Mr mweb rep thingie

milomak said:
yeah this is network issue. i wonder if these are "problems" not based on overall usage of each user.
Click to expand...

Clearly mweb have oversold this product and are now under-strain to try and deliver a "world class" service, so hense the choking of p2p related protocols. When i first got it, it worked amazingly, its just a joke of late. ALL protocols are slow.
 
Its a God damn network problem. Stop trying to tell people its their setup. I'm not computer illiterate. They treat me like a baby and that is why I hung the phone up in is ear.
 
cavedog said:
Its a God damn network problem. Stop trying to tell people its their setup. I'm not computer illiterate. They treat me like a baby and that is why I hung the phone up in is ear.
Click to expand...

And never got your problem resolved:D
 
Well my ping times to Cape Town (home location) has dropped below 100 ms - not great but an improvement - think we are dealing with some flawed proxy servers... Reminds me of iBurst!
 
cavedog said:
Its a God damn network problem. Stop trying to tell people its their setup. I'm not computer illiterate. They treat me like a baby and that is why I hung the phone up in is ear.
Click to expand...

Hi Cacedog

We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience, would you like me to get one of our Specialist to give you call to assist?
Please inbox me if you require assistance.

Regards
MWEB Operations
 
who.is.michael said:
Well my ping times to Cape Town (home location) has dropped below 100 ms - not great but an improvement - think we are dealing with some flawed proxy servers... Reminds me of iBurst!
Click to expand...

Hi who.is.michael

I am glad to hear that there has been an improvement.
Please inbox me if you need any assistance


Regards
MWEB Operations
 
Remarkable recovery from Mr MWEb thingy. Glad to see your still around. As everything at MWEB takes lots of time. It took 6 (six) days to hear from MWEB, after I contacted them for the procedures to follow to cancel (too late to cancel this month). 4 (four) days after my internet went AWOL to get a reply from Tegnical. Good things come to those who wait, seems to be MWEB's new logo...
 
Last edited:
mika1000 said:
Remarkable recovery from Mr MWEb thingy. Glad to see your still around. As everything at MWEB takes lots of time. It took 6 (six) days to hear from MWEB, after I contacted the to the procedures to follow to cancel (too late to cancel this month). 4 (four) days after my internet went AWOL to get a reply from Tegnical. Good things come to those who wait, seems to be MWEB's new logo...
Click to expand...

Hi mika1000


Please feel free to inbox me with your details should you require any assistance.

Regards
MWEB Operations
 
semaphore said:
They will go through things like your MTU settings(makes no difference), then tell you to put your modem into bridged mode(makes no difference), then they will tell you have you thought about upgrading to the 4096 unshaped package, and if you say no they will then suggest that you go for the 512k. It was at that point where i said i will rather choose the cancellation option thanks.
Click to expand...

Ironic isn't it, I'm experiencing 150+ms on local servers even though I have the 4096 UNSHAPED Business package.. looks like the only difference between the two is the price and no shaping during the day. My download speed is fine but my latency is not.
 
MWEB Operations said:
Hi Cacedog

We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience, would you like me to get one of our Specialist to give you call to assist?
Please inbox me if you require assistance.

Regards
MWEB Operations
Click to expand...

I won't mind. But I KNOW the problem is not on my side so why don't they simply fix the general problem rather than wasting time to try and convince people that they should upgrade to a unshaped package.
 
cavedog said:
I won't mind. But I KNOW the problem is not on my side so why don't they simply fix the general problem rather than wasting time to try and convince people that they should upgrade to a unshaped package.
Click to expand...

Hi cavedog

We are continuously working hard to improve our product, and appreciate any constructive feedback. We do apologise for any inconvenience.


Regards
MWEB Operations
 
MWEB, not really affected by this issue but is there anyway you can route traffic to places such as the saix game service, steam and the infinity ward network (CoD) through a faster connection? Or would this be open to abuse?
 
Well since yesterday I have an intermittent connection with high latency once again:

My connection is the worst it has ever been?

See below.

Ping statistics for 41.203.21.136:
Packets: Sent = 6973, Received = 2223, Lost = 4750 (68% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 604ms, Average = 52ms

Ping statistics for 196.35.164.201:
Packets: Sent = 6862, Received = 2122, Lost = 4740 (69% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 595ms, Average = 52ms

Ping statistics for 196.2.63.110:
Packets: Sent = 6605, Received = 1834, Lost = 4771 (72% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 56ms, Maximum = 757ms, Average = 70ms

Ping statistics for 208.69.38.150:
Packets: Sent = 7029, Received = 2271, Lost = 4758 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 418ms, Maximum = 977ms, Average = 433ms

Ping statistics for 74.125.77.104:
Packets: Sent = 6912, Received = 2148, Lost = 4764 (68% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 300ms, Maximum = 903ms, Average = 313ms

Ping statistics for 81.95.156.42:
Packets: Sent = 6932, Received = 2222, Lost = 4710 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 288ms, Maximum = 907ms, Average = 301ms

Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 6815, Received = 2013, Lost = 4802 (70% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 620ms, Average = 72ms

Ping statistics for 209.85.227.106:
Packets: Sent = 7030, Received = 2250, Lost = 4780 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 294ms, Maximum = 906ms, Average = 311ms

Ping statistics for 75.125.92.82:
Packets: Sent = 7013, Received = 2304, Lost = 4709 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 404ms, Maximum = 976ms, Average = 435ms

Please contact me urgently!
 
cavedog said:
I won't mind. But I KNOW the problem is not on my side so why don't they simply fix the general problem rather than wasting time to try and convince people that they should upgrade to a unshaped package.
Click to expand...

That would mean admitting to a problem on their side or that they oversold capacity which is not good PR. So all you can expect is the same rehashed responses, the problem will always be on your side. This is a corporation, corporations are about making a profit and not honesty.
 
who.is.michael said:
Well since yesterday I have an intermittent connection with high latency once again:

My connection is the worst it has ever been?

See below.

Ping statistics for 41.203.21.136:
Packets: Sent = 6973, Received = 2223, Lost = 4750 (68% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 604ms, Average = 52ms

Ping statistics for 196.35.164.201:
Packets: Sent = 6862, Received = 2122, Lost = 4740 (69% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 595ms, Average = 52ms

Ping statistics for 196.2.63.110:
Packets: Sent = 6605, Received = 1834, Lost = 4771 (72% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 56ms, Maximum = 757ms, Average = 70ms

Ping statistics for 208.69.38.150:
Packets: Sent = 7029, Received = 2271, Lost = 4758 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 418ms, Maximum = 977ms, Average = 433ms

Ping statistics for 74.125.77.104:
Packets: Sent = 6912, Received = 2148, Lost = 4764 (68% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 300ms, Maximum = 903ms, Average = 313ms

Ping statistics for 81.95.156.42:
Packets: Sent = 6932, Received = 2222, Lost = 4710 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 288ms, Maximum = 907ms, Average = 301ms

Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 6815, Received = 2013, Lost = 4802 (70% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 620ms, Average = 72ms

Ping statistics for 209.85.227.106:
Packets: Sent = 7030, Received = 2250, Lost = 4780 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 294ms, Maximum = 906ms, Average = 311ms

Ping statistics for 75.125.92.82:
Packets: Sent = 7013, Received = 2304, Lost = 4709 (67% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 404ms, Maximum = 976ms, Average = 435ms

Please contact me urgently!
Click to expand...


Hi who.is.michael


I will arrange for you to be contacted shortly


Regards
MWEB Operations
 
Talking about changing MTU settings, does anyone know how to change my MTU setting on a D-Link 2540? Seeing as you guys have been through it with the mweb techies?
 
Blaze786 said:
Talking about changing MTU settings, does anyone know how to change my MTU setting on a D-Link 2540? Seeing as you guys have been through it with the mweb techies?
Click to expand...

Go to WAN (shows your connection(s)),Edit the connection type, click next till you're at the 2nd last page I think, there will be MTU. I dont know the names of the pages 100%, since I'm at work. But I have the same router and I know its there. Default is 1492, on mine at least. Alternatively you can google for the manual, its a pdf.
 
Last edited:
prOd said:
Go to WAN (shows your connection(s)),Edit the connection type, click next till you're at the 2nd last page I think, there will be MTU. I dont know the names of the pages 100%, since I'm at work. But I have the same router and I know its there. Default is 1492, on mine at least. Alternatively you can google for the manual, its a pdf.
Click to expand...

Thanks so much :D WIll try tonight, Xbox live wants a MTU of like 1500 something =/
 
June 10th:

Code: 
C:\>ping www.mweb.co.za

Pinging www.mweb.co.za [196.2.63.110] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 196.2.63.110: bytes=32 time=501ms TTL=107
Reply from 196.2.63.110: bytes=32 time=481ms TTL=107
Reply from 196.2.63.110: bytes=32 time=493ms TTL=107
Reply from 196.2.63.110: bytes=32 time=496ms TTL=107

Ping statistics for 196.2.63.110:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 481ms, Maximum = 501ms, Average = 492ms

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

Pinging www.l.google.com [64.233.179.104] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=530ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=628ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=515ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=427ms TTL=50

Ping statistics for 64.233.179.104:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 427ms, Maximum = 628ms, Average = 525ms

C:\>ping www.google.com

Pinging www.l.google.com [64.233.179.104] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=430ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=430ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=453ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=428ms TTL=50

Ping statistics for 64.233.179.104:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 428ms, Maximum = 453ms, Average = 435ms

International pings still better than local, awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X