nocilah
Banned
okay and we all on different towers... weird... as usual support knows nothing
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Do you think Bafana Bafana will win tonight?
really freaky
- Thread starter nocilah
- Start date
They (Sentech) have just introduced the greatest marketing (sting)tool ever. I have tried a few times downloading the same file of about 500k, and everytime it starts at 90KB/sec and then goes down to 7.2KB/sec. With bigger files on single thread downloads it goes to down to about 4KB/s after starting at 90KB/s.
What does this mean, good browsing and sh?t donwloading (on a single thread). But what it actually means is that when you demonstrate to joe soap public, and they browse, they are going to get very good speeds, and naturally will think that they can download and share files (P2P) at the same fantastic speed.
Again, I am happy with what they have done recently, and with the permanent connection that I get, but this stinks of trying to sucker (Sting)the public. And you know what, they will get away with it.
I don't know if any of you look at Carte Blanche tonight. Well there is a guy selling cruises on a ship that does not exist. So, Sentech is okay
, at least we get an internet connection, with some iburst.
What does this mean, good browsing and sh?t donwloading (on a single thread). But what it actually means is that when you demonstrate to joe soap public, and they browse, they are going to get very good speeds, and naturally will think that they can download and share files (P2P) at the same fantastic speed.
Again, I am happy with what they have done recently, and with the permanent connection that I get, but this stinks of trying to sucker (Sting)the public. And you know what, they will get away with it.
I don't know if any of you look at Carte Blanche tonight. Well there is a guy selling cruises on a ship that does not exist. So, Sentech is okay
, at least we get an internet connection, with some iburst.nocilah
Banned
well this is what I can establish.
Sentech have finally figured out what they are doing with regards to the BW profiler.
However what they are doing now is locking down on downlaods and such things.
But this is the probelm:
When I surf things are great. Nice n quick. We are talking insane speeds on a MW128.
Howveer once I start a download things are quickly choked by the BW profiler to about 3KB/s
howvere if I browse to another site the BW profiler doesnt register this and keeps me chocked at about
3KB/s until that downlaod is cancelled or has ended. Some sites seem to disregard thos rule however. Local will be fast regardless which must be something they allow on their side also certain URLs. like www.cnn.com
I am with Robone here. This is a move on Sentechs behalf to appear faster. And indeed they are faster but are leashing the ability to download. Also once I do downlaod and the BW manager chokes me to 3KB it does that to all International traffic.
Once again it seeems sentech are putting in little to no thought in their solutions...
Should we all just cancell or should we fight them knowing that they can provide a decent service?
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
Sentech have finally figured out what they are doing with regards to the BW profiler.
However what they are doing now is locking down on downlaods and such things.
But this is the probelm:
When I surf things are great. Nice n quick. We are talking insane speeds on a MW128.
Howveer once I start a download things are quickly choked by the BW profiler to about 3KB/s
howvere if I browse to another site the BW profiler doesnt register this and keeps me chocked at about
3KB/s until that downlaod is cancelled or has ended. Some sites seem to disregard thos rule however. Local will be fast regardless which must be something they allow on their side also certain URLs. like www.cnn.com
I am with Robone here. This is a move on Sentechs behalf to appear faster. And indeed they are faster but are leashing the ability to download. Also once I do downlaod and the BW manager chokes me to 3KB it does that to all International traffic.
Once again it seeems sentech are putting in little to no thought in their solutions...
Should we all just cancell or should we fight them knowing that they can provide a decent service?
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
I can confirm I'm seeing the same thing on my BW graphs .. when downloads start there are a few seconds of good speeds, then it's clearly throttled right back down to the usually sh-tty 2-4kB/s I've come to consistently expect the last few months. I suppose this is marginally better for people who mostly just do a bit of Web browsing and e-mail, but I don't think it's acceptable at all, and anyway if that's all you do then why would you be paying R650+/month for MW? Even dial-up with Telkom's insanely high call charges will usually work out cheaper (and faster!). If ST want to get more "Joe Public" (low BW usage) users (which is a good idea in principle), they're going to have to be price-competitive with dial-up (i.e. under R300/month), because quite frankly right now their product specs are roughly comparable with dial-up from an end-user perspecive.
I'm frankly rather bemused at the lengths ST seem to be willing to go, installing these complex BW managers, to avoid simply buying some more international bandwidth.
I'm frankly rather bemused at the lengths ST seem to be willing to go, installing these complex BW managers, to avoid simply buying some more international bandwidth.
bb_matt
Executive Member
They are obviously re-aligning themselves to a different market.
They quite simply cannot service the "geek" or "enthusiast" market, so it's better for them to target the email/solitaire brigade who think the www is mweb's home page.
It's been wonderful surfing for the last few days, but as mentioned, anything over a certain size slowly chokes the bandwidth.
So, if your still a MyWireless subscriber and want to be able to download/p2p/online gaming, streaming audio/video, it's time to cancel, because this move by Sentech signals that the service will never be able to provide what you want.
It's a wise move by Sentech if this is the case - profiling the bandwidth to make surfing and email really fast will please most casual internet users. Power users will go elsewhere.
Subtitles Off
They quite simply cannot service the "geek" or "enthusiast" market, so it's better for them to target the email/solitaire brigade who think the www is mweb's home page.
It's been wonderful surfing for the last few days, but as mentioned, anything over a certain size slowly chokes the bandwidth.
So, if your still a MyWireless subscriber and want to be able to download/p2p/online gaming, streaming audio/video, it's time to cancel, because this move by Sentech signals that the service will never be able to provide what you want.
It's a wise move by Sentech if this is the case - profiling the bandwidth to make surfing and email really fast will please most casual internet users. Power users will go elsewhere.
Subtitles Off
nocilah
Banned
but unfortunately its the power users who will make th biggest stink as we have and we will.
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
if you ask me, the title of the topic is a little wrong, its not so freaky whats going on, its just the way TCP works, coupled with the rest of the glitches on the mywi network.
I've been expecting this to happen as soon as sentech does get their bandwidth in order, it could be their bandwidth manager, but I doubt Sentech have the skill to do that, I'll explain the logic in easy terms!
<u>My theory</u>
When a new TCP connection starts (ie i click web site, it starts downloading) the server and client will align data throughput rate, (ie server will determine clients connection, and send at that speed) hence why initial connection is quick, the server then waits for acknowledgements from client (mywi users), if an acknowledgement of a packet is not returned, or takes too long, the server will slow the throughput rate to accomodate the client, and ensure a consistent connection/avoid network congestion.
since internationally, mywireless drops excessive amounts of packets, the server will not get acknowledgements, resend those packets, and slow down the transmission rate, this is known as tcp flow control.
This is not an issue locally, as local packetloss is near nill.
This will also explain why all the packages single thread connections have the same speeds (packet loss is equivalent, so the servers determine the transfer rate)
why are multithreaded downloads quicker ??
because each connection is determined by its packetloss, but a combination of the lot , means the connection can get equivalent rates from several servers!
so, basically, this means we all fscked until Sentech decide to get off their lazy @sses, pick up the ducktape, and patch up the holes in their cables.[:0]
if only life was so simple.
I've been expecting this to happen as soon as sentech does get their bandwidth in order, it could be their bandwidth manager, but I doubt Sentech have the skill to do that, I'll explain the logic in easy terms!
<u>My theory</u>
When a new TCP connection starts (ie i click web site, it starts downloading) the server and client will align data throughput rate, (ie server will determine clients connection, and send at that speed) hence why initial connection is quick, the server then waits for acknowledgements from client (mywi users), if an acknowledgement of a packet is not returned, or takes too long, the server will slow the throughput rate to accomodate the client, and ensure a consistent connection/avoid network congestion.
since internationally, mywireless drops excessive amounts of packets, the server will not get acknowledgements, resend those packets, and slow down the transmission rate, this is known as tcp flow control.
This is not an issue locally, as local packetloss is near nill.
This will also explain why all the packages single thread connections have the same speeds (packet loss is equivalent, so the servers determine the transfer rate)
why are multithreaded downloads quicker ??
because each connection is determined by its packetloss, but a combination of the lot , means the connection can get equivalent rates from several servers!
so, basically, this means we all fscked until Sentech decide to get off their lazy @sses, pick up the ducktape, and patch up the holes in their cables.[:0]
if only life was so simple.
nocilah
Banned
the problem is with this new system multithreaded is no longer reacting the same. They somehow cap everything down to 3.5KB/s
I also thought it was what you explained... the intial burst being the typical... but it is not so because this lasts for about 10-20 seconds... Browsing is considerably faster. We are talking uncached sites loading in under 3seconds. Speed tests that used to relay speeds of 3KB now all the way to 20KB/s
They have done something... but if they want to cap our downlaods and stuff they should be relaistic and cap it at 7KB on the MW 128
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
I also thought it was what you explained... the intial burst being the typical... but it is not so because this lasts for about 10-20 seconds... Browsing is considerably faster. We are talking uncached sites loading in under 3seconds. Speed tests that used to relay speeds of 3KB now all the way to 20KB/s
They have done something... but if they want to cap our downlaods and stuff they should be relaistic and cap it at 7KB on the MW 128
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
regardtv
Expert Member
From what everyone on the thread are reporting I'd say it's simply a matter of Sentech extending the "burst time" allocated before it starts the bandwidth throttling.
Hope it lasts for the general browser users though ...
Hope it lasts for the general browser users though ...
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dorris</i>
<br />if you ask me, the title of the topic is a little wrong, its not so freaky whats going on, its just the way TCP works.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nonsense. Why did this behaviour start just last week then? And if this was simply due to the way TCP/IP works, then how come we ALL got blazing fast speeds at our FULL package rates ALL THE TIME even from international sites back in Feb/March, until Sentech (and they admit this) suddenly cut off the MW users from their main BW pool? The effects you describe may be true but IMO are probably virtually negligible. TCP/IP didn't suddenly change in April at the same time ST cut MW users off from their main BW pool, nor did it change last week when we all suddenly started noticing this particular behaviour. Anyway if the international packet loss was that high it would also make ST's satellite packages very slow, which isn't the case.
Sorry, but all of the evidence still points at greed, i.e. at Sentech just not being willing to buy enough international bandwidth.
If Sentech is trying to shift towards a more "Joe Public" market, I agree that's probably a good thing, because ultimately that's the only way to get economies of scale .. you can't achieve this by signing up mostly early-adopter type p2p-sharing bw-raping techies. Only problem is R650/month is too high for Joe Public because the product is, by and large, not really better than dial-up which works out cheaper. I suppose it's still a bit cheaper than mega-rip-off HomeDSL, but then the public isn't exactly jumping onto ADSL in a big way either.
<br />if you ask me, the title of the topic is a little wrong, its not so freaky whats going on, its just the way TCP works.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Nonsense. Why did this behaviour start just last week then? And if this was simply due to the way TCP/IP works, then how come we ALL got blazing fast speeds at our FULL package rates ALL THE TIME even from international sites back in Feb/March, until Sentech (and they admit this) suddenly cut off the MW users from their main BW pool? The effects you describe may be true but IMO are probably virtually negligible. TCP/IP didn't suddenly change in April at the same time ST cut MW users off from their main BW pool, nor did it change last week when we all suddenly started noticing this particular behaviour. Anyway if the international packet loss was that high it would also make ST's satellite packages very slow, which isn't the case.
Sorry, but all of the evidence still points at greed, i.e. at Sentech just not being willing to buy enough international bandwidth.
If Sentech is trying to shift towards a more "Joe Public" market, I agree that's probably a good thing, because ultimately that's the only way to get economies of scale .. you can't achieve this by signing up mostly early-adopter type p2p-sharing bw-raping techies. Only problem is R650/month is too high for Joe Public because the product is, by and large, not really better than dial-up which works out cheaper. I suppose it's still a bit cheaper than mega-rip-off HomeDSL, but then the public isn't exactly jumping onto ADSL in a big way either.
bb_matt
Executive Member
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by regardtv</i>
<br />From what everyone on the thread are reporting I'd say it's simply a matter of Sentech extending the "burst time" allocated before it starts the bandwidth throttling.
Hope it lasts for the general browser users though ...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It's still lasting. I think Sentech have "got a clue" - possibly in terms of hiring some network consultants to sort out some of the issues. The sudden spate of activity and then subsequent slowdown is only really noticed on files larger than 300 to 400k - try downloading a 3 meg file and see what happens.
IOW, optimised for browsing and email.
I'm almost certain that MyWireless is changing focus big time to the casual user - of which thier are millions - they got hurt in the broadband "geek" market, got lambasted and ridiculed.
This is pure speculation - iow, I'm probably talkin' crap, but it's a logical step to take for the MyWireless team - get some outside assistance who recommend to MyWireless that they manage the bandwidth aggressively to please the average joe user.
Nothing wrong, if your an average joe user. If your not, cancel your contract now - Sentech will be only too glad. [
]
I'll restate the fact I'm probably talking out my ass, just to cover it ! [
]
Subtitles Off
<br />From what everyone on the thread are reporting I'd say it's simply a matter of Sentech extending the "burst time" allocated before it starts the bandwidth throttling.
Hope it lasts for the general browser users though ...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It's still lasting. I think Sentech have "got a clue" - possibly in terms of hiring some network consultants to sort out some of the issues. The sudden spate of activity and then subsequent slowdown is only really noticed on files larger than 300 to 400k - try downloading a 3 meg file and see what happens.
IOW, optimised for browsing and email.
I'm almost certain that MyWireless is changing focus big time to the casual user - of which thier are millions - they got hurt in the broadband "geek" market, got lambasted and ridiculed.
This is pure speculation - iow, I'm probably talkin' crap, but it's a logical step to take for the MyWireless team - get some outside assistance who recommend to MyWireless that they manage the bandwidth aggressively to please the average joe user.
Nothing wrong, if your an average joe user. If your not, cancel your contract now - Sentech will be only too glad. [
]I'll restate the fact I'm probably talking out my ass, just to cover it ! [
]Subtitles Off
nocilah
Banned
yeah... well their new and improved system have totally slashed the abiility to multi thread downlaods. Some how even this gets throttled down to 3KB/s.
What one needs is an app that will pause the download every 30 seconds for about 5 seconds and the resume the download. I did that the other night when downloading the JAVA 15MG file. workes like a bomb. Got it under 20 minutes.
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
What one needs is an app that will pause the download every 30 seconds for about 5 seconds and the resume the download. I did that the other night when downloading the JAVA 15MG file. workes like a bomb. Got it under 20 minutes.
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
Regardt!!!
congrats, and welcome back!
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What one needs is an app that will pause the download every 30 seconds for about 5 seconds<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
hmm, this might not be such a bad idea, and not too improbable )assuming this effect remains long enough on their network), I got fedup with this multithreaded business (or lack thereof) and started working on a multithreaded manager for linux, that actually does work (since prozilla and axel are nothing more than resumers).
Anyways, if it all comes together, it could be modified to only pull 300K per thread, and then start a new connection.
come to think of it, one could also write a script to do that using axel.
Turtle : Noone asked your opinion. I shouldn't justify your response with anything other than [xx(], but anyway, my point is that bandwidth is not the only problem on the network, even if/when that gets alleviated, there will not be a marked improvement until many others issues are fixed.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And if this was simply due to the way TCP/IP works<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
[xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(]
noone said that either, only that sentechs congestion/network config (or lack thereof) is not condusive to such a Transfer Control Protocol
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">TCP/IP didn't suddenly change in April <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
[xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(]
no it didn't but packet loss did spike then!!
noone disagrees about a bandwidth shortage, I are merely to be pointing out that their problems is bigger!
oh, and another one turtle, I didn't think of this up till know, but if you really wanted to be a smart@ass and tell me TCP is not the cause, you simply needed to ask why UDP apps are also problematic, ie if streaming media is a problem, it is not due to TCP.
Speaking of which, does someone want to try a stream for a few minutes and see if it also degrades over time.
congrats, and welcome back!
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What one needs is an app that will pause the download every 30 seconds for about 5 seconds<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
hmm, this might not be such a bad idea, and not too improbable )assuming this effect remains long enough on their network), I got fedup with this multithreaded business (or lack thereof) and started working on a multithreaded manager for linux, that actually does work (since prozilla and axel are nothing more than resumers).
Anyways, if it all comes together, it could be modified to only pull 300K per thread, and then start a new connection.
come to think of it, one could also write a script to do that using axel.
Turtle : Noone asked your opinion. I shouldn't justify your response with anything other than [xx(], but anyway, my point is that bandwidth is not the only problem on the network, even if/when that gets alleviated, there will not be a marked improvement until many others issues are fixed.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And if this was simply due to the way TCP/IP works<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
[xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(]
noone said that either, only that sentechs congestion/network config (or lack thereof) is not condusive to such a Transfer Control Protocol
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">TCP/IP didn't suddenly change in April <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
[xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(][xx(]
no it didn't but packet loss did spike then!!
noone disagrees about a bandwidth shortage, I are merely to be pointing out that their problems is bigger!
oh, and another one turtle, I didn't think of this up till know, but if you really wanted to be a smart@ass and tell me TCP is not the cause, you simply needed to ask why UDP apps are also problematic, ie if streaming media is a problem, it is not due to TCP.
Speaking of which, does someone want to try a stream for a few minutes and see if it also degrades over time.
nocilah
Banned
streaming does degrade...
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
myWireless 128, 64, 48, 16 - depends on its mood.
After another test tonight my downloading on multithread is the same as a single thread. 4KB/s. Used to be a constant 12KB/s.
Tried my streaming trading package and that seems okay, but time will tell when I need to trade. If locks up then I know. Althoug it looks good. Connection status at 1.6 seconds. Used to be higher
Tried my streaming trading package and that seems okay, but time will tell when I need to trade. If locks up then I know. Althoug it looks good. Connection status at 1.6 seconds. Used to be higher
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dorris</i>
Turtle : Noone asked your opinion.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Sucks to be wrong hey dorris, real big of you to admit it. Oh sorry, I didn't know this forum was on an 'invite-only' basis, I mistakenly thought it was open to all, don't worry I won't post again. (Guess you were over-eager to show off your l33t TCP/IP knowledge, hate to break it to you but you not the only one here who knows a bit about networks.)
Turtle : Noone asked your opinion.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Sucks to be wrong hey dorris, real big of you to admit it. Oh sorry, I didn't know this forum was on an 'invite-only' basis, I mistakenly thought it was open to all, don't worry I won't post again. (Guess you were over-eager to show off your l33t TCP/IP knowledge, hate to break it to you but you not the only one here who knows a bit about networks.)
you'll have to excuse my harsh response, but your reply really had nothing to do with my earlier statements (which might I add, i also underlined was a theory), anyways, we've each had our little go at each other, now lets put it all behind us and end this silly trolling behaviours. we all on the same sides, and we should all be open to hear any theories, no matter how obscure they seem.
sorry, I can't resist, 1 more response : I really don't think rehashing textbook TCP knowledge could be considered l33t.
sorry, I can't resist, 1 more response : I really don't think rehashing textbook TCP knowledge could be considered l33t.
beerygaz
Well-Known Member
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Robone</i>
<br />They (Sentech) have just introduced the greatest marketing (sting)tool ever. I have tried a few times downloading the same file of about 500k, and everytime it starts at 90KB/sec and then goes down to 7.2KB/sec. With bigger files on single thread downloads it goes to down to about 4KB/s after starting at 90KB/s.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
So I'm not the only one then! I know it's very subjective, but I've been doing a fair amount of d/l over the past few days from assorted sites. It seems the 1st 500k-1Mb fly down and then I get throttled back to 10KB/sec - I'm on the 512 package, BTW.
I wish they were more transparent with their network shaping so that I at least knew where the bottleneck was.
<br />They (Sentech) have just introduced the greatest marketing (sting)tool ever. I have tried a few times downloading the same file of about 500k, and everytime it starts at 90KB/sec and then goes down to 7.2KB/sec. With bigger files on single thread downloads it goes to down to about 4KB/s after starting at 90KB/s.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
So I'm not the only one then! I know it's very subjective, but I've been doing a fair amount of d/l over the past few days from assorted sites. It seems the 1st 500k-1Mb fly down and then I get throttled back to 10KB/sec - I'm on the 512 package, BTW.
I wish they were more transparent with their network shaping so that I at least knew where the bottleneck was.