anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

as above.

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

AT wrote:
> as above.

UBS is Telecoms wholesales product that they sell to ISP's, to market as
they will, and was meant to be "unlimited", but Telecom have chucked in
some limitations, like "no active promotion of static IPs" and "10Gbyte
average usage across all users of each ISP"

Basically they are both DSL, and essencially the same thing to the end
user, a 256kbit DSL account.

Others will no doubt be able to point out other differences/similarities.

--
Dave.net.nz
reply addy is dave@the.domain.above
nice! http://www.dave.net.nz/images/link.jpg

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
> AT wrote:
>> as above.
>
> UBS is Telecoms wholesales product that they sell to ISP's, to market
> as they will, and was meant to be "unlimited", but Telecom have
> chucked in some limitations, like "no active promotion of static IPs"
> and "10Gbyte average usage across all users of each ISP"
>
> Basically they are both DSL, and essencially the same thing to the end
> user, a 256kbit DSL account.
>
> Others will no doubt be able to point out other
> differences/similarities.

There is a whisper of Telecom deliberately nerfing UBS to make it unsuitable
for gaming. (Thus keeping customers for themselves) When I first got it it
was atrocious. Now it's better, the ping-times are around 140% of what they
were on Jetstream. However, every few minutes there are unbelievable
lag-spikes, making on-line gaming a real chore. I have spoken to people a
round the world and other NZers accessing the same server from non-UBS lines
and nobody else is having these problems.

Ping times aren't bad though, so sending copies of the 'ping' output or
'tracert' to the ISP achieves nothing. It's the unexplained (and hard to
'document') lag-spikes that are the problem.
--
~misfit~ (****ed off)

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:35:03 +1300, "~misfit~"
<misfit61nz@hooya.co.nz> wrote:

>Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>> AT wrote:
>>> as above.
>>
>> UBS is Telecoms wholesales product that they sell to ISP's, to market
>> as they will, and was meant to be "unlimited", but Telecom have
>> chucked in some limitations, like "no active promotion of static IPs"
>> and "10Gbyte average usage across all users of each ISP"
>>
>> Basically they are both DSL, and essencially the same thing to the end
>> user, a 256kbit DSL account.
>>
>> Others will no doubt be able to point out other
>> differences/similarities.
>
>There is a whisper of Telecom deliberately nerfing UBS to make it unsuitable
>for gaming. (Thus keeping customers for themselves) When I first got it it
>was atrocious. Now it's better, the ping-times are around 140% of what they
>were on Jetstream. However, every few minutes there are unbelievable
>lag-spikes, making on-line gaming a real chore. I have spoken to people a
>round the world and other NZers accessing the same server from non-UBS lines
>and nobody else is having these problems.
>
>Ping times aren't bad though, so sending copies of the 'ping' output or
>'tracert' to the ISP achieves nothing. It's the unexplained (and hard to
>'document') lag-spikes that are the problem.

It is possibly also to stop people using VoIP phoens, and hence them
losing their cut of the phoen revenue.
Geoff

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:03:50 +1300, AT wrote:

> as above.

The offical excuse is that the bandwidth from Telecom to your ISP is just
not enough. But, yes, wouldn't you love to take a look at their traffic
shaping setup.

You can only hope that an insider would blow the whistle if they are really
up to something. I've yet to meet a Telecom tech (are they real people?).

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:35:03 +1300, "~misfit~"
<misfit61nz@hooya.co.nz> wrote:

>Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>> AT wrote:
>>> as above.
>>
>> UBS is Telecoms wholesales product that they sell to ISP's, to market
>> as they will, and was meant to be "unlimited", but Telecom have
>> chucked in some limitations, like "no active promotion of static IPs"
>> and "10Gbyte average usage across all users of each ISP"
>>
>> Basically they are both DSL, and essencially the same thing to the end
>> user, a 256kbit DSL account.
>>
>> Others will no doubt be able to point out other
>> differences/similarities.
>
>There is a whisper of Telecom deliberately nerfing UBS to make it unsuitable
>for gaming. (Thus keeping customers for themselves) When I first got it it
>was atrocious. Now it's better, the ping-times are around 140% of what they
>were on Jetstream. However, every few minutes there are unbelievable
>lag-spikes, making on-line gaming a real chore. I have spoken to people a
>round the world and other NZers accessing the same server from non-UBS lines
>and nobody else is having these problems.
>
>Ping times aren't bad though, so sending copies of the 'ping' output or
>'tracert' to the ISP achieves nothing. It's the unexplained (and hard to
>'document') lag-spikes that are the problem.

I am getting the same thing and it is ****ing off my son..

In counter strike the ping has gone from 60 - 80ms average
(jetstream128) to 120 - 160ms average (Bliink 256)??

This is the ping to local CS servers..




help desk person had no idea, but told story of it is all the new
users coming on to bliink and should get better round mid Jan when
things will get faster and someone or somthing goes to 2MB...

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

Bob wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:35:03 +1300, "~misfit~"
> <misfit61nz@hooya.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>>> AT wrote:
>>>> as above.
>>>
>>> UBS is Telecoms wholesales product that they sell to ISP's, to
>>> market as they will, and was meant to be "unlimited", but Telecom
>>> have chucked in some limitations, like "no active promotion of
>>> static IPs" and "10Gbyte average usage across all users of each ISP"
>>>
>>> Basically they are both DSL, and essencially the same thing to the
>>> end user, a 256kbit DSL account.
>>>
>>> Others will no doubt be able to point out other
>>> differences/similarities.
>>
>> There is a whisper of Telecom deliberately nerfing UBS to make it
>> unsuitable for gaming. (Thus keeping customers for themselves) When
>> I first got it it was atrocious. Now it's better, the ping-times are
>> around 140% of what they were on Jetstream. However, every few
>> minutes there are unbelievable lag-spikes, making on-line gaming a
>> real chore. I have spoken to people a round the world and other
>> NZers accessing the same server from non-UBS lines and nobody else
>> is having these problems.
>>
>> Ping times aren't bad though, so sending copies of the 'ping' output
>> or 'tracert' to the ISP achieves nothing. It's the unexplained (and
>> hard to 'document') lag-spikes that are the problem.
>
> I am getting the same thing and it is ****ing off my son..
>
> In counter strike the ping has gone from 60 - 80ms average
> (jetstream128) to 120 - 160ms average (Bliink 256)??
>
> This is the ping to local CS servers..

So it's even happening on local servers too? The person who told me that
Telecom may be deliberately nerfing the UBS thing is someone who may
actually know a thing or two so it's not a fictional scenario. How have we,
a democracy, put ourselves in a position where a single company can hold a
significant portion of the population to ransom? Currently it looks like, if
you want to play games on-line and can't get Wired Country or 'cable' (Woosh
latency is too high is my understanding) then you have no choice but to deal
directly with Telecom/Xtra or someone on-selling their product. This is a
worse situation than pre-UBS, at least then you didn't have a choice (if you
know what I mean) I went from Jetstream to UBS and now my gameplaying
experience is an exercise in frustration rather than the stress-relieving
experience it used to be. I don't "do" TV, I play games on-line and, since
UBS, I'm ****ed.

> help desk person had no idea, but told story of it is all the new
> users coming on to bliink and should get better round mid Jan when
> things will get faster and someone or somthing goes to 2MB...

Yeah, excuses excuses. Always with the God-damned excuses. In the meantime
they're still taking my bloody money. By proxy, but it's still going to
Telecom indirectly.

Bastards. Bruce, you got a working cruise-missile handy? I'm sure I've seen
a big building with "Telecom" in big, neon lights on it in Auckland
somewhere, will someone with a GPS give us a fix please? Or in Wellington,
wherever Theresa's office is.
--
~misfit~

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

Bob wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 18:35:03 +1300, "~misfit~"
> <misfit61nz@hooya.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>>> AT wrote:
>>>> as above.
>>>
>>> UBS is Telecoms wholesales product that they sell to ISP's, to
>>> market as they will, and was meant to be "unlimited", but Telecom
>>> have chucked in some limitations, like "no active promotion of
>>> static IPs" and "10Gbyte average usage across all users of each ISP"
>>>
>>> Basically they are both DSL, and essencially the same thing to the
>>> end user, a 256kbit DSL account.
>>>
>>> Others will no doubt be able to point out other
>>> differences/similarities.
>>
>> There is a whisper of Telecom deliberately nerfing UBS to make it
>> unsuitable for gaming. (Thus keeping customers for themselves) When
>> I first got it it was atrocious. Now it's better, the ping-times are
>> around 140% of what they were on Jetstream. However, every few
>> minutes there are unbelievable lag-spikes, making on-line gaming a
>> real chore. I have spoken to people a round the world and other
>> NZers accessing the same server from non-UBS lines and nobody else
>> is having these problems.
>>
>> Ping times aren't bad though, so sending copies of the 'ping' output
>> or 'tracert' to the ISP achieves nothing. It's the unexplained (and
>> hard to 'document') lag-spikes that are the problem.
>
> I am getting the same thing and it is ****ing off my son..
>
> In counter strike the ping has gone from 60 - 80ms average
> (jetstream128) to 120 - 160ms average (Bliink 256)??
>
> This is the ping to local CS servers..

So it's even happening on local servers too? The person who told me that
Telecom may be deliberately nerfing the UBS thing is someone who may
actually know a thing or two so it's not a fictional scenario. How have we,
a democracy, put ourselves in a position where a single company can hold a
significant portion of the population to ransom? Currently it looks like, if
you want to play games on-line and can't get Wired Country or 'cable' (Woosh
latency is too high is my understanding) then you have no choice but to deal
directly with Telecom/Xtra or someone on-selling their product. This is a
worse situation than pre-UBS, at least then you didn't have a choice (if you
know what I mean) I went from Jetstream to UBS and now my gameplaying
experience is an exercise in frustration rather than the stress-relieving
experience it used to be. I don't "do" TV, I play games on-line and, since
UBS, I'm ****ed.

> help desk person had no idea, but told story of it is all the new
> users coming on to bliink and should get better round mid Jan when
> things will get faster and someone or somthing goes to 2MB...

Yeah, excuses excuses. Always with the God-damned excuses. In the meantime
they're still taking my bloody money. By proxy, but it's still going to
Telecom indirectly.

Bastards. Bruce, you got a working cruise-missile handy? I'm sure I've seen
a big building with "Telecom" in big, neon lights on it in Auckland
somewhere, will someone with a GPS give us a fix please? Or in Wellington,
wherever Theresa's office is.
--
~misfit~

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

~misfit~ wrote:
> I went from Jetstream to UBS and now my gameplaying
> experience is an exercise in frustration rather than the stress-relieving
> experience it used to be. I don't "do" TV, I play games on-line and, since
> UBS, I'm ****ed.

go back to Jet Stream then.. there is always an option.

Re: anyone can explain to me about UBS and non-UBS?
 

~misfit~ wrote:
> I went from Jetstream to UBS and now my gameplaying
> experience is an exercise in frustration rather than the stress-relieving
> experience it used to be. I don't "do" TV, I play games on-line and, since
> UBS, I'm ****ed.

go back to Jet Stream then.. there is always an option.