Cool Ideas Fibre ISP – Feedback Thread 4

S.Claus

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
1,593
On cable. It just happened again while playing. I would just lose connection and then it results in a loss for me.
Ps5 is full of crap when it comes to cables (mine says connected/disconnected with the 20m lan cable constantly ). Try playing on wireless or check the LAN cable
 

Gimli

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
638
Its easy to get a higher IPv6 adoption rate when majority of a country is so poor it can't actually afford internet...
Not sure what the point is here. We can compare ourselves to brasil or India if you want? They are on 40 and 60% respectively...
 

Gimli

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
638
I guess, a downside to having IPv6 is: if something goes wrong, it is double as tricky to find the problem, you first need to find out whether the problem is v4 or v6 related, for some kind of problems.

The nice thing about v6 is having a gigajillionty static IP addresses at home, but you can't give up on v4 DDNS and port forwarding to access a device at home until all the networks out there, like your cell phone networks etc support v6. So once again nothing here is going to change any time soon.

I had a bit of fun merely trying to get my router's DNS to resolve my LAN devices, and getting my LAN devices not to use HE's DNS servers to try resolve my LAN devices, after switching on the HE tunnel. I told a friend or two, it is cool to have V6 running, but I would not suggest trying it :)

At least my pings from Jhb to the HE tunnel server has been pretty stable at 3ms for the last 6 weeks, thanks for that!
You don't have native IPV6 yet? All that tunneling is just unnecessary overhead and effort. I can suggest good ISPs if you want :)

Major benefit to me is no more Nat and shorter routes. Also IPv6 routes are less congested in some cases.

Insist on an ISP that delegates a /56 when you choose
 

Gimli

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
638
It's a complicated implementation to do correctly and considering we have enough v4 for the moment there isn't a major motivation towards it, we are a multi-tiered network which then complicates peering a bit vs just an ISP that buys transit. What is your reason for wanting the v6?
See, fighting with your users will not do you any favours.
 

Gimli

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
638
So these benefits are more around the technology not the experience, it isn't going to change the way you use the internet or consumer data etc. Which is why it's not at the top of our list
Delay at your own peril. Your competition is making the move, they will eat your breakfast
 

TheRoDent

Cool Ideas Rep
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
5,679
You don't have native IPV6 yet? All that tunneling is just unnecessary overhead and effort. I can suggest good ISPs if you want :)

Major benefit to me is no more Nat and shorter routes. Also IPv6 routes are less congested in some cases.

Insist on an ISP that delegates a /56 when you choose
As previously discussed, less NAT is not a major benefit, statefull firewalling is still a requirement, which carries the same connection tracking overhead as statefull V4 NAT on a consumer router.

And there should not be such thing as a faster V6 route considering existing peering arrangements. A path is a path whether over V4 or V6.

A /56 is the norm for a consumer allocation, which is our planning too, but again not really a benefit.

Happy to discuss how V6 has changed your life compared to V4 however.

If you have evidence where your ISP has a better V6 route over the V4 route I would say that they've been neglecting their V4 routes, which doesn't compute.

In fact, considering the lower number of peers that are capable of V6, V4 routes would typically follow better paths, and have less transit hops.
 
Last edited:

TheRoDent

Cool Ideas Rep
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
5,679
See, fighting with your users will not do you any favours.
We're not fighting with them. That is a statement you made....

We're simply explaining, and debating our strategies and timelines for V6 and not claiming that it will be a panacea.

Which V6 is not.
 
Last edited:

Gimli

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
638
We're not fighting with them. That is a statement you made....

We're simply explaining, and debating our strategies and timelines for V6 and not claiming that it will be a panacea.

Which V6 is not.
I have not heard anybody claiming it is a panacea, however I have seen you argue that people don't need it. Which is fine. So we understand why Cool Ideas aren't cool :)
 

Kilerhotdog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
197
I have not heard anybody claiming it is a panacea, however I have seen you argue that people don't need it. Which is fine. So we understand why Cool Ideas aren't cool :)
Cool Ideas are in fact cool whether they have V6 implemented yet or not, my line is working flawlessly and support is fast to fix issues. I actually like that Cool Ideas is prioritizing things that make the experience better/smoother for the consumer like the routing they have overseas, rather then something that we as consumers won't feel that much. Just my 2 cents.
 

Armizael

Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2006
Messages
540
For the first time in years, I'm seeing 180 - 210ms in World of Warcraft - normally it's around 140-150ms.
IP for the server I'm connected to is 34.91.160.197 - traceroute below:

Code:
Tracing route to 197.160.91.34.bc.googleusercontent.com [34.91.160.197]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.254
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3     3 ms     2 ms     2 ms  192.168.10.5
  4     1 ms     2 ms     1 ms  192.168.11.6
  5     2 ms     2 ms     2 ms  100.98.0.1
  6    18 ms    18 ms    17 ms  100.98.1.3
  7    17 ms    17 ms    17 ms  100.99.1.250
  8    19 ms    19 ms    19 ms  196-60-9-113.ixp.joburg [196.60.9.113]
  9    18 ms    19 ms    19 ms  10.252.235.94
 10    19 ms    20 ms    19 ms  74.125.245.209
 11    18 ms    19 ms    19 ms  74.125.245.212
 12   174 ms   177 ms   173 ms  108.170.227.219
 13   174 ms   174 ms   174 ms  209.85.250.185
 14   180 ms   179 ms   179 ms  209.85.142.166
 15   184 ms   183 ms   183 ms  108.170.232.72
 16   183 ms   182 ms   183 ms  209.85.246.162
 17   182 ms   182 ms   181 ms  142.250.209.81
 18     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 19     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 20     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 21     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 22     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 

FrankyF

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
1,908
Hi guys,

I created a line speed upgrade request to 200/200Mbps and was hoping that you may be able to have it processed as soon as possible. I saw now that the website indicates upgrades/downgrades can only be processed before the 20th of the month (my bad for only seeing this now, doh!).

#COOL-20210522-687651 - Upgrade Request for service:66429

Thanks!

@PBCool @TheRoDent
 

PBCool

Cool Ideas
Company Rep
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
10,945
Hi guys,

I created a line speed upgrade request to 200/200Mbps and was hoping that you may be able to have it processed as soon as possible. I saw now that the website indicates upgrades/downgrades can only be processed before the 20th of the month (my bad for only seeing this now, doh!).

#COOL-20210522-687651 - Upgrade Request for service:66429

Thanks!

@PBCool @TheRoDent
Sure will check
 

S.Claus

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
1,593
@Gimli This is more of a discussion in my opinion. User says they want XYZ then PBCool and Rodent determine if it will be beneficial to the majority of users. The majority of us have FTTH connections so we really don't have any ground to request/demand specific niche services. Keep in mind they are in no way obligated to assist us and do so out of their free will. They could always forward us to the regular support which will tell you to file a service request.

I'm personally getting MFN because I'm struggling with Openserve to resolve a problem and saw an opportunity to play with the new toys on Afrihost (still keeping my Openserve line with Cool Ideas).

Edit: Big tears if you end up on the ignore list for being rude :ROFL:
 
Last edited:

PBCool

Cool Ideas
Company Rep
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
10,945
For the first time in years, I'm seeing 180 - 210ms in World of Warcraft - normally it's around 140-150ms.
IP for the server I'm connected to is 34.91.160.197 - traceroute below:

Code:
Tracing route to 197.160.91.34.bc.googleusercontent.com [34.91.160.197]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1  2 * * * Request timed out.
3 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.10.5
4 1 ms 2 ms 1 ms 192.168.11.6
5 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 100.98.0.1
6 18 ms 18 ms 17 ms 100.98.1.3
7 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 100.99.1.250
8 19 ms 19 ms 19 ms 196-60-9-113.ixp.joburg [196.60.9.113]
9 18 ms 19 ms 19 ms 10.252.235.94
10 19 ms 20 ms 19 ms 74.125.245.209
11 18 ms 19 ms 19 ms 74.125.245.212
12 174 ms 177 ms 173 ms 108.170.227.219
13 174 ms 174 ms 174 ms 209.85.250.185
14 180 ms 179 ms 179 ms 209.85.142.166
15 184 ms 183 ms 183 ms 108.170.232.72
16 183 ms 182 ms 183 ms 209.85.246.162
17 182 ms 182 ms 181 ms 142.250.209.81
18 * * * Request timed out.
19 * * * Request timed out.
20 * * * Request timed out.
21 * * * Request timed out.
22 * * * Request timed out.
So wow would be via Blizzard and your trace is to a Google IP, what does a trace to uktest.cisp.co.za look like?
 

Armizael

Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2006
Messages
540
So wow would be via Blizzard and your trace is to a Google IP, what does a trace to uktest.cisp.co.za look like?
That's the IP it was connected to, so maybe they host some of their instance servers there?

Code:
Tracing route to uktest.cisp.co.za [154.0.5.20]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.254
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3    11 ms    11 ms     6 ms  192.168.10.5
  4     1 ms     2 ms     1 ms  192.168.11.6
  5     3 ms     2 ms     1 ms  100.98.0.3
  6   142 ms   144 ms   143 ms  100.99.0.126
  7   142 ms   142 ms   142 ms  154.0.5.20

Trace complete.

That's what I would expect my latency to look like to WoW though.

I just logged in again and I'm still seeing 180ms+ - the 2 addresses the game is connected to is:

34.91.160.197 (same instance server as before)
37.244.61.61

Both seem to be Google IPs - no chance of shaving that down to 150ms?
 
Top