«

Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Graham. chose
the tried and tested strategy of:

> the 1st 24 hour graph is intresting, but not very encouraging
> http://bbbbbbmm.netfirms.com/f8lure.jpg

You are indeed a master of understatement!

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
20:31:04 up 1 day, 22:26, 6 users, load average: 0.26, 0.19, 0.38
"I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
-- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010

In article <i9vomv$r1l$>, Daniel Smith
<> scribeth thus
>On 23/10/10 13:00, Nick wrote:
>> On 23/10/2010 12:26, tony sayer wrote:
>>> In article<4cc2b0bb$0$1568$c3e8da3$ aweb.com>, Nick
>>> <> scribeth thus
>>>> On 21/10/2010 16:20, KevinSmith wrote:
>>>>> Hi Tony
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, that's a good point about Virgin cable. When they offer a service
>>>>> speed it's not the dreaded "up to 24Mbs" it really is going to be the
>>>>> speed of the line.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That certainly wasn't the case when I tried VM 20Mb/s service a couple
>>>> of years ago. Heavily congested in the evening with single connection
>>>> speeds dropping as low as 1Mb/s.
>>>
>>> Was that from a Virgin network line i.e. delivered by co-axial cable, or
>>> virgin subbing out to BT over ADSL?..
>>>
>>
>> It was VM cable not the BT based ADSL service. The ThinkBroadband
>> speedtest would give 19Mb in the morning and as low as 1Mb at 7.00pm.
>> Zen gave a constant 4Mb on the same test. So I know it was due to the VM
>> side not a problem with the test (at least up to 4Mb)
>>
>> I should also make clear the reference to single connection speed. If I
>> were to use enough connections, e.g. multiple users, multi-thread
>> download manager, bittorrent, etc I could always achieve close to 20Mb
>> with VM, even at heavily congested times.
>>
>> I personally came to the conclusion that my internet usage was dominated
>> by applications that used single connections and that the 4Mb ADSL line
>> was slightly superior for this type of use. If I had been more
>> interested in heavy downloading via mutithread/multiconnection apps VM
>> would have won hands down.
>>
>>
>>
>
>I used VM coax for 1 year at 10M
>
>in quiet times i got 10M down 1M up with a latancy of about 120ms
>
>at the wost of the congestion (which was most of the time ) i got 10M
>down 0.5M up with 14000ms latancy (yes thats right a whole 14 seconds of
>latancy)!
>
>VM is fine if nobody else in your area uses, it, but if they do then avoid!

Well we're on the Cambridge cable as was system and never experienced
anything like that sort of latency!.

Just wonder if its area dependent sometimes between various bits of the
VM network all with different owners originally?....
--
Tony Sayer

On 24/10/10 21:21, tony sayer wrote:
> In article <i9vomv$r1l$>, Daniel Smith
> <> scribeth thus
>> On 23/10/10 13:00, Nick wrote:
>>> On 23/10/2010 12:26, tony sayer wrote:
>>>> In article<4cc2b0bb$0$1568$c3e8da3$ aweb.com>, Nick
>>>> <> scribeth thus
>>>>> On 21/10/2010 16:20, KevinSmith wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Tony
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, that's a good point about Virgin cable. When they offer a service
>>>>>> speed it's not the dreaded "up to 24Mbs" it really is going to be the
>>>>>> speed of the line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That certainly wasn't the case when I tried VM 20Mb/s service a couple
>>>>> of years ago. Heavily congested in the evening with single connection
>>>>> speeds dropping as low as 1Mb/s.
>>>>
>>>> Was that from a Virgin network line i.e. delivered by co-axial cable, or
>>>> virgin subbing out to BT over ADSL?..
>>>>
>>>
>>> It was VM cable not the BT based ADSL service. The ThinkBroadband
>>> speedtest would give 19Mb in the morning and as low as 1Mb at 7.00pm.
>>> Zen gave a constant 4Mb on the same test. So I know it was due to the VM
>>> side not a problem with the test (at least up to 4Mb)
>>>
>>> I should also make clear the reference to single connection speed. If I
>>> were to use enough connections, e.g. multiple users, multi-thread
>>> download manager, bittorrent, etc I could always achieve close to 20Mb
>>> with VM, even at heavily congested times.
>>>
>>> I personally came to the conclusion that my internet usage was dominated
>>> by applications that used single connections and that the 4Mb ADSL line
>>> was slightly superior for this type of use. If I had been more
>>> interested in heavy downloading via mutithread/multiconnection apps VM
>>> would have won hands down.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I used VM coax for 1 year at 10M
>>
>> in quiet times i got 10M down 1M up with a latancy of about 120ms
>>
>> at the wost of the congestion (which was most of the time ) i got 10M
>> down 0.5M up with 14000ms latancy (yes thats right a whole 14 seconds of
>> latancy)!
>>
>> VM is fine if nobody else in your area uses, it, but if they do then avoid!
>
> Well we're on the Cambridge cable as was system and never experienced
> anything like that sort of latency!.
>
> Just wonder if its area dependent sometimes between various bits of the
> VM network all with different owners originally?....

I think it had more to do with me living on a street with over 50%
student houses most of which using VM.
but this being originally a nynexx area may have somthing to do with it

> I think it had more to do with me living on a street with over 50%
> student houses most of which using VM.
> but this being originally a nynexx area may have somthing to do with it

Oh dear, that's exactly what I advised my son to sign up at his digs in Liverpool L7

Note the packet loss on a typical weekday

http://bbbbbbmm.netfirms.com/monday.jpg

As a control, I am also monitoring a router on the next consecutive IP, here is the same period

http://bbbbbbmm.netfirms.com/control.jpg

I have absolutely no idea where this router is geographically or if it has any significance for my son's case
There are 5 of them in the house, on my recommendation they went for the XXL 50Mb/s product.
Speed test results vary much more than my ADSL2+ for example.

The fastest I have seen is 4 or 5Mb/s down and almost 1Mb/s up, but even then the packet-loss
makes VoIP break up etc.

At its worst, the sub-dialup speed is so slow the thinkbroadband and speedtest .net checkers refuse to load.

My strong suspicion is if he had taken the 10Mb/s service instead his connection would be no worse. In a word ripoff.

Any ideas about how I should tackle VM about this?

What I might do is set up an 0151 Sipgate voicemail line and leaflet the entire street (it's not very long)
Something on the lines of "Are you being ripped of by Virgin Media? Call this number with your experience"

Oh I nearly forgot, when reported , VM claim they know about the issue and it will be fixed in about a week.
Well that's what they say, but if, heaven forefend, they are not telling the whole truth, I thought a a plan B might be useful.



--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Graham. chose
the tried and tested strategy of:

> I have absolutely no idea where this router is geographically

The 'know' bit in the reverse DNS for the IP is a geographic indicator. Eg,
'gate' for Gateshead, 'newy' for New York [no, the one in North Tyneside],
'uddi' for Uddingston, etc.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
20:36:20 up 4 days, 22:31, 6 users, load average: 0.12, 0.15, 0.07
"I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
-- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010