iBurst, most of the info was on this very forum- thanks to MyADSL members
I have 0% doubt, that IntelliCell & iBurst as a wireless technology, is 100% better than IPWireless (or perhaps just the way that Sentech have implemented it
).
The reason I wanted to know GPS co-ords and measure straight line distance on my Garmin eTrex Legend- I want to determine the approximate effects of distance WRT speed as well as latency (starting the moment there is a tower hand-off, i.e. at a guess, when the signal strength leds go from say 4..5 down to 2..1). I do realise that other factors like obstacles along the way can skew this, but I am still interested in trying this intellectual pursuit.
I investigated all that before getting iBurst, most of the info was on this very forum- thanks to MyADSL members
I have 0% doubt, that IntelliCell & iBurst as a wireless technology, is 100% better than IPWireless (or perhaps just the way that Sentech have implemented it
).The reason I wanted to know GPS co-ords and measure straight line distance on my Garmin eTrex Legend- I want to determine the approximate effects of distance WRT speed as well as latency (starting the moment there is a tower hand-off, i.e. at a guess, when the signal strength leds go from say 4..5 down to 2..1). I do realise that other factors like obstacles along the way can skew this, but I am still interested in trying this intellectual pursuit.
Last edited:
MrGray
Honorary Master
Hi ic
Sounds like a worthwhile exercise.
I'm just holding my breath waiting to see what happens next year when they add thousands of subscribers. I have a little more hope for iBurst though, as it seems that the way the system works will obviate the problems Sentech seemed to have with tower congestion, and ultimately iBurst could theoretically put towers up all over the place in a way that Sentech cannot which could give them quite an edge.
In any case, I think their upstream bandwidth, esp. international will be the critical factor, not so much their coverage topology as it is so much more flexible.
I've been experimenting with an iBurst modem as well and have had mostly good experiences although I am a little concerned about increasing latency over the last few weeks. Since I am in the computer business I was vaguely considering becoming an iBurst agent but you have to commit to purchasing 15 UTDs/UTCs in order to do so and right now I think that is way too risky - I don't want to make that investment before I know how well iBurst is going to handle when they go "live" and I would hate to recommend something to my clients that could turn into the same fiasco that Sentech did. I still have a Sentech modem on a 256k package, which is actually starting to behave itself, however, I suspect that is only because so many ppl have dumped Sentech
Sounds like a worthwhile exercise.
I'm just holding my breath waiting to see what happens next year when they add thousands of subscribers. I have a little more hope for iBurst though, as it seems that the way the system works will obviate the problems Sentech seemed to have with tower congestion, and ultimately iBurst could theoretically put towers up all over the place in a way that Sentech cannot which could give them quite an edge.
In any case, I think their upstream bandwidth, esp. international will be the critical factor, not so much their coverage topology as it is so much more flexible.
I've been experimenting with an iBurst modem as well and have had mostly good experiences although I am a little concerned about increasing latency over the last few weeks. Since I am in the computer business I was vaguely considering becoming an iBurst agent but you have to commit to purchasing 15 UTDs/UTCs in order to do so and right now I think that is way too risky - I don't want to make that investment before I know how well iBurst is going to handle when they go "live" and I would hate to recommend something to my clients that could turn into the same fiasco that Sentech did. I still have a Sentech modem on a 256k package, which is actually starting to behave itself, however, I suspect that is only because so many ppl have dumped Sentech
Just to add something to this section on the range of Iburst, I'm am exactly 9.6km from the basestation (the next one is 19km). This was checked with GPS. There are two hills blocking LOS. (Checked this with WBS and ofcourse common sense in knowing where I live relative to the tower) I get 100% Reception at all times. Download rates of 120/35 quite comfortably. Latency on the other hand is obviosly where I fall short. Pings are slow and erratic. However i'm not a gamer so I really could'nt be bothered.
Speeds
Thanks for the info Mercury, just 2 more things since you also lie in Illovo:
Firstly, what are your ping times like to local gaming servers, Counter-Strike specifically on the different networks (SAIX, MWeb etc).
Secondly, what are local and international download speeds like (say www.tucows.co.za and any international site). I know you mentioned getting mail headers at 1mbps, but thats probably with compression and only to the mail server. I hear UUNet has excellent international bandwidth, but local peering is a bit limited.
Thanks in advance
Thanks for the info Mercury, just 2 more things since you also lie in Illovo:
Firstly, what are your ping times like to local gaming servers, Counter-Strike specifically on the different networks (SAIX, MWeb etc).
Secondly, what are local and international download speeds like (say www.tucows.co.za and any international site). I know you mentioned getting mail headers at 1mbps, but thats probably with compression and only to the mail server. I hear UUNet has excellent international bandwidth, but local peering is a bit limited.
Thanks in advance
Mercury
Well-Known Member
Requested Test Results
I am not really into online gaming. (I suppose I should add, "yet".) I took the IP address for one of the servers listed on www.unreal.co.za for my pings and downloaded an identical file from five different tucows servers around the net both this morning and a short while ago. Here are the results:
The only reason I mentioned the news header retrieval at 1Mbps was to demonstrate that the it was possible. It is not something you are going to see very often but it is possible...
I am not really into online gaming. (I suppose I should add, "yet".) I took the IP address for one of the servers listed on www.unreal.co.za for my pings and downloaded an identical file from five different tucows servers around the net both this morning and a short while ago. Here are the results:
Code:
17 December 2004 at 09:25 - 09:35
PING 196.2.128.102: 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=0. time=110. ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=1. time=100. ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=2. time=150. ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=3. time=130. ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=4. time=100. ms
----196.2.128.102 PING Statistics----
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 100/118/150
Matrix Revolutions 3D 3.2 Screensaver
Tucows SAIX: 30 seconds (618kbps)
Tucows IS: 23 seconds (806 kbps)
Tucows MWeb: 24 seconds (772 kbps)
Tucows NYI (USA): 32 seconds (579 kbps)
Tucows chello (Austria): 36 seconds (515 kbps)
----------------------------------------------------
17 December 2004 at 19:25 - 19:38
PING 196.2.128.102 (196.2.128.102) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=1 ttl=117 time=140 ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=2 ttl=117 time=135 ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=3 ttl=117 time=128 ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=4 ttl=117 time=113 ms
64 bytes from 196.2.128.102: icmp_seq=5 ttl=117 time=118 ms
--- 196.2.128.102 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4003ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 113.929/127.446/140.894/10.197 ms
Matrix Revolutions 3D 3.2 Screensaver
Tucows SAIX: 75 seconds (247kbps)
Tucows IS: 57 seconds (325 kbps)
Tucows MWeb: 57 seconds (325 kbps)
Tucows NYI (USA): 59 seconds (314 kbps)
Tucows chello (Austria): 60 seconds (309 kbps)The only reason I mentioned the news header retrieval at 1Mbps was to demonstrate that the it was possible. It is not something you are going to see very often but it is possible...