Pretoria: iBurst not capped, but max 6.7 kilobits / sec, since 6th July

[slimothy]

remove abusers? hahaha, what a silly idea, firstly, you're not an "abuser" and can't be on the system, think about it the package is 1mbit to the cap and 64kbit thereafter, if I choose to download 24/7, then tough because thats what I paid for

Now I want you to think about this, you say OK remove "abusers", the selfish people and everything will be fixed, right?... WRONG, see what you said is "cut off other people so I can have a better connection", well thats just as "selfish" as raping bandwidth all night, DO NOT BLAME OTHER USERS, THEY DID NOT MAKE THE PROBLEM.

I could say well I was here when there was no cap, so they should cut you off, first come first serve, but luckily it doesn't work like that and anotherthing... before the cap in the soft launch EVERYONE downloaded what they could when they wanted, if you remove or lax the bandwidth manager you guys will just become the new abusers and WBS would run at a loss because they still need to pay for all the bandwidth and hardware at the end of the day

 

[MrH]

The main reason I said remove the cap is that the dumb software is not working correctly and is causing more problems than anything else.

As for removing abusers, what was really meant by that statment is remove those that cannot control themselves and go totally crazy with DL.

Selfishness from my side does not even come into the picture as in general my connection has not been affected until this month by that damn flaky limiting software, which in theory is not needed if users could control themselves and not go overboard raping the net.

Fire away.

 

[slimothy]

well its not going to happen and not going to work, and the main software controlling the cap is probably from Eloceyra so very sturdy, we're talking corperate stuff that you pay a mint for. The only thing WBS coded is software whihc bridges the firewall and database, it could be a light script for all we know but its not alot. All they need to do is purchase a library to handle this stuff and implement it in thier script, that way they can maintain total control but the core of the 'glue script' is nice and sturdy and tested.

Its all hypothetical anyway, and probably not going to happen, so its like you either wait for better days or you go to sentech/adsl/dial up/3g/gprs full time

 

[MrH]

Well whatever they are using does not work, so maybe they should get someone who can sort out that script/software before inflicting it's terror on all of us.

BTW I was trying to offer a posible short term answer to the problem for all users/subscribers, and not trying to be negative/selfish etc.

If the 64k cap stays thats fine as well, BUT then they must get it working properly, and stick to it as they state on their webpage.
This business of them cutting us off and expecting us to buy more bandwidth is probably the main reason that would make me drop iburst.

As for moving on, well not just yet as I can sit out this month and see in which direction they are heading before making any decisions.

 

[jmn]

Back to the IP's

Just took a risk

Disconnected, reconnected immediately (with IPCop), IP changed from 196.2.122.xxxx to 196.2.120.xxx and speed remained at +- 300 - 500 kbps as before the disconnection, slower than at 07:00.

Anybody with an IP in the 196.2.10x.xxx ranges with improved speed?

As a side observation:
All the IP's I got recently before the 5 July were in the 196.2.12x.xxx ranges.
The IP's during the problem period were in the 196.2.10x.xxx ranges.
It may be coincidence, but somehow I doubt it...

 

[BicPen]

Below is the data used to calculate your download speed:

* Download time: 13.88 seconds
* Size of file: 500 KiloBytes
* Estimated line speed: 293.9 (kilobits/second)
* Estimated line speed: 36 (kiloBytes/second)

arrg...what is this now? definitly not Iburst; Iburst = 130kiloBytes / 0.9kiloBytes Sooooooo confused, can't things just work properly?

 

[Simple Twist Of Fate]

ER DID YOU UPDATE YOUR HOSTS FILE?

since the name change of Pretoria to Tshwane, maybe the packets got lost????

 

[jmn]

I think something is still going on, fiddling and tuning etc, all testing and general usage seem to be very erratic, although overall better than premature cappulation.

 

[jmn]

@ Simple Twist Of Fate

 

[BicPen]

My IP is also in a very errotic range: 196.2.122.xxx
so jmr, you are saying your IP updates apon disconnection, and doesn't suffer from premature capulation?

 

[jmn]

My IP is also in a very errotic range: 196.2.122.xxx

WBS has porn on the network?

so jmr, you are saying your IP updates apon disconnection, and doesn't suffer from premature capulation?

Seems to be behaving normally again, as in pre 6 July

Update:
Speed has deteriorated to 100 kbps and dropping

 

[P0tenc]

remove abusers? hahaha, what a silly idea, firstly, you're not an "abuser" and can't be on the system, think about it the package is 1mbit to the cap and 64kbit thereafter, if I choose to download 24/7, then tough because thats what I paid for

Now I want you to think about this, you say OK remove "abusers", the selfish people and everything will be fixed, right?... WRONG, see what you said is "cut off other people so I can have a better connection", well thats just as "selfish" as raping bandwidth all night, DO NOT BLAME OTHER USERS, THEY DID NOT MAKE THE PROBLEM.

I could say well I was here when there was no cap, so they should cut you off, first come first serve, but luckily it doesn't work like that and anotherthing... before the cap in the soft launch EVERYONE downloaded what they could when they wanted, if you remove or lax the bandwidth manager you guys will just become the new abusers and WBS would run at a loss because they still need to pay for all the bandwidth and hardware at the end of the day

Well said Slimothy!

Remove the few abusers....you can't seriously think that will fix the problem MrH?

There has been a small development with my connection. Before this morning I had to leave the UTD off for at least an hour before getting a new ip and hopefully some speed. Now what happened this morning was I connected, got really bad speed, reconnected got new ip and ok speed. At least getting a new ip seems easier now.

Does Sasan P. really think sending a techie out to ppl's houses will solve anything? Really now! Damit it's overly obvious that's it's NOT USER ERROR!
Common sense WBS! Something that seems to be lacking.

How can such a good technology go so wrong?

 

[jmn]

At the moment I'm almost satisfied: speed generally varies from 300 - 800 kbps, occasionally dropping to 100, but also peaks at 1000+. I also received a reply on the problem (from Sasan) that I'll accept conditionally, but just want to watch it for a while (indeterminate time) longer.

I do have a new problem: FTP appears to be shaped to 64 kbps but will obviously need to be tested properly and at various times during the day. I only checked on one local site and 2 international sites.

 

[MrH]

Well said Slimothy!

Remove the few abusers....you can't seriously think that will fix the problem MrH?

POtenc, what does it say at the bottom of that post I made?

I expected some moans and groans, so what do YOU have as a solution to the problems we are having with the IP and bandwidth monitor cutoff?

The solution still is fix the 64k speed software, but it seems wbs do not have the skill or qualified people to sort it out, so they now want to cut us dead and force us to buy more bandwidth.

Before they started messing around at the beginning of this month the main problem was base station contention, since then we all have suffered with bad speed etc.

 

[BicPen]

Below is the data used to calculate your download speed:

* Download time: 30.664 seconds
* Size of file: 500 KiloBytes
* Estimated line speed: 133.1 (kilobits/second)
* Estimated line speed: 16.3 (kiloBytes/second)

I'm getting as much bits as Bytes i should be getting....someone over at WBS is drinking on the job again!!!!

 

[jmn]

Sasan's ultimate reply: Not read

This was Sasan's original reply to the Pta problem:

"We have no conclusive evidence yet. However, it is pointing to a faulty port on of our core switches which was replaced last night."

Sasan's ultimate reply to the emails:
Not read: Ridiculous speed
Your message

To: Sasan Parvin; Luis Chin
Subject: Re: Ridiculous speed
Sent: 2005/07/12 02:25 PM

was deleted on 2005/07/14 01:58 PM

 

[Simple Twist Of Fate]

the 5 seconds thing to me sounds liek the bandwith manager (the bit that throttles us when capped) because its always been like that, starts fast and clamps down in a few seconds... wouldn't it be messed up if this wasnt a huge technical error at the tower or hardware error but merely a misconfiguration or not so liberal code added to the bandwidth manager, meaning it could all be avoided.... but isn't... for some reason, probably money

I agree its exactly like that.............. mine was lasting 20seconds though.
I reckon they capped it at 6.4 K/bs instaead of 64K/bs.
Obviosly at that speed it will time out
It is technical and Slim and I have been saying so since last week Fri AM
Thats 7 days now!!!

I VOTE THE "liberal code added to the bandwidth" THING
fUNNY moving the decimal point, one place back on the throttling machine is the same as moving it one point forward in the bank account!!!
But thats FRAUD................ IS THIS WBS NEW MONEY MACHINE?

 

[SupaMonkey]

Ok, This is would be @#$%@ hilarious if I wasnt fuming with anger. After a handful of days of my connection working "properly" (as in 30KBps as opposed to the 100-110 KBps I USED to get); My speed has dropped to below 1KBps again!

Anyone Else?
Anyone Else Ready To Go Out And Kill Somebody?

 

[BadBoyZ]

Well, I'm down to sub-dialup speeds again (just like on Monday).
Let's just say I'm waiting for one reply from WBS which is the only thing that can still persuade me not to cancel my connection tomorrow.

 

[P0tenc]

I had to reconnect 6 times this morning before getting better that 6.4kbps speeds!
At the moment I get about 250kbps which is well below my usuall full speed 1024kbps.