Frogfoot Port Elizabeth

Retro1337 said:
finally back to 10ms again, and its amazing :cool:
Click to expand...

I'm glad I have the luxury of being able to bide my time on the Openserve network before switching to Frogfoot. In a year or two or three when they finally realise that their disgraceful lack of investment needs to be sorted out, this network will be amazing. For now, the 100% reliability of Openserve is miles beyond Frogfoot imo.

PhireSide said:
Oh would you look at that, I am back to my 12.3ms on the first hop as well
Click to expand...

On the first hop? Jesus. What's the total latency?
 
Bryn said:
On the first hop? Jesus. What's the total latency?
Click to expand...
Yup.

C:\Users\User>ping www.google.co.za

Pinging www.google.co.za [216.58.223.131] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.58.223.131: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=51
Reply from 216.58.223.131: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=51
Reply from 216.58.223.131: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=51
Reply from 216.58.223.131: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 216.58.223.131:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 31ms, Maximum = 31ms, Average = 31ms
 
Bryn said:
I'm glad I have the luxury of being able to bide my time on the Openserve network before switching to Frogfoot. In a year or two or three when they finally realise that their disgraceful lack of investment needs to be sorted out, this network will be amazing. For now, the 100% reliability of Openserve is miles beyond Frogfoot imo.
Click to expand...
yeah still amazes me, you would expect something like this from openserve not from a company like frogfoot :laugh:
 
Retro1337 said:
yeah still amazes me, you would expect something like this from openserve not from a company like frogfoot :laugh:
Click to expand...
Really? If you followed them since the beginning, you kind of should have. They managed to mess up just designing their network topology, e.g. Constantia some sections didn't have enough light, building a ring network so something going wrong in any part of CT affects the other parts of CT instead of building it as a star network (they did this as a cost saving, about a 40% difference according to older studies but reduces theoretical down time by 50% at least but note that paper is from 1999, those numbers are old, it's just to give an idea), routine maintenance that frequently takes out the entire network, etc.
 
thewusman said:
You're lucky, son.

I'm in the naughty corner, back to 21ms.

Latency Lottery continues.
Click to expand...
We also went back up to ~19ms right around midnight.

The ~12ms was nice while it lasted (a whole 12 hours)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X