«

Torrents @ 12kB/s
Emule @ 10.6kB/s
Web Browsing at a absolute standstill.

'As fast as your line will allow'.


Guess I needn't worry about exceeding the 600mb during the busy hours.

canon paora wrote:
> Torrents @ 12kB/s
> Emule @ 10.6kB/s
> Web Browsing at a absolute standstill.
>
> 'As fast as your line will allow'.
>
>
> Guess I needn't worry about exceeding the 600mb during the busy hours.

Just wondering......is your IP address 125.*.*.* (the mythical sinbin
which, supposedly, no longer exists) or the usual xtra 202.*.*.* or
222.*.*.*

125.*.*.* is "supposedly" mercilessly throttled 24/7

Regards
Miguel

Miguel wrote:

> 125.*.*.* (the mythical sinbin
> which, supposedly, no longer exists)

> 125.*.*.* is "supposedly" mercilessly throttled 24/7


Sorry....just to clarify my post.

125.*.*.* addresses do exist on xtra. The 24/7 throttling-sinbin is the
mythical part. It's only meant to be from 4pm to midnight.

But from what I hear 24/7 throttling of 125.*.*.* is alive and well.

Regards
Miguel

Miguel wrote:
> Miguel wrote:
>
> > 125.*.*.* (the mythical sinbin
> > which, supposedly, no longer exists)
>
> > 125.*.*.* is "supposedly" mercilessly throttled 24/7
>
>
> Sorry....just to clarify my post.
>
> 125.*.*.* addresses do exist on xtra. The 24/7 throttling-sinbin is
> the mythical part. It's only meant to be from 4pm to midnight.
>
> But from what I hear 24/7 throttling of 125.*.*.* is alive and well.

Then you hear correctly Miguel. I've been fastidious about not downloading
more than, at the most, 200MB between the hours of 4 - 12pm. However, today
after restarting a choked Azureus, I notice torrents really slow. I saw your
post, checked my IP, and, sure enough 125.*.*.*.

When I first rang Actrix to complain about my Go Large connection I told the
guy that I wasn't downloading anything other than newsgroups webpages and
email during those hours. He said that, word on the street is it doesn't
matter *when* you download, if you are a heavy user, even if it's outside
the hours of 4 - 12pm, you get sin-binned. Seems I have. I thought that
I was supposed to get a warning? That's what the T&Cs say.

I only got just over 100MB overnight and Azureus is topping out, on
well-seeded torrents, at 25kB/s (If my connection stays up long enough for
it to climb that high).

Woot!! I didn't get disconnected while typing this!
--
Shaun.

Miguel <> wrote:

> Miguel wrote:
>
> > 125.*.*.* (the mythical sinbin
> > which, supposedly, no longer exists)
>
> > 125.*.*.* is "supposedly" mercilessly throttled 24/7
>
> Sorry....just to clarify my post.
>
> 125.*.*.* addresses do exist on xtra. The 24/7 throttling-sinbin is the
> mythical part. It's only meant to be from 4pm to midnight.

Some addresses within 125.*.*.* are used by the Go Large plan. I have an
address in that range normally, and I'm on a Go Large plan with Actrix
(Telecom actually implements the service, Actrix is just on-selling it).

I expect that the sinbin has distinct addresses but as far as I know
I've never been in it so I can't tell you what range it might be.

Right now I have a 125.236.*.* address and I'm getting download speeds
from a test site in Auckland of about 2.6 Mbps, even though my flatmate
is doing something slow but steady at the same time.

I expect the sinbin would be seriously throttled, so this means
125.*.*.* is not sufficient to identify the sinbin, or your information
about this being the address range is wrong.

> But from what I hear 24/7 throttling of 125.*.*.* is alive and well.

Since switching to Go Large, I have never seen a download faster than
about 350 KB per second (about 2.8 Mbps), just doing simple FTP or HTTP
transfers from NZ-hosted servers. The raw line speed reported by my
modem is about 4.7 Mbps.

I expect this performance limit is due to insufficient bandwidth into my
exchange, combined with limited bandwidth allocated to Go Large
customers (especially for international traffic).

At busy times it can be shockingly bad even for web browsing.

I'm intending to try switching to a full speed standard plan for a
month, just to see what kind of performance is possible on my line.

I was on 2M/128 before Go Large, and the Go Large plan is cheaper,
allows higher speed for downloads (if I'm lucky) and more traffic, at
the expense of really bad performance some of the time.

--
David Empson

David Empson wrote:
> Miguel <> wrote:
>
> > Miguel wrote:
> >
> > > 125.*.*.* (the mythical sinbin
> > > which, supposedly, no longer exists)
> >
> > > 125.*.*.* is "supposedly" mercilessly throttled 24/7
> >
> > Sorry....just to clarify my post.
> >
> > 125.*.*.* addresses do exist on xtra. The 24/7 throttling-sinbin is
> > the mythical part. It's only meant to be from 4pm to midnight.
>
> Some addresses within 125.*.*.* are used by the Go Large plan. I have
> an address in that range normally, and I'm on a Go Large plan with
> Actrix (Telecom actually implements the service, Actrix is just
> on-selling it).
>
> I expect that the sinbin has distinct addresses but as far as I know
> I've never been in it so I can't tell you what range it might be.
>
> Right now I have a 125.236.*.* address and I'm getting download speeds
> from a test site in Auckland of about 2.6 Mbps, even though my
> flatmate is doing something slow but steady at the same time.
>
> I expect the sinbin would be seriously throttled, so this means
> 125.*.*.* is not sufficient to identify the sinbin, or your
> information about this being the address range is wrong.
>
> > But from what I hear 24/7 throttling of 125.*.*.* is alive and well.
>
> Since switching to Go Large, I have never seen a download faster than
> about 350 KB per second (about 2.8 Mbps), just doing simple FTP or
> HTTP transfers from NZ-hosted servers. The raw line speed reported by
> my modem is about 4.7 Mbps.
>
> I expect this performance limit is due to insufficient bandwidth into
> my exchange, combined with limited bandwidth allocated to Go Large
> customers (especially for international traffic).
>
> At busy times it can be shockingly bad even for web browsing.
>
> I'm intending to try switching to a full speed standard plan for a
> month, just to see what kind of performance is possible on my line.
>
> I was on 2M/128 before Go Large, and the Go Large plan is cheaper,
> allows higher speed for downloads (if I'm lucky) and more traffic, at
> the expense of really bad performance some of the time.

David, from what I can gather, the 125.*.*.* range of IPs are packet-sniffed
and shaped far moreso than the 22x.*.*.* range. Also, they are lower
priority.

For my first few weeks on Go Large, when it was working well and I was in
the 22x.*.*.* IP range, I managed to get torrent speeds up to around 3M from
well-seeded private trackers (in the wee hours) and general downloads (in
bursts, like Sun Java updates) around the 4M mark. Faster than the test
sites told me my line was capable of.

However, since about 5 days ago, I've noticed my torrents slowing to a
(<256kbps) crawl and the whole connection is *very* unresponsive. Also I've
noticed my IP is now in the 125 range. Perhaps one of your flatmates has
been using p2p? It seems simply using p2p apps at any time of the day will
get you in the 125 sin-bin with no warning. From what little Actrix have
been able to glean from experience with Go Large (as Xtra isn't sticking to
the published T&C and isn't talking either), the warning if you use more
than 700MB consistantly between 4 - 12pm is a myth.

I've studiously stopped all downloading during this period (other than
automatic scheduled AV downloads) and only browse or check email/read
newsgroups with maybe an attempt at on-line game playing during the 'no-fly'
period. I seriously doubt I've ever used more than 200MB in that period
*max*, and then only once. However, here I am, with a connection (drop-outs
aside for now) that is only performing at 256kbps level, other than the odd
burst.

(I currently have a torrent running at around 28kB/s and I can't get
newsgroups, email or a webpage unless I stop Azureus. Also Gmail notifier
keeps telling me it can't connect to server while Azureus is running. This
is max speed?)

As I posted last night, due to Actrix' urging, I'm going to give it a few
more days. If it doesn't come right then I guess I'll have to tighten the
belt (I've commited the $20/month I've been saving, a new fridge on HP) and
go back to Cyberjet 2M/128/1GB.

Cheers, (Connection just dropped, will send in a minute)
--
Shaun.

Hello David....

>David Empson wrote:
>
> I expect the sinbin would be seriously throttled, so this means
> [...] your information about this being the address range is wrong.
>
More than likely. I'm only relaying what I'd previously read on another
board.

> Right now I have a 125.236.*.* address and I'm getting download speeds
> from a test site in Auckland of about 2.6 Mbps,

I've been 125.*.*.* for the last two weeks and I can get speeds from
http://speedtest.actrix.co.nz and http://www.speedtest.net anywhere
between 1.5MB/s and 4.2 MB/s from their NZ servers. From elsewhere (UK,
USA) it's been as low as .2MB/s. Never higher than 2MB/s

But as I'm sure you know, speedtests aren't the real (cyber) world.
Text based websites (e.g google groups, eztv) will load reasonably well
for me but any sites involving images, flash etc (ANZ, SciFi.com) are,
more often than not, pretty painful to watch load. Little better than
dial-up.

> Since switching to Go Large, I have never seen a download faster than
> about 350 KB per second (about 2.8 Mbps)

I've had operating system updates from Palmerston North come down at
over 400KB/s.

And I've had torrents with a hundred-plus seeds never get above 4 KB/s.


That's why I don't mind spreading a rumour that Xtra/Telecom is
constantly throttling p2p and selectively throttling http.

I keep an eye on my IP and the big change in quality came when I moved
from a 22?.*.*.* address to a 125.*.*.* address. I'm just reporting
from personal experience.

> about 350 KB per second (about 2.8 Mbps)

Isn't 350KB/s the same as 3.5 MB/s. They're both just abbreviations,
not actual numbers.....just curious.

>I have a temporary financial constraint because of a minimum term
>contract with Actrix

That must be a hell of a minimum term contract cos haven't you been
with Actrix since the early nineties

> I was on 2M/128 before Go Large, and the Go Large plan is cheaper,
> allows higher speed for downloads (if I'm lucky) and more traffic, at
> the expense of really bad performance some of the time.
>

That's a pretty accurate summing up.

Yesterday my stats were 1535 MB downloaded, 636 MB uploaded, Daily
Usage total of 2171 MB. By any stretch of the imagination that's good
value for $1.64 a day

Regards
Miguel

Hi Shaun...

>~misfit~ wrote:
>
> David, from what I can gather, the 125.*.*.* range of IPs are packet-sniffed
> and shaped far moreso than the 22x.*.*.* range. Also, they are lower
> priority.
>

That's pretty much what I understood from what I'd heard and read. And
that's pretty much what seems to be happening with my connection.

> I've commited the $20/month I've been saving, a new fridge on HP

I didn't know HP made fridges

Regards
Miguel

Miguel wrote:


Hey there Miguel,

> > ~misfit~ wrote:
> >
> > David, from what I can gather, the 125.*.*.* range of IPs are
> > packet-sniffed and shaped far moreso than the 22x.*.*.* range.
> > Also, they are lower priority.
> >
>
> That's pretty much what I understood from what I'd heard and read. And
> that's pretty much what seems to be happening with my connection.

That's also what the Actrix guys told me. They're really ****ed that one of
their office test connections has been put in the 125 pool considering that
they've pretty much not used it. They're at a loss as to how this whole Go
Large thing works. It's certainly not being run as advertised, especially re
the warnings, 4 - 12pm period only limited etc....

Since I've been on 125, torrent speeds suck, websites are generally sluggish
and I have trouble if more than one programme is trying to download
simultaneously. However, at certain times I get fast downloads. My last Java
update was lightning fast (>4M for 2 seconds) but my last PC-cillin one
crawled and had to be re-started twice as my connection dropped
mid-download.

> > I've commited the $20/month I've been saving, a new fridge on HP
>
> I didn't know HP made fridges

Heh! Smart-arse. HP (in this case) = Hire Purchase. It's a F&P.

Cheers,
--
Shaun.

On 2006-12-04, Miguel <> wrote:
>
>> about 350 KB per second (about 2.8 Mbps)
>
> Isn't 350KB/s the same as 3.5 MB/s.


only if asynchronous... and modems haven't relied on
asynchronous tranmission for decades.

350 000 bytes is exactly 2 800 000 bits.

> They're both just abbreviations, not actual numbers.....just curious.

not sure what you mean by "actual number"


Bye.
Jasen