Soo... Does MWeb not have a method of providing a link from JINX to CINX? Surely if MWeb and WA are peering, JHB Customers should be able to use the MWeb backbone to get to the WA servers, rather than international?
Just a thought?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What is the ultimate French toast topping?
MWEB Gaming Feedback
- Thread starter Will@MWEB
- Start date
Just a thought?
Kosmik
Honorary Master
@Will
This has probably been asked before but it would take a while to search this thread, what are the chances of at least getting a BF:BC2 server going at mweb? Eve etc for me are international so no issues but I can't game with my clan as my pings range from 200-500ms which for a fps is insane.
This has probably been asked before but it would take a while to search this thread, what are the chances of at least getting a BF:BC2 server going at mweb? Eve etc for me are international so no issues but I can't game with my clan as my pings range from 200-500ms which for a fps is insane.
Chevron
Serial breaker of phones
Use the iGame servers...
Gtx Gaming
Gtx Gaming
must say blakc ops is very nice, sitting 40m, highest was 80, and lagg fix patch is out so its all cool now 
Yep the latency was much improved last night, I primarily play BC2 on igame myself at the moment - I find the connection to there to be very solid. I can't tell you anything definite about timelines, or plans for other games at this point, but as I've said before, watch this space - things will happen
i never have issues with mweb when it comes to gaming, both pc and especially xbox live works without a hitch, seems like some people get all the issues while others (like me) can game without lag or pull torrents at 380kbs no problem.
smokemaryjane
Expert Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 1,471
- Reaction score
- 5,546
Yep the latency was much improved last night, I primarily play BC2 on igame myself at the moment - I find the connection to there to be very solid. I can't tell you anything definite about timelines, or plans for other games at this point, but as I've said before, watch this space - things will happen
Will, whats your nick on BC2? For all the 'pain and suffering' we been experiencing, I wouldn't mind trying to sneak up behind you and take your tags? I think I will feel 100 times better
If we did this we would effectively be carrying traffic destined for WA's network across our national transit links. The principle of peering is to create relationships at points where the networks come together, not to carry long haul traffic which is ultimately not destined for services on your own network.
Yeesss.... but don't the networks come together in Cape Town?
How would you have done it Pre-cost-free-peering? This free peering is beginning to sound more and more involved....
Edit:
I'm just trying to understand few things, so bare with me a bit.
I'm a JHB MWeb user, who you provide a service to. I'm connecting to (sticking with this example) a Web Africa server, which is on your Peer's CT Network. Now the question is, who's traffic is it really? Does it belong to MWeb who is providing me with internet connectivity at a price? Or does it belong to Web Africa, who is merely providing a service that I'm using (and more than likely at no cost to me)?
I can understand this is a grey area, as you have to be able to reverse the role for WA to MWeb etc...
Last edited:
I have to agree, I play a lot of games so decent gaming performance is extremely important when it comes to my selection of ISP and account. Online, I regularly play Heroes of Newerth, League of Legends, Starcraft II, Bad Company 2, Eve Online, World of Warcraft, Call of Duty games, Quake Live, Team Fortress 2, various Xbox 360 and PS3 games etc. etc. etc. The only game that gives me any trouble is WoW, which I work around with Battleping. The rest work 100% and never give me any grief, so overall the MWEB uncapped accounts are (at least for me) excellent for gaming. Considering I also have a lot of GBs of data usage every month (Steam, Youtube, big patches, pr0n, work), my MWEB account has prove itself excellent value for money.
That said, due to the popularity of WoW, if its not working correctly with an ISP/account it's going to result in a lot of very negative feedback and a big thumbs down for gaming with said ISP.
Will, whats your nick on BC2? For all the 'pain and suffering' we been experiencing, I wouldn't mind trying to sneak up behind you and take your tags? I think I will feel 100 times better
Sorry, but I'd prefer to keep that to myself - I'm sure at least one or two people here have caught one of my 40mms with their teeth
, but I make it a rule not to mix business with wholesale slaughter @Blustorm
The thing you have to understand is that peering agreements work on the basis of physical proximity.
Our network has a physical presence in both CPT and JHB, which means that we can peer at both CINX and JINX. In practical terms this means that if traffic is generated from our network in JHB that is destined for ISP B and they have a presence at JINX then we will deliver the traffic to them there. However if they only had a presence at CINX then we would deliver the traffic to them via our default transit.
By the same token if we only had a presence at JINX and they had traffic generated in CPT destined for our network then we would not expect them to carry this traffic up to JINX at their expense and hand it off to us there, so again default transit would take precedence.
I hope that makes a little more sense
The thing you have to understand is that peering agreements work on the basis of physical proximity.
Our network has a physical presence in both CPT and JHB, which means that we can peer at both CINX and JINX. In practical terms this means that if traffic is generated from our network in JHB that is destined for ISP B and they have a presence at JINX then we will deliver the traffic to them there. However if they only had a presence at CINX then we would deliver the traffic to them via our default transit.
By the same token if we only had a presence at JINX and they had traffic generated in CPT destined for our network then we would not expect them to carry this traffic up to JINX at their expense and hand it off to us there, so again default transit would take precedence.
I hope that makes a little more sense
Yes and No. From a consumer point of view, we see "Web Africa and MWeb have a peering agreement", so for us, ALL traffic should be peered, not just Cape Town or JHB or whatever.
That said, I'll leave this as is.
Out of interest, are Vodacom and IS only peered in certain locations? Any other ISP's that MWeb might peer with in future, that are location "bound" (that you know of)?
Gatecrasher
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,727
- Reaction score
- 624
WebAfrica have said that they will be peering at JINX "pretty soon."
Last edited:
I'm afraid I can't really discuss any more detail about those agreements, however I would say that the ones which have become common knowledge so far are the only ones that gamers really need to be concerned about.
Gatecrasher
Executive Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,727
- Reaction score
- 624
The user with the Leatrix fix still had latency spikes. Did the MTU fix (to 960) and now both are good.