MWEB Uncapped Subscribers Feedback

Status
Not open for further replies.
I gave NNTP a try quite a few times. I can remember one time I was trying to get a season of Fifth Gear (not a very old season) and it could not download it because it was missing or something. Got them on torrentz.com and never looked back.

Now pay close attention to what I am going to say : Mweb does not shape NNTP - you are shaping it.

The reason it is so slow is that too many claytards are trying to download bloated binaries with massive overheads from the same news server and there is not enough bandwidth for all of you. You are starving yourselves while the rest of us do more on heavily shaped torrents.
 
And yet its much faster than those heavely shaped torrents....kinda makes me not care about the congestion
 
Just stop all the preachyness please, at the end of the day its all about personal preferrence....end of story.
Neither of the two are "the best" in every situation, to claim otherwise is to suffer from fanboy-ism. Same as with the supposedly great PC-vs-Console debate, what works for one person does not work for another.
 
Rouxenator said:
Now pay close attention to what I am going to say : Mweb does not shape NNTP - you are shaping it.

The reason it is so slow is that too many claytards are trying to download bloated binaries with massive overheads from the same news server and there is not enough bandwidth for all of you. You are starving yourselves while the rest of us do more on heavily shaped torrents.
Click to expand...
So you are saying that my downloads are slow because they are on a ISP backbone, versus a fluctuating number of users that may or may not share file after it has been downloaded ? Your logic is flawed my friend, News servers are the future - why do you think they 'came back' as a usable technology.

Sure a paid news server is extra money going out from my credit card - but it is much better than the default news.mweb.co.za
Reason i keep using it ? well MWEBS own LOCAL server needs a upgrade / kick up the ass - cause it is shaped to hell or quite possibly broken.
Stop shaping it - and you will pay less for your international ipc costs !
 
rambo919 said:
Just stop all the preachyness please, at the end of the day its all about personal preferrence....end of story.
Neither of the two are "the best" in every situation, to claim otherwise is to suffer from fanboy-ism. Same as with the supposedly great PC-vs-Console debate, what works for one person does not work for another.
Click to expand...

+1
 
If Mweb works for you stick with it, if not dont, dont see why there’s debate and don’t really see why ex customers have to visit here
 
schumi said:
If Mweb works for you stick with it, if not dont, dont see why there’s debate and don’t really see why ex customers have to visit here
Click to expand...

Surely this is an open forum where everybody can express their opinions, as this is overall the "MWEB subscribers feedback" where we are allowed to "give" feedback
 
You usually call someone a troll when you have failed to prove them wrong after several attempts. I know that cause I have been called a troll many times.

Despite explaining how news servers work people still think they can simply "make the logic go away" by saying silly things like "its still faster" and "its on the ISP backbone".
No matter where it is siting its still a server and it still has a limited capacity pipe to it. Some sections of the autobahn has no speed limits, but if you put 1,000,000 cars on it see what speed they average.

I guess I'll just leave you lot to it then - you clearly have a built a couple of ISP backbones yourself and you know everything there is to know about protocols and how they work.
 
Currently getting ubuntu upgrades from za.archive.ubuntu.com at around 5kb a sec on a 4meg line?

Synced at 7883900 down. SNR 4.5/9 up/down, 29/15 Attenuation with no CRC errors

Traceroute seems fine:

traceroute to za.archive.ubuntu.com (155.232.191.229), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 5.026 ms 4.989 ms 4.982 ms
2 41.133.98.1 12.116 ms 13.228 ms 14.435 ms
3 196.22.169.134 18.173 ms 19.299 ms 20.507 ms
4 196.22.189.2 22.300 ms 196.22.189.3 23.503 ms 196.22.189.2 24.604 ms
5 196.22.169.241 77.695 ms 77.714 ms 77.712 ms
6 196.22.163.1 29.614 ms 25.834 ms 28.022 ms
7 198.32.142.33 28.921 ms 22.581 ms 22.784 ms
8 155.232.191.229 23.150 ms 20.509 ms 20.390 ms
 
Last edited:
Rouxenator said:
I guess I'll just leave you lot to it then - you clearly have a built a couple of ISP backbones yourself and you know everything there is to know about protocols and how they work.
Click to expand...

Yip - and you've built tons, and have a PhD in p2p protocols and their benefits - obviously learning that torrents bypass ISPs completely.
 
Rouxenator said:
I guess I'll just leave you lot to it then - you clearly have a built a couple of ISP backbones yourself and you know everything there is to know about protocols and how they work.
Click to expand...

More like we stopped caring, personally the end result is all I care about. Unless something changes in the future I will prefer NNTP, you just want a excuse to complain about how badly the "superior" torrents are being shaped just because you didn't have a good NNTP experience (btw not all torrents are permantently seeded for a year or 2).

All this aside, sometimes the one is usefull sometimes the other one is, for you torrents are more usefull and for a lot of us NNTP is more usefull.
 
xrapidx said:
Yip - and you've built tons, and have a PhD in p2p protocols and their benefits - obviously learning that torrents bypass ISPs completely.
Click to expand...
I have done nothing of the kind - but I do have years of experience and I know how these protocols work. There is an amount of overhead when it comes to P2P too but its much less than on NNTP. There is no way that DHT and Local Peer Discovery traffic results in more traffic overhead than the 1.3333x bloat factor on NNTP.

With NNTP you get a bottleneck effect as many connection terminate on the same destination (news server) that has to service them all. P2P on the other hand terminates on different destinations (peers/seeders) using the mostly dormant upstream bandwidth of fellow peers.

You ISP has to invest large volumes of money to maintain its news server - think of storage, processing power, bandwidth capacity and maintenance. Its much easier to not have that kind of expenditure and just buy more local/international capacity for P2P connections to go over.

rambo919 said:
More like we stopped caring, personally the end result is all I care about.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true America driving his 5.7L gas guzzler SUV down to McDonalds with the A/C on full blast and all the windows down. :rolleyes:
 
What about all the wasted chunks from torrents ?;) and i have vast knowledge of the torrent protocol written implementations for different platforms. NNTP and Bittorrent both have their pro's and con's.
 
Why do I bother, Rouxenator I truely hope u feel so special now like you always wanted because none of this even matters anymore. So no we are not gonna join your cult mkay
 
I don't use MWEBs newsgroups - there are companies dedicated to newsgroups and supporting them - and guess what, they handle WAY more than our little 10MB SA connections.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X