Web sQuad ISP - Feedback Thread #2

tm458 said:
Got no proper active service nor have I received any invoices from you guys since migrating, all i got is a pending black friday deal. Could you please look into it as I don't want to be randomly disconnected :) @websquadza
Click to expand...
No invoices yet again and the active service I have is showing a recurring amount of R842 instead of R599.
@websquadza
 
@websquadza - any idea why I get +20ms more latency on websquad (frogfoot) vs cool ideas on openserve? In the images below you can see the increased latency which is when I switched over to WS/FF - I am in PTA

1711992706435.png

1711992724969.png
 
Last edited:
Mzezman said:
@websquadza - re-pinging you on this
Click to expand...
Evening- apologies for my delayed response here. We’re currently picking up FF services on our CPT NNI. I know there are plans to bring these back to JHB- but I don’t have a timeline yet. At this point only JHB content takes a small penalty, but you shouldn’t see any latency effect on transit paths (as most of that traffic heads to CPT anyway).
 
websquadza said:
Evening- apologies for my delayed response here. We’re currently picking up FF services on our CPT NNI. I know there are plans to bring these back to JHB- but I don’t have a timeline yet. At this point only JHB content takes a small penalty, but you shouldn’t see any latency effect on transit paths (as most of that traffic heads to CPT anyway).
Click to expand...

Aaah ok, makes sense then. Thanks for the clarification
 
Zodiak said:
mybroadband.co.za

Fibre “express route” connecting Johannesburg and London launched

Paratus has launched what it says is the fastest fibre route between Johannesburg and London.
mybroadband.co.za mybroadband.co.za

Does this mean we will get better ping to EU/UK through Web Squad as well from Johanneburg?
Click to expand...
DarkSt0rm said:
poke @websquadza :D
Click to expand...

We’ve pinged the team at Paratus to see what they can do for us. Also want to see the real world latency between JHB and Lon. I think the marketing machine is being a little optimistic here. Meterage wise, the direct path between Jhb-cpt-nam is is about 30% longer than Jhb-nam (so more along the lines of 10-15ms shaved off the top line- 10-13% is still great for Jhb and KZN users), so I think the latencies in this article (numbers which also appeared in another article as EU, not London https://techcentral.co.za/paratus-express-route-joburg-to-europe/242935/), are quoted between Jhb and Lisbon.

Also dependant on cloud vendors adoption of the route. But this is great forward momentum!
 
websquadza said:
We’ve pinged the team at Paratus to see what they can do for us. Also want to see the real world latency between JHB and Lon. I think the marketing machine is being a little optimistic here. Meterage wise, the direct path between Jhb-cpt-nam is is about 30% longer than Jhb-nam (so more along the lines of 10-15ms shaved off the top line- 10-13% is still great for Jhb and KZN users), so I think the latencies in this article (numbers which also appeared in another article as EU, not London https://techcentral.co.za/paratus-express-route-joburg-to-europe/242935/), are quoted between Jhb and Lisbon.

Also dependant on cloud vendors adoption of the route. But this is great forward momentum!
Click to expand...
Fantastic, thank you! Even 10ms less would be amazing!
 
Hi @websquadza

Can you please assist with the following ticket as I didn’t get feedback : Ticket ID: 431728] Re: Link Layer FTTH Price and Package Adjustment

Today, I got a mail saying my current 100/100 package will change to 200/200 come 1 May with an increase in price.

ISPA said a while ago that consumers shouldn’t be “forced upgraded ”

ISPA Cautions Against Forced Fibre Upgrades

6 March 2023 Home Press Releases ISPA Cautions Against Forced Fibre Upgrades The Internet Service Providers’ Association of SA (NPC) (“ISPA”) today sounded a word of […]
ispa.org.za ispa.org.za

I want to remain on 100/100 mbps and pay the approx R 850 or so per month instead.

I also don’t see why I should be paying any service fee or downgrade fee or any other penalty fee as I didn’t ask for any changes from my side.

Why couldn’t the position from websquad be to keep the consumer on the current speed and lower their monthly charge ?

Btw , I have link layer as the FNO so I don’t know what pricing dynamic is taking place between ISP (websquad) and link layer

Either way , as a consumer why should I be disadvantaged with extra cash leaving my pockets ?

Look forward to your assistance
 
@websquadza it looks like your IPv6 broke just after midnight? At least from openserve in pretoria:

> traceroute6 -l -f 2 websquad.co.za
traceroute6 to websquad.co.za (2c0f:f030:6040:2::75) from 2001:4200:7000:4::9, 64 hops max, 28 byte packets
Skipping 1 intermediate hops
2 2c0f:f030::1000:112 (2c0f:f030::1000:112) 3.695 ms 3.656 ms 3.732 ms
3 core.cr-01.jb1.za.ws.net.za (2c0f:f030::1000:101) 3.900 ms 3.702 ms 3.727 ms
4 * * *
5 * * *
^C

> traceroute6 -l -f 2 orca
traceroute6 to orca.cids.org.za (2603:c026:4500:8001:a7f9:c1ba:e8ec:4d7f) from 2001:4200:7000:4::9, 64 hops max, 28 byte packets
Skipping 1 intermediate hops
2 2c0f:f030::1000:112 (2c0f:f030::1000:112) 3.820 ms 3.713 ms 3.750 ms
3 core.cr-01.jb1.za.ws.net.za (2c0f:f030::1000:101) 3.853 ms 3.692 ms 3.772 ms
4 * * *
5 * * *
6 * * *
^C
 
JohnHay said:
@websquadza it looks like your IPv6 broke just after midnight? At least from openserve in pretoria:

> traceroute6 -l -f 2 websquad.co.za
traceroute6 to websquad.co.za (2c0f:f030:6040:2::75) from 2001:4200:7000:4::9, 64 hops max, 28 byte packets
Skipping 1 intermediate hops
2 2c0f:f030::1000:112 (2c0f:f030::1000:112) 3.695 ms 3.656 ms 3.732 ms
3 core.cr-01.jb1.za.ws.net.za (2c0f:f030::1000:101) 3.900 ms 3.702 ms 3.727 ms
4 * * *
5 * * *
^C

> traceroute6 -l -f 2 orca
traceroute6 to orca.cids.org.za (2603:c026:4500:8001:a7f9:c1ba:e8ec:4d7f) from 2001:4200:7000:4::9, 64 hops max, 28 byte packets
Skipping 1 intermediate hops
2 2c0f:f030::1000:112 (2c0f:f030::1000:112) 3.820 ms 3.713 ms 3.750 ms
3 core.cr-01.jb1.za.ws.net.za (2c0f:f030::1000:101) 3.853 ms 3.692 ms 3.772 ms
4 * * *
5 * * *
6 * * *
^C
Click to expand...

We’ve tracked this down- please can you check again and confirm?
 
dev8383 said:
Hi @websquadza

Can you please assist with the following ticket as I didn’t get feedback : Ticket ID: 431728] Re: Link Layer FTTH Price and Package Adjustment

Today, I got a mail saying my current 100/100 package will change to 200/200 come 1 May with an increase in price.

ISPA said a while ago that consumers shouldn’t be “forced upgraded ”

ISPA Cautions Against Forced Fibre Upgrades

6 March 2023 Home Press Releases ISPA Cautions Against Forced Fibre Upgrades The Internet Service Providers’ Association of SA (NPC) (“ISPA”) today sounded a word of […]
ispa.org.za ispa.org.za

I want to remain on 100/100 mbps and pay the approx R 850 or so per month instead.

I also don’t see why I should be paying any service fee or downgrade fee or any other penalty fee as I didn’t ask for any changes from my side.

Why couldn’t the position from websquad be to keep the consumer on the current speed and lower their monthly charge ?

Btw , I have link layer as the FNO so I don’t know what pricing dynamic is taking place between ISP (websquad) and link layer

Either way , as a consumer why should I be disadvantaged with extra cash leaving my pockets ?

Look forward to your assistance
Click to expand...

Thanks for your message here. To start off, I am 100% in agreement that there should be no forced upgrade with impediments to downgrades. In today’s tough times, the only person this harms is the consumer. Our COO is part of the ISPA working group that helped draft this statement and working hard against these kinds of moves by FNOs.

However therein lies the rub. ISPA is a body that exists for its ISP members and consumers - an association that provides a stronger voice for ISPs against market forces (eg regulators and FNOs) and a code of conduct that we abide so that consumers are protected under common guidelines. FNOs are not members of ISPA and have no reason to be, so a statement made by ISPA is not binding on FNOs. ISPA is not toothless, it has been incredibly powerful in the past, helping to break apart the Telkom monopoly and advocating for the open telecoms landscape that exists today. The ISPA FNO Working Group is new and its impact will take some time to have the desired effect on FNOs, though incremental changes have started and we’ve seen Vumatel and Frogfoot drop downgrade fees under pressure from ISPA.

Link Layer, however, have not. Rather they have forced upgrades on packages and re-rated packages in accordance with this new “value”. Other FNOs outright block downgrades to lower packages on their network, only providing “affordable” options for new signups.

From the FNO perspective, their costs have increased dramatically. Debt costs are up above inflation levels (interest rate hikes) and every other cost associated with the provision of services is up equally or more. Their motivation is to create perceived value on top of the increase, by bundling bandwidth with the higher costs. And this is all understandable. But the introduction of downgrade fees is where FNOs and ISPs diverge. FNOs are penalising customers on month to month terms to try and reduce the impact on their bottom line.
 
websquadza said:
Thanks for your message here. To start off, I am 100% in agreement that there should be no forced upgrade with impediments to downgrades. In today’s tough times, the only person this harms is the consumer. Our COO is part of the ISPA working group that helped draft this statement and working hard against these kinds of moves by FNOs.

However therein lies the rub. ISPA is a body that exists for its ISP members and consumers - an association that provides a stronger voice for ISPs against market forces (eg regulators and FNOs) and a code of conduct that we abide so that consumers are protected under common guidelines. FNOs are not members of ISPA and have no reason to be, so a statement made by ISPA is not binding on FNOs. ISPA is not toothless, it has been incredibly powerful in the past, helping to break apart the Telkom monopoly and advocating for the open telecoms landscape that exists today. The ISPA FNO Working Group is new and its impact will take some time to have the desired effect on FNOs, though incremental changes have started and we’ve seen Vumatel and Frogfoot drop downgrade fees under pressure from ISPA.

Link Layer, however, have not. Rather they have forced upgrades on packages and re-rated packages in accordance with this new “value”. Other FNOs outright block downgrades to lower packages on their network, only providing “affordable” options for new signups.

From the FNO perspective, their costs have increased dramatically. Debt costs are up above inflation levels (interest rate hikes) and every other cost associated with the provision of services is up equally or more. Their motivation is to create perceived value on top of the increase, by bundling bandwidth with the higher costs. And this is all understandable. But the introduction of downgrade fees is where FNOs and ISPs diverge. FNOs are penalising customers on month to month terms to try and reduce the impact on their bottom line.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful response, I appreciate that.

In my case as a FTTH consumer, 200/200 is a totally underutilized line,

Lastly, I replied to the ticket about 30min ago as I didn’t get feedback from yesterday afternoon.

Will you be able to provide further assistance for my issue @websquadza ?
 
dev8383 said:
Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful response, I appreciate that.

In my case as a FTTH consumer, 200/200 is a totally underutilized line,

Lastly, I replied to the ticket about 30min ago as I didn’t get feedback from yesterday afternoon.

Will you be able to provide further assistance for my issue @websquadza ?
Click to expand...
You're most welcome. I've asked the team to respond here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X