Official Crystal Web ADSL performance feedback thread Part 2...

[Crystal Web]

I'll wait for CW to respond.

We use the IS backbone. We initially launched some products on the Cybersmart backbone but no longer offer any products whatsoever on the Cybersmart backbone and have standardised on the IS backbone entirely, where we manage our own IPC capacity and internet breakout countrywide.

This means that our uncapped accounts are currently not offered on standard IS shaping policies and are not subjected to calendar month's notice terms. We are however employing some standard IS shaping policies and business policies for new products being released.

New products may be subjected to some industry standard shaping policies and cancellation terms, however the standard uncapped accounts you currently see on the website will not be. We are currently sanitising the product offerings while adding new products and services, and will be launching the new site in the next few days.

How our uncapped product range will be offered in future is as follows:

Basic: lower price; calendar month's notice required; star rating system employed
Premium: median price-point; no calendar month's notice; no star rating system; dynamic shaping
Business: higher price point; no star rating; highest business hours priority on the network; no calendar month's notice required

Our capped product range will be offered as follows:

Basic: subject to calendar month's notice; contends p2p in business hours
Premium: subject to calendar month's notice; contends p2p in business hours with highest priority during contention
Business: no calendar month's notice; highest priority on the network on all protocols at all times

All of these products are offered on the IS backbone.

 

[StevenC]

@CW That weird internet thing is happening again that happened last Saturday (or the week before) and it's happening in the exact same time frame.

The 'internet' connection dies after 10 seconds after connecting. I can connect and disconnect and repeat it many times.
Odd thing is if in those first few seconds i start a download it will stay going but no webpages or anything else internet related will work. If i pause that download it will not resume.

I even changed the router to manual connect so i can control it.
I would normally say that is probably my router failing if not for the fact that it is happening at the exact same time as last time, and that using an Afrihost account works normally.

We really need to get to the bottom of this, it is so odd and frustrating.

EDIT: Support have fixed it for now.

I am having the same issue. Account is connected but nothing happens. Lights are on but nobody is home. Resets do nothing. Only once you contact support, they "reset" the account and then it works. Until the next month when it will happen on pretty much the same date (the 20th normally for me, but I had it a second time this month on the 28th as well).

I did private message CW about it, but no response as of yet.

 

[Crystal Web]

@CW That weird internet thing is happening again that happened last Saturday (or the week before) and it's happening in the exact same time frame.

EDIT: Support have fixed it for now.

I've spotted the issue and had a PM from another customer using the same unshaped profile and controllers as you. To be frank this is a product I am reconsidering entirely. It's entirely unprofitable to us (in a big way) and there's no real benefit to run it for a few customers as a loss leader. It tends to generate more problems than actually result in positive ROI in any department. It's effectively a subsidised product to the few guys who I squeezed onto this profile behind the scenes the last few months, and if you look at how this issue scales up as a product and its associated problems, one only has to look at the feedback threads of a certain red cousin of ours over the last 18 months. I don't want to have to find ourselves in a position where we're subsidising one product with bandwidth from another to such an extent that it affects the network so poorly, so I may just terminate this offering (with sufficient notice to the few guys using it). Unless certain input costs come down substantially, all we'll find ourselves in is a position where we have frequent capacity constraints unless this product is priced well outside of the realms of "consumer expectation".

I will continue to try to tweak this though over the coming days, and am running a few scenarios out with the network guys, but ultimately it does look like the negatives are outweighing the few positives of continuing to offer this unshaped product for a handful of customers.

 

[semaphore]

We use the IS backbone. We initially launched some products on the Cybersmart backbone but no longer offer any products whatsoever on the Cybersmart backbone and have standardised on the IS backbone entirely, where we manage our own IPC capacity and internet breakout countrywide.

This means that our uncapped accounts are currently not offered on standard IS shaping policies and are not subjected to calendar month's notice terms. We are however employing some standard IS shaping policies and business policies for new products being released.

New products may be subjected to some industry standard shaping policies and cancellation terms, however the standard uncapped accounts you currently see on the website will not be. We are currently sanitising the product offerings while adding new products and services, and will be launching the new site in the next few days.

How our uncapped product range will be offered in future is as follows:

Basic: lower price; calendar month's notice required; star rating system employed
Premium: median price-point; no calendar month's notice; no star rating system; dynamic shaping
Business: higher price point; no star rating; highest business hours priority on the network; no calendar month's notice required

Our capped product range will be offered as follows:

Basic: subject to calendar month's notice; contends p2p in business hours
Premium: subject to calendar month's notice; contends p2p in business hours with highest priority during contention
Business: no calendar month's notice; highest priority on the network on all protocols at all times

All of these products are offered on the IS backbone.

At what point in threshold terms do the accounts start getting throttled ? Lets take premium uncapped and business.

 

[semaphore]

not that difficult. just look up the hostname of the dynamic assigned to you.

Yeah that would work if i had an account with them. And as you can see they were with cybersmart, and thats when i stopped considering them, but now that they with IS. I'm keen.

 

[StevenC]

I've spotted the issue and had a PM from another customer using the same unshaped profile and controllers as you. /snip

=/

I assume the Business package would be the most similar to this product?

At what point in threshold terms do the accounts start getting throttled ? Lets take premium uncapped and business.

+1 for this question

 

[Crystal Web]

I am having the same issue. Account is connected but nothing happens. Lights are on but nobody is home. Resets do nothing. Only once you contact support, they "reset" the account and then it works. Until the next month when it will happen on pretty much the same date (the 20th normally for me, but I had it a second time this month on the 28th as well).

I did private message CW about it, but no response as of yet.

Yours was the PM I was referring to in my previous post. Problem with offering uncapped unshaped is that it costs a substantial amount to subsidise the "top-end" users who run their accounts 24x7. They sway the financial models off to such an extent that overall as a product, it becomes rather untenable (at current price points). I'll illustrate this for you quickly. One 20Mbps customer running his line 24x7 on uncapped unshaped means 20Mbps IPC and internet breakout is at all times taken. To recover this cost (tens of thousands of Rands), one has to find customers on the same product whose average peak usage is so low that the average contention can balance out. The problem: customers on this profile want it specifically for high usage. Overall you end up having to run on such low contentions that as a product it becomes unprofitable, simply because of one or two users, and it makes offering the product in its current form to you guys very difficult, because as a business we have to subsidise it instead. Either we implement strict FUPs in this regard (and risk being told we're not offering uncapped); or we raise pricing to ensure that the heavy users can be catered for. Current projections in this regard push the product pricing well outside of what ordinary home users are typically willing to pay.

I'm just being open with you guys here, as we always are. Which is why it has always perplexed me how some ISPs revel and promote high usage scorecards and advertise them. ISPs who run their own IPC and internet breakout do not pay per gig, so any perceived economies of scale end users believe ISPs are subjected to on a pay per gig model doesn't exist (I saw this mentioned by someone in another thread here). Personally, I don't want Crystal Web to make the mistake of offering a product that encourages the kind of usage that could jeopardize performance for the vast majority of customers on the network.

BUT, there are some things happening behind the scenes that could make this possible very soon. We simply need the usual suspect to come to the party on it.

 

[semaphore]

+1 for this question

I'm not a heavy user but i want to be able to use my account when i see fit, if i want to downloads updates / games (xbox live). I don't want to have to try and schedule it for 12 at night.

 

[Crystal Web]

At what point in threshold terms do the accounts start getting throttled ? Lets take premium uncapped and business.

We don't employ throttling at all on accounts. We employ dynamic shaping on accounts, so when there is spare capacity we open up the pipe for everyone. It's also a smart and fair policy on the backend, that will open up capacity first to lower usage customers when they demand it. So if you consume 100GB in peak and another customer 10GB in peak, and you are both downloading at the same time, the lower usage peak customer will have first access to the spare capacity (or more access, to be precise - it's a fairly complex system but one that has so far proven itself very successful in terms of feedback and management). This is backend network management to ensure that the capacity is shared on a fair basis to everyone and that we don't have to employ throttling penalties.

Our premium uncapped is designed to offer the best performance in the market on gaming, streaming, browsing and other real-time protocols. You simply won't find better in our opinion. Downloads are the only protocols that contend for bandwidth dynamically.

 

[semaphore]

We don't employ throttling at all on accounts. We employ dynamic shaping on accounts, so when there is spare capacity we open up the pipe for everyone. It's also a smart and fair policy on the backend, that will open up capacity first to lower usage customers when they demand it. So if you consume 100GB in peak and another customer 10GB in peak, and you are both downloading at the same time, the lower usage peak customer will have first access to the spare capacity (or more access, to be precise - it's a fairly complex system but one that has so far proven itself very successful in terms of feedback and management). This is backend network management to ensure that the capacity is shared on a fair basis to everyone and that we don't have to employ throttling penalties.

Our premium uncapped is designed to offer the best performance in the market on gaming, streaming, browsing and other real-time protocols. You simply won't find better in our opinion. Downloads are the only protocols that contend for bandwidth dynamically.

Sweet. Check your PM plox.

 

[Crystal Web]

I'm not a heavy user but i want to be able to use my account when i see fit, if i want to downloads updates / games (xbox live). I don't want to have to try and schedule it for 12 at night.

I think everyone wants this, and all ISPs want to offer this. The realities however are that the costs to make this accessible to the market are huge. And we find that most home users aren't prepared to pay the associated costs, OR you drop the price down and embark on an annual or bi-annual "profit-taking" period.

 

[semaphore]

I think everyone wants this, and all ISPs want to offer this. The realities however are that the costs to make this accessible to the market are huge. And we find that most home users aren't prepared to pay the associated costs, OR you drop the price down and embark on an annual or bi-annual "profit-taking" period.

Yeah that is fair.

 

[Enzo Matrix]

CW has been great for me. 99% of what i was looking for.

Suggestions:

1. Make the night time data, from 9pm to 6am. Starting at 12, i dont see the point, surely the load is less from 9 or so?
2. Make the night time data applicable over all of the weekend.

 

[Crystal Web]

CW has been great for me. 99% of what i was looking for.

Suggestions:

1. Make the night time data, from 9pm to 6am. Starting at 12, i dont see the point, surely the load is less from 9 or so?
2. Make the night time data applicable over all of the weekend.

Great to hear, and thanks for the suggestions.

Usage doesn't drop from 9pm I'm afraid. Ever since the influx to streaming Netflix, Hulu, and so on, and the fact that we massively prioritise these, usage only drops reasonably at around 11:30pm and often a little later as well. On weekends, you've got sport, movies, and TV show streaming happening, but there's some room to look at this sort of thing in the future as well.

 

[Phinix]

I've spotted the issue and had a PM from another customer using the same unshaped profile and controllers as you. To be frank this is a product I am reconsidering entirely. It's entirely unprofitable to us (in a big way) and there's no real benefit to run it for a few customers as a loss leader. It tends to generate more problems than actually result in positive ROI in any department. It's effectively a subsidised product to the few guys who I squeezed onto this profile behind the scenes the last few months, and if you look at how this issue scales up as a product and its associated problems, one only has to look at the feedback threads of a certain red cousin of ours over the last 18 months. I don't want to have to find ourselves in a position where we're subsidising one product with bandwidth from another to such an extent that it affects the network so poorly, so I may just terminate this offering (with sufficient notice to the few guys using it). Unless certain input costs come down substantially, all we'll find ourselves in is a position where we have frequent capacity constraints unless this product is priced well outside of the realms of "consumer expectation".

I will continue to try to tweak this though over the coming days, and am running a few scenarios out with the network guys, but ultimately it does look like the negatives are outweighing the few positives of continuing to offer this unshaped product for a handful of customers.

So why don't you enforce the same deal you've done with me in terms of usage with the others?
After changing when i do most downloads I'm only using a 3rd of what i was on peak compared to last month.

 

[Manemarak]

We don't employ throttling at all on accounts. We employ dynamic shaping on accounts, so when there is spare capacity we open up the pipe for everyone. It's also a smart and fair policy on the backend, that will open up capacity first to lower usage customers when they demand it. So if you consume 100GB in peak and another customer 10GB in peak, and you are both downloading at the same time, the lower usage peak customer will have first access to the spare capacity (or more access, to be precise - it's a fairly complex system but one that has so far proven itself very successful in terms of feedback and management). This is backend network management to ensure that the capacity is shared on a fair basis to everyone and that we don't have to employ throttling penalties.

Our premium uncapped is designed to offer the best performance in the market on gaming, streaming, browsing and other real-time protocols. You simply won't find better in our opinion. Downloads are the only protocols that contend for bandwidth dynamically.

Not very logical?

A. 1mbs uncapped will always trump 40mbs uncapped or more.
B. facebooker will always trump a gamer.

Of course:

Streamer always trump everyone even if they watch the show 10x times vs the facebooker

 

[Crystal Web]

So why don't you enforce the same deal you've done with me in terms of usage with the others?
After changing when i do most downloads I'm only using a 3rd of what i was on peak compared to last month.

I wish it was as easy as that. I'll PM you.

 

[Enzo Matrix]

Great to hear, and thanks for the suggestions.

Usage doesn't drop from 9pm I'm afraid. Ever since the influx to streaming Netflix, Hulu, and so on, and the fact that we massively prioritise these, usage only drops reasonably at around 11:30pm and often a little later as well. On weekends, you've got sport, movies, and TV show streaming happening, but there's some room to look at this sort of thing in the future as well.

cool

 

[Crystal Web]

Not very logical?

A. 1mbs uncapped will always trump 40mbs uncapped or more.
B. facebooker will always trump a gamer.

Correct on A, but it's already based on line/account speed on our side as well.
Incorrect on B. Gaming gets top priority as the packets are latency sensitive.

 

[Manemarak]

Correct on A, but it's already based on line/account speed on our side as well.
Incorrect on B. Gaming gets top priority as the packets are latency sensitive.

So 1mbs accounts will always perform better than 40mbs accounts.