Frogfoot Gpon FTTH Fibre Performance

bumbledore said:
Fair enough, but all servers in Cape Town, so more like N1 to CPT, N2 to CPT and M3 to CPT.
Even still, that asides, whose problem is this to rectify?
Frogfoot says CISP.
CISP says Frogfoot.
I'm in the middle saying, "Woe is me."
Click to expand...
For sure.. Would be great to get a conf call going with both of them.

PS. Have you done iperf tests?

EDIT: OK looks like pbcool is on it. Good luck!
 
Finally. 2 years after having my fibre installed - im getting the connection i paid for. 2 years of fighting with ISP's - untold hours spent troubleshooting, thousands spent on upgrading my network equipment (because, it must be a problem on my end) - it finally frikkin works.

goddamnit.
 
"In the interest of transparency and for those who are interested in a technical explanation, herewith some details and events of what transpired."

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: We are all technical, or @ least interested in this technology. Bring on the hardcore technical explanations as it will be well received.

Everyone on this platform is into fibre and technology.
It's totally awesome being direct and open with your clients, even if we are indirect clients.

We appreciate the GPON deployment. Not every small or medium business has got cash for a DFA supercharged line. I can tell you that by being upfront about the back-end more business clients will move to your GPON as they trust your network more and more. Just as the residential clients have.

So hat's off to whoever suggested jumping onto MyBB and that person should be head of communication if they are not already.

It's how I got to know the old Frogfoot Open source geeks that we supported for a decade. Thanks for the feedback. Good luck with ironing out the rest of the network niggles.
 
@Frogfoot Fibre

Any ETA on the Frogfoot fibre roll out in Richards Bay? Most of Richards Bay is done trenching but still no sighnups? Are you guys finishing the whole network first then allow for installations?
 
Hi Frogfoot, while you are being so open I am going push my luck and ask you. Is this what the other side of my line plugs into, the "4-way" split @ the node? :

calix-gpon.png


And is this the 16 way split @ the houses:

FF_Manhole.png


Thanks!
 
lightpixel said:
Hi Frogfoot, while you are being so open I am going push my luck and ask you. Is this what the other side of my line plugs into, the "4-way" split @ the node? :

View attachment 705245


And is this the 16 way split @ the houses:

View attachment 705247


Thanks!
Click to expand...

your first pic is a pic of the OLT itself, the 4-way splitter at the node or pop is a passive device and the the dome joint in the man hole could contain the passive 16-way splitter
 
Last edited:
cavedog said:
@Frogfoot Fibre

Any ETA on the Frogfoot fibre roll out in Richards Bay? Most of Richards Bay is done trenching but still no sighnups? Are you guys finishing the whole network first then allow for installations?
Click to expand...
Hi, we are still busy deploying and have the live dates available on our coverage map: www.frogfoot.com Live date is dependant on your address and zone.
 
Seems after this network fix, I am finally getting the speeds I should have 13 months after I first complained.

Line speeds for both local & international speed test & steam downloads at 40mbps instead of the max of 13...

Hopefully it stays that way.
 
Frogfoot Fibre said:
  • Do not test using the speedtest.net web page. Please download their application and use that to test. We’ve found that results produced via some web browsers are not reliable.
  • Do not test over Wifi. Connect a computer or laptop directly to the router using an internet cable. Testing via wifi can not always produce reliable results, specifically with regards to high speed services.
Click to expand...
Good joke, that app is horrendous, I can't get to e.g. London, without scrolling for an insane amount of time.
I'd rather use CLI (ID from here: http://www.speedtestserver.com/):
705291
with international via iPerf looking like:
Code: 
[  4]   0.00-60.00  sec  24.3 MBytes  3.40 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  4]   0.00-60.00  sec  24.3 MBytes  3.40 Mbits/sec                  receiver
But on UDP/IP it's a lot better:
Code: 
[  4] local 192.168.0.110 port 59842 connected to 196.10.99.34 port 5201
Starting Test: protocol: UDP, 1 streams, 1460 byte blocks, omitting 3 seconds, 15 second test
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Jitter    Lost/Total Datagrams
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  9.21 MBytes  77.3 Mbits/sec  0.179 ms  240/6856 (3.5%)  (omitted)
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.177 ms  0/6849 (0%)  (omitted)
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  9.53 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.190 ms  0/6848 (0%)  (omitted)
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.186 ms  0/6851 (0%)
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.184 ms  0/6850 (0%)
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.178 ms  0/6850 (0%)
[  4]   3.00-4.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.183 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   4.00-5.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.175 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   5.00-6.00   sec  9.53 MBytes  79.9 Mbits/sec  0.160 ms  0/6845 (0%)
[  4]   6.00-7.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.218 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   7.00-8.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.1 Mbits/sec  0.177 ms  0/6853 (0%)
[  4]   8.00-9.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.190 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   9.00-10.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.189 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]  10.00-11.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.147 ms  0/6852 (0%)
[  4]  11.00-12.00  sec  9.53 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.182 ms  0/6848 (0%)
[  4]  12.00-13.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.181 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]  13.00-14.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.176 ms  0/6850 (0%)
[  4]  14.00-15.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.181 ms  0/6849 (0%)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Test Complete. Summary Results:
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Jitter    Lost/Total Datagrams
[  4]   0.00-15.00  sec   143 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.188 ms  0/102757 (0%)
[  4] Sent 102757 datagrams
CPU Utilization: local/receiver 11.8% (2.4%u/9.4%s), remote/sender 0.1% (0.0%u/0.1%s)
I'm still getting that first second loss, which is what I think is the issue.

And e.g. a file download from hetzner:
705293
 
Last edited:
Excellent Feedback and Transparency FrogFoot. Most of us are techies and appreciate the open approach, and probably garner empathy as we all have similar issues in our day jobs.

[OT]
Where did you get the name FrogFoot? Must be an interesting story in that.
[/OT]
 
Johnatan56 said:
Good joke, that app is horrendous, I can't get to e.g. London, without scrolling for an insane amount of time.
I'd rather use CLI (ID from here: http://www.speedtestserver.com/):
View attachment 705291
with international via iPerf looking like:
Code: 
[  4]   0.00-60.00  sec  24.3 MBytes  3.40 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  4]   0.00-60.00  sec  24.3 MBytes  3.40 Mbits/sec                  receiver
But on UDP/IP it's a lot better:
Code: 
[  4] local 192.168.0.110 port 59842 connected to 196.10.99.34 port 5201
Starting Test: protocol: UDP, 1 streams, 1460 byte blocks, omitting 3 seconds, 15 second test
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Jitter    Lost/Total Datagrams
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  9.21 MBytes  77.3 Mbits/sec  0.179 ms  240/6856 (3.5%)  (omitted)
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.177 ms  0/6849 (0%)  (omitted)
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  9.53 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.190 ms  0/6848 (0%)  (omitted)
[  4]   0.00-1.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.186 ms  0/6851 (0%)
[  4]   1.00-2.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.184 ms  0/6850 (0%)
[  4]   2.00-3.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.178 ms  0/6850 (0%)
[  4]   3.00-4.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.183 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   4.00-5.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.175 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   5.00-6.00   sec  9.53 MBytes  79.9 Mbits/sec  0.160 ms  0/6845 (0%)
[  4]   6.00-7.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.218 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   7.00-8.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.1 Mbits/sec  0.177 ms  0/6853 (0%)
[  4]   8.00-9.00   sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.190 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]   9.00-10.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.189 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]  10.00-11.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.147 ms  0/6852 (0%)
[  4]  11.00-12.00  sec  9.53 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.182 ms  0/6848 (0%)
[  4]  12.00-13.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.181 ms  0/6849 (0%)
[  4]  13.00-14.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.176 ms  0/6850 (0%)
[  4]  14.00-15.00  sec  9.54 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.181 ms  0/6849 (0%)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Test Complete. Summary Results:
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bandwidth       Jitter    Lost/Total Datagrams
[  4]   0.00-15.00  sec   143 MBytes  80.0 Mbits/sec  0.188 ms  0/102757 (0%)
[  4] Sent 102757 datagrams
CPU Utilization: local/receiver 11.8% (2.4%u/9.4%s), remote/sender 0.1% (0.0%u/0.1%s)
I'm still getting that first second loss, which is what I think is the issue.

And e.g. a file download from hetzner:
View attachment 705293
Click to expand...
Hi, if you are experiencing any issues with that first second loss, please inbox your details and we will investigate further.
 
Frogfoot Fibre said:
There are regularly concerns regarding splitters that share bandwidth between 64 houses. This is a valid concern, which Frogfoot addresses by only employing 16 way splitters in the field complemented by 4 way splitters in the nodes. This allows Frogfoot to upgrade any port should it be necessary. Something Frogfoot is committed to do if and when required.
Click to expand...

Not that I have a problem with GPON but isn't that still a 64 way split per GPON port?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X