TheRoDent
Cool Ideas Rep
Well, I spent a good deal of time talking to Marcel Raath today.
It was all really speculative deliberation, and discussion, which took a long time, and a number of beers. It felt like a frank, open, and friendly discussion, and I must say that Marcel definately seems to be genuinely concerned about the product, how it is perceived, and how to better it. He was friendly, but avoided the issue of Sentech's threatened litigation as "not his area"...
From what he discussed with me, it was obvious that:
1. Sentech doesn't really have any idea how to run an ISP type business, even with the knowledge of infosat in their recently acquired corporate history.
2. They're having a lot of "corporate memory" problems, to the effect that their corporate culture isn't conducive to a competitive business, though he believes they've made lots of inroads to address this issue.
3. He believes that somehow people are misusing the system to get "static IP adresses" and are "reselling" Sentech's bandwidth. My view was that it was probably mostly peer-to-peer traffic patterns. All measurements where in Megabytes over the last 2 months. Some stats showed 90gigs <b>in and out</b> over 40 days.
My response to this was that it is entirely their problem. They shouldn't allow statically assigned PPP adresses (which I still believe isn't doable, but have to check on). I also explained to him, that if they're finding abusive traffic patterns, that they should identify it as such, and shape the traffic PER TYPE if it becomes a issue detrimental to other customers's service delivery.
I stressed to him, the following points, to which he acted mostly with surprise, and promises to investigate/relay.
1. Sentech is now an ISP. This came as a bit of a surprise, but he agreed after some examples that they're more than just a connectivity enabler. They need to think, and work like an ISP.
2. There DEFINATELY still is a problem, and that it is affecting a LOT more people out there than they generally believe.
3. There is a need for extensive local peering with other ISP's, and JINX. He agreed that this kind of bandwidth is cheap, and that they were currently in deliberation with Telkom to get some "non-retail" bandwidth, as they are apparently now entitled to it. I also pointed out that JINX is right at Internet Solutions, to which their STP central concentration site is currently connnected via Microwave.
4. I pointed out that I believed that their choking point is currently IS. This apparently came as a "light bulb" kind of idea to him, and he said that this would be investigated, and discussed with IS by him personally. He agreed that things like tucows.is.co.za shouldn't be contended whatsoever, but that it appeared it currently is, possibly due to their arrangement with IS.
4. There is a requirement to inform customers about the "contention" and target of the service. He initially showed me some traffic stats and said that people weren't using the service as it was "intended".
I explained to him that they didn't EVER specify what the service was "intended" for, how it was contended, and that their marketing was thus incorrect. I explained that some of the traffic statistics he showed me is entirely in line, when one considers that it is a permanent connection. His worry was people showing the same amount of inbound and outbound traffic. I mentioned that the traffic stats are irrelevant, as there are many legitimate reasons for those kind of traffic patterns, and no "illigetimate" usage is defined in the contract.
He asked me what an acceptible contention ratio was, and I explained that I believe a 15:1 contention ratio for international bandwidth was "fair", but should be managed. Local bandwidth should be nearly uncontended.
5. There's a need to inform customers of technical issues in a timeous fashion, to which he agreed that a "noticeboard" type area is something they will investigate.
5. The need to "hotwire" the helpdesk and the networking guys behind the service with a 1 out of 10, "direct connection". Meaning every 10th call/ticket should be directly handled by 2nd, and 3rd level support so they have an understanding of what really is happening out there. I've found this personally, to be a useful mechanism to keep 2nd, and 3rd level support on the "hot seat". Either way, some mechanism needs to be put into place, so that management, and higher level support get's prodded with the urgency of any technical issues.
6. The need for "intelligent" traffic management. I pointed him in the direction of Packeteer inc. Just drawing a report from a Radius server to see who sent/received the most bytes, and slapping them on the wrist is NOT bandwidth management. It could simply be two users peer-to-peering with each other, and not costing Sentech ANY bandwidth. I explained to him that "per-user" abuse tracking is stupid, and pointless. A better way is to identify abusive applications, and reprioritize such traffic.
He asked a lot of questions about what I believed would be "alternative" packages e.g. VPN/Closed-user-group type packages, in the context of having that solve the "bandwidth" problems. I promptly pointed out that this would be a "specialist" product for people wanting to replace leased lines between branches, etc. and that it wouldn't really help with the general problem of bandwidth and oversubscription for MyWireless users. An uncontended service would also be possible for "corporate" customers.
I explained that I didn't believe that this was really applicable to the ~2000 customers they currently have, and that it wouldn't alleviate any of the current service provision problems.
I highly emphasized that they should take ownership of their network now, and manage it on a proactive basis. I mentioned smaller technical issues like the firmware, and P4/Hyperthreading problems to elucidate my view that they need to be firmer with Fastcomm, IPWireless and the rest of their technology partners. He mentioned that he felt they're taking the knock for a lot things that were beyond their control. My response to this was to make sure that EVERYTHING is under their control, since they are after all, the people we're paying and are contractually bound to.
He took a lot of notes during the course of our discussion, and seemed, for someone involved in sales and marketing, able to grasp most of what I attempted to explain to him, on a basic level at least. He also seemed sincere in his view of reporting the issues we discussed, and taking them up with the appropriate Sentech divisions.
He is also the first person from Sentech that I believe to be empowered to actually take some action.
I'm still not happy with Sentech's actions regarding the domains, and the way they've treated me. And I have no intention of backing down making public the facts of their behaviour and level of service.
I do, however feel that for the first time, someone has actually listened to my view of the problem with a reasonably sympathetic ear.
Whether it was all just talk, and pacifying remains to be seen. No comittments were given, and no promises were made.
<center><h6> MyWireless <s>Hacks</s> Tweaks & Tech Info || Have you checked the fawking FAQ? <br /> <font color="red">Tired of bad Service? Want to compare speeds? We at least listen...</font id="red"></h6></center>
It was all really speculative deliberation, and discussion, which took a long time, and a number of beers. It felt like a frank, open, and friendly discussion, and I must say that Marcel definately seems to be genuinely concerned about the product, how it is perceived, and how to better it. He was friendly, but avoided the issue of Sentech's threatened litigation as "not his area"...
From what he discussed with me, it was obvious that:
1. Sentech doesn't really have any idea how to run an ISP type business, even with the knowledge of infosat in their recently acquired corporate history.
2. They're having a lot of "corporate memory" problems, to the effect that their corporate culture isn't conducive to a competitive business, though he believes they've made lots of inroads to address this issue.
3. He believes that somehow people are misusing the system to get "static IP adresses" and are "reselling" Sentech's bandwidth. My view was that it was probably mostly peer-to-peer traffic patterns. All measurements where in Megabytes over the last 2 months. Some stats showed 90gigs <b>in and out</b> over 40 days.
My response to this was that it is entirely their problem. They shouldn't allow statically assigned PPP adresses (which I still believe isn't doable, but have to check on). I also explained to him, that if they're finding abusive traffic patterns, that they should identify it as such, and shape the traffic PER TYPE if it becomes a issue detrimental to other customers's service delivery.
I stressed to him, the following points, to which he acted mostly with surprise, and promises to investigate/relay.
1. Sentech is now an ISP. This came as a bit of a surprise, but he agreed after some examples that they're more than just a connectivity enabler. They need to think, and work like an ISP.
2. There DEFINATELY still is a problem, and that it is affecting a LOT more people out there than they generally believe.
3. There is a need for extensive local peering with other ISP's, and JINX. He agreed that this kind of bandwidth is cheap, and that they were currently in deliberation with Telkom to get some "non-retail" bandwidth, as they are apparently now entitled to it. I also pointed out that JINX is right at Internet Solutions, to which their STP central concentration site is currently connnected via Microwave.
4. I pointed out that I believed that their choking point is currently IS. This apparently came as a "light bulb" kind of idea to him, and he said that this would be investigated, and discussed with IS by him personally. He agreed that things like tucows.is.co.za shouldn't be contended whatsoever, but that it appeared it currently is, possibly due to their arrangement with IS.
4. There is a requirement to inform customers about the "contention" and target of the service. He initially showed me some traffic stats and said that people weren't using the service as it was "intended".
I explained to him that they didn't EVER specify what the service was "intended" for, how it was contended, and that their marketing was thus incorrect. I explained that some of the traffic statistics he showed me is entirely in line, when one considers that it is a permanent connection. His worry was people showing the same amount of inbound and outbound traffic. I mentioned that the traffic stats are irrelevant, as there are many legitimate reasons for those kind of traffic patterns, and no "illigetimate" usage is defined in the contract.
He asked me what an acceptible contention ratio was, and I explained that I believe a 15:1 contention ratio for international bandwidth was "fair", but should be managed. Local bandwidth should be nearly uncontended.
5. There's a need to inform customers of technical issues in a timeous fashion, to which he agreed that a "noticeboard" type area is something they will investigate.
5. The need to "hotwire" the helpdesk and the networking guys behind the service with a 1 out of 10, "direct connection". Meaning every 10th call/ticket should be directly handled by 2nd, and 3rd level support so they have an understanding of what really is happening out there. I've found this personally, to be a useful mechanism to keep 2nd, and 3rd level support on the "hot seat". Either way, some mechanism needs to be put into place, so that management, and higher level support get's prodded with the urgency of any technical issues.
6. The need for "intelligent" traffic management. I pointed him in the direction of Packeteer inc. Just drawing a report from a Radius server to see who sent/received the most bytes, and slapping them on the wrist is NOT bandwidth management. It could simply be two users peer-to-peering with each other, and not costing Sentech ANY bandwidth. I explained to him that "per-user" abuse tracking is stupid, and pointless. A better way is to identify abusive applications, and reprioritize such traffic.
He asked a lot of questions about what I believed would be "alternative" packages e.g. VPN/Closed-user-group type packages, in the context of having that solve the "bandwidth" problems. I promptly pointed out that this would be a "specialist" product for people wanting to replace leased lines between branches, etc. and that it wouldn't really help with the general problem of bandwidth and oversubscription for MyWireless users. An uncontended service would also be possible for "corporate" customers.
I explained that I didn't believe that this was really applicable to the ~2000 customers they currently have, and that it wouldn't alleviate any of the current service provision problems.
I highly emphasized that they should take ownership of their network now, and manage it on a proactive basis. I mentioned smaller technical issues like the firmware, and P4/Hyperthreading problems to elucidate my view that they need to be firmer with Fastcomm, IPWireless and the rest of their technology partners. He mentioned that he felt they're taking the knock for a lot things that were beyond their control. My response to this was to make sure that EVERYTHING is under their control, since they are after all, the people we're paying and are contractually bound to.
He took a lot of notes during the course of our discussion, and seemed, for someone involved in sales and marketing, able to grasp most of what I attempted to explain to him, on a basic level at least. He also seemed sincere in his view of reporting the issues we discussed, and taking them up with the appropriate Sentech divisions.
He is also the first person from Sentech that I believe to be empowered to actually take some action.
I'm still not happy with Sentech's actions regarding the domains, and the way they've treated me. And I have no intention of backing down making public the facts of their behaviour and level of service.
I do, however feel that for the first time, someone has actually listened to my view of the problem with a reasonably sympathetic ear.
Whether it was all just talk, and pacifying remains to be seen. No comittments were given, and no promises were made.
<center><h6> MyWireless <s>Hacks</s> Tweaks & Tech Info || Have you checked the fawking FAQ? <br /> <font color="red">Tired of bad Service? Want to compare speeds? We at least listen...</font id="red"></h6></center>
]. Just a quick, potentially stupid question - who/what exactly is Marcel Raath?
]