Cool Ideas Fibre ISP – Feedback Thread 4

[tardomatic]

I think what he meant is that area has say 10Gbps that gets shared between between say 150 people all with 100Mbps lines so when everyone is using the internet at the same time it's over utilized.

So they need to upgrade to maybe 100Gbps for that area.

that sounds like a 'them' problem to me.

 

[Soul Assassin]

that sounds like a 'them' problem to me.

That's why he said it's on them to resolve.

 

[CrypticZA]

Does CISP have a Looking Glass to view latencies/traces to various destinations?

That would be a negative what traces you looking for?

 

[CrypticZA]

that sounds like a 'them' problem to me.

They just like shifting the blame, especially in that area, the Parklands area Vroetfoot has been Failfoot from day 1.

When i heard they were coming to a place across the road i was super excited and hoped they were coming my side of the main road but oh boy am i so glad them and Octotel decided to go to other areas.

I'll rather pay a few more green Nelson Mandelas for stable decent internet, sadly at work we have to choose between Frogfoot and Octotel...

 

[PBCool]

How exactly does one over utilize their line? He pays for it, if he wants to 100% his download and upload 24/7 surely that's his choice or am I not understanding what over utilize means here?

Hence me saying that is a nonsense response from FF, even if a line is fully utilised it shouldn't drop sessions.

 

[Seeyou]

That would be a negative what traces you looking for?

Some general routes / latencies. If you're volunteering these would be great:

217.147.89.101
129.227.69.198
116.251.216.51
81.171.92.211
130.211.51.110

Muchos gracias!

 

[PBCool]

Some general routes / latencies. If you're volunteering these would be great:

217.147.89.101
129.227.69.198
116.251.216.51
81.171.92.211
130.211.51.110

Muchos gracias!

Also which region are you in as this has an impact on latencies.

 

[tardomatic]

They just like shifting the blame, especially in that area, the Parklands area Vroetfoot has been Failfoot from day 1.

When i heard they were coming to a place across the road i was super excited and hoped they were coming my side of the main road but oh boy am i so glad them and Octotel decided to go to other areas.

I'll rather pay a few more green Nelson Mandelas for stable decent internet, sadly at work we have to choose between Frogfoot and Octotel...

Agreed - I am in the Parklands area and it has been problems from day 1. Luckily I see OpenServe are busy rolling out in my neighborhood so hopefully soon I can switch across.

 

[CrypticZA]

Some general routes / latencies. If you're volunteering these would be great:

217.147.89.101
129.227.69.198
116.251.216.51
81.171.92.211
130.211.51.110 Google server so will be the same everywhere around 180ms

Muchos gracias!

217.147.89.101 London server so should be 142
129.227.69.198 Singapore so around 320-360
116.251.216.51 Singapore so around 320-360
81.171.92.211 EU based looks to be around Amsterdam so around 145-150
130.211.51.110 Google server so will be the same everywhere around 180ms

I am at the office and have checked these pings on RSAWEB but will check later when i am home but have put assumptions there which should be pretty accurate.

Asia pings are all upward of 300ms

 

[Seeyou]

Also which region are you in as this has an impact on latencies.

Cape Town

 

[Seeyou]

217.147.89.101 London server so should be 142
129.227.69.198 Singapore so around 320-360
116.251.216.51 Singapore so around 320-360
81.171.92.211 EU based looks to be around Amsterdam so around 145-150
130.211.51.110 Google server so will be the same everywhere around 180ms

I am at the office and have checked these pings on RSAWEB but will check later when i am home but have put assumptions there which should be pretty accurate.

Asia pings are all upward of 300ms

Would love to see the traces as well if you get a moment to run through them - appreciate your time!

 

[grantduke]

Some general routes / latencies. If you're volunteering these would be great:

217.147.89.101
129.227.69.198
116.251.216.51
81.171.92.211
130.211.51.110

Muchos gracias!

C:\Users\grant>ping 217.147.89.101

Pinging 217.147.89.101 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 217.147.89.101: bytes=32 time=142ms TTL=115
Reply from 217.147.89.101: bytes=32 time=142ms TTL=115
Reply from 217.147.89.101: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=115
Reply from 217.147.89.101: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=115

Ping statistics for 217.147.89.101:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 141ms, Maximum = 142ms, Average = 141ms

C:\Users\grant>ping 129.227.69.198

Pinging 129.227.69.198 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 129.227.69.198: bytes=32 time=327ms TTL=47
Reply from 129.227.69.198: bytes=32 time=326ms TTL=47
Reply from 129.227.69.198: bytes=32 time=328ms TTL=47
Reply from 129.227.69.198: bytes=32 time=328ms TTL=47

Ping statistics for 129.227.69.198:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 326ms, Maximum = 328ms, Average = 327ms

C:\Users\grant>ping 116.251.216.51

Pinging 116.251.216.51 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 116.251.216.51: bytes=32 time=328ms TTL=52
Reply from 116.251.216.51: bytes=32 time=326ms TTL=52
Reply from 116.251.216.51: bytes=32 time=327ms TTL=52
Reply from 116.251.216.51: bytes=32 time=326ms TTL=52

Ping statistics for 116.251.216.51:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 326ms, Maximum = 328ms, Average = 326ms

C:\Users\grant>ping 81.171.92.211

Pinging 81.171.92.211 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 81.171.92.211: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=49
Reply from 81.171.92.211: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=49
Reply from 81.171.92.211: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=49
Reply from 81.171.92.211: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=49

Ping statistics for 81.171.92.211:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 176ms, Maximum = 178ms, Average = 177ms

C:\Users\grant>ping 130.211.51.110

Pinging 130.211.51.110 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 130.211.51.110: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=58
Reply from 130.211.51.110: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=58
Reply from 130.211.51.110: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=58
Reply from 130.211.51.110: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=58

Ping statistics for 130.211.51.110:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 178ms, Maximum = 179ms, Average = 178ms

 

[CrypticZA]

81.171.92.211 latency of 176? That seems a tad high, IP as i assumed is in Netherlands so ping should be 145ish even on RSAWEB its 148

 

[grantduke]

81.171.92.211 latency of 176? That seems a tad high, IP as i assumed is in Netherlands so ping should be 145ish even on RSAWEB its 148

View attachment 1177926

 

[image132]

81.171.92.211 latency of 176? That seems a tad high, IP as i assumed is in Netherlands so ping should be 145ish even on RSAWEB its 148

I play sea of thieves and my mates and I get put on Amsterdam servers, always get 180-210ms. I did ask about here a while ago and got told to use the CISP UK VPN which made no difference.

I didn't know you could get ~140 to Amsterdam, I thought that was only for London?

 

[CrypticZA]

I play sea of thieves and my mates and I get put on Amsterdam servers, always get 180-210ms. I did ask about here a while ago and got told to use the CISP UK VPN which made no difference.

I didn't know you could get ~140 to Amsterdam, I thought that was only for London?

London is like 140 give or take a few ms, and then from there traffic from what i know generally goes either to France or Amsterdam.

Overwatch ping to France and Amsterdam always use to be 149ms + 10ms game buffer so use to get 159 ideally but there would be some variance so would range from 159 to 165.

The trip from London to Amsterdam is around 5-10ms generally.

In Apex i get 142 to London and 148ms to Amsterdam.

 

[John Tempus]

great, durbanville down. Not sure if its. vumatel or coolideas or both.

 

[Seeyou]

I play sea of thieves and my mates and I get put on Amsterdam servers, always get 180-210ms. I did ask about here a while ago and got told to use the CISP UK VPN which made no difference.

I didn't know you could get ~140 to Amsterdam, I thought that was only for London?

CloudFlare Warp will bring these down. 147ms to Amsterdam with it on. Warp+ is only ~20 bucks a month too.

Edit: With Warp on to Apex servers:

 

[Bighit]

great, durbanville down. Not sure if its. vumatel or coolideas or both.

According to the Vumatel Stellenberg Telegram group, it was a vumatel issue. It's up now though.

 

[KillerOnDrugX]

I play sea of thieves and my mates and I get put on Amsterdam servers, always get 180-210ms. I did ask about here a while ago and got told to use the CISP UK VPN which made no difference.

I didn't know you could get ~140 to Amsterdam, I thought that was only for London?

I think sea of thieves has a high buffer and/or bad servers. Friend of mine in Norway gets 70-90 to the servers and I get 240-260, all on EU. Idk if the VPN would work but the servers on that game need some TLC.