Telecom BigTime "traffic shaping"

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by John Little, Dec 8, 2009.

  1. John Little

    John Little Guest

    Hi all

    I posted here about my troubles with the teenagers blowing the data
    cap. Well, I gave in and have switched plans to Telecom's BigTime,
    $10 more a month with no cap but with "traffic shaping" for "p2p"
    applications.

    Now I'm finding package downloads and updates from
    nz.archive.ubuntu.com slow, 10 to 15 kB/s. Is this the result of the
    "traffic shaping",
    or are others getting this speed from there?

    Regards, John
    John Little, Dec 8, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Little

    Carnations Guest

    On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:36:47 -0800, John Little wrote:

    > Hi all
    >
    > I posted here about my troubles with the teenagers blowing the data cap.
    > Well, I gave in and have switched plans to Telecom's BigTime, $10 more
    > a month with no cap but with "traffic shaping" for "p2p" applications.
    >
    > Now I'm finding package downloads and updates from nz.archive.ubuntu.com
    > slow, 10 to 15 kB/s. Is this the result of the "traffic shaping",
    > or are others getting this speed from there?
    >
    > Regards, John


    I read in the paper today that Telecom is shaping its "BigTime" plan at any time for any sort of traffic.


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Carnations, Dec 8, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John Little

    AD. Guest

    On Dec 9, 9:27 am, "geoff" <> wrote:
    > John Little wrote:
    > > Now I'm finding package downloads and updates from
    > > nz.archive.ubuntu.com slow, 10 to 15 kB/s.  Is this the result of the
    > > "traffic shaping",
    > > or are others getting this speed from there?

    >
    > It's usual to talk b/s , not B/s in relation to serial data communications.
    > But that seems pretty slow, even for Go Large era.  More likely the server.


    It isn't the server. I can max out my works 25Mb/s Citylink connection
    with that server (it is Citylinks FTP server) - ie we can get a
    sustained 3.1 MB/s download from there.

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Dec 8, 2009
    #3
  4. John Little

    John Little Guest

    On Dec 9, 11:43 am, "AD." <> wrote:

    > It isn't the server. I can max out my works 25Mb/s Citylink connection
    > with that server (it is Citylinks FTP server) - ie we can get a
    > sustained 3.1 MB/s download from there.


    Thanks for that. After four hours (loading 200 MB) the router
    overheated with about 10 MB to go. On reconnecting, the remainder
    came down at 300-400 kB/s. It seems that the "shape" was set for the
    "connection", perhaps based on load at that time, which persisted for
    four hours.

    IMO, it stinks that:
    - Telecom "shapes" software updates.
    - Telecom "shapes" local traffic. IIUC Telecom won't peer with
    Citylink so the traffic is effectively not local, but that's no
    excuse, they should, that stinks as well.

    Regards, John
    John Little, Dec 9, 2009
    #4
  5. John Little

    John Little Guest

    On Dec 9, 9:27 am, "geoff" <> wrote:

    > It's usual to talk b/s , not B/s in relation to serial data communications.


    I disagree. (I reported kB/s because that's what Synaptic told me.)
    I think that as one moves up the layers, it is more natural and much
    more useful to use B/s, rather than b/s, which is more low level.
    Even in the early days with dial-up Netscape would report B/s; indeed,
    it would be difficult for a high level tool to know what bit overheads
    apply lower down and so translate bytes to bits.

    How would you translate 10 kB/s to b/s? One can't just multiply by 8.

    Regards, John
    John Little, Dec 9, 2009
    #5
  6. John Little

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarwebs John Little wrote:
    > On Dec 9, 11:43 am, "AD." <> wrote:
    >
    >> It isn't the server. I can max out my works 25Mb/s Citylink
    >> connection with that server (it is Citylinks FTP server) - ie we can
    >> get a sustained 3.1 MB/s download from there.

    >
    > Thanks for that. After four hours (loading 200 MB) the router
    > overheated with about 10 MB to go. On reconnecting, the remainder
    > came down at 300-400 kB/s. It seems that the "shape" was set for the
    > "connection", perhaps based on load at that time, which persisted for
    > four hours.


    Nah, it's shaped my IP, which, as you have a dynamic IP, changed when you
    disconnected and reconnected.

    Perhaps there's a a lesson there...
    --
    Shaun.

    "Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
    warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.

    > IMO, it stinks that:
    > - Telecom "shapes" software updates.
    > - Telecom "shapes" local traffic. IIUC Telecom won't peer with
    > Citylink so the traffic is effectively not local, but that's no
    > excuse, they should, that stinks as well.
    >
    > Regards, John
    ~misfit~, Dec 9, 2009
    #6
  7. John Little

    Gordon Guest

    On 2009-12-08, Carnations <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:36:47 -0800, John Little wrote:
    >
    >> Hi all
    >>
    >> I posted here about my troubles with the teenagers blowing the data cap.
    >> Well, I gave in and have switched plans to Telecom's BigTime, $10 more
    >> a month with no cap but with "traffic shaping" for "p2p" applications.
    >>
    >> Now I'm finding package downloads and updates from nz.archive.ubuntu.com
    >> slow, 10 to 15 kB/s. Is this the result of the "traffic shaping",
    >> or are others getting this speed from there?
    >>
    >> Regards, John

    >
    > I read in the paper today that Telecom is shaping its "BigTime" plan at any time for any sort of traffic.
    >
    >

    Penny to a pound it is not shaping the TiVo traffic
    Gordon, Dec 9, 2009
    #7
  8. John Little

    Enkidu Guest

    John Little wrote:
    > On Dec 9, 11:43 am, "AD." <> wrote:
    >
    >> It isn't the server. I can max out my works 25Mb/s Citylink connection
    >> with that server (it is Citylinks FTP server) - ie we can get a
    >> sustained 3.1 MB/s download from there.

    >
    > Thanks for that. After four hours (loading 200 MB) the router
    > overheated with about 10 MB to go. On reconnecting, the remainder
    > came down at 300-400 kB/s. It seems that the "shape" was set for the
    > "connection", perhaps based on load at that time, which persisted for
    > four hours.
    >

    I don't believe that they could do it that way. TCP/IP doesn't contain
    any session info (it's 'stateless') so the router that is doing the
    shaping would have to maintain the state info somehow, and IMO that's
    unlikely to be the case.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
    the same old personalities show through.
    Enkidu, Dec 9, 2009
    #8
  9. John Little

    AD. Guest

    On Dec 9, 4:28 pm, John Little <> wrote:
    > On Dec 9, 9:27 am, "geoff" <> wrote:
    >
    > > It's usual to talk b/s , not B/s in relation to serial data communications.

    >
    > I disagree.  (I reported kB/s because that's what Synaptic told me.)
    > I think that as one moves up the layers, it is more natural and much
    > more useful to use B/s, rather than b/s, which is more low level.
    > Even in the early days with dial-up Netscape would report B/s; indeed,
    > it would be difficult for a high level tool to know what bit overheads
    > apply lower down and so translate bytes to bits.


    Yeah, IMO connections should be measured in b/s but downloads are best
    measured with B/s.

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Dec 9, 2009
    #9
  10. John Little

    John Little Guest

    On Dec 9, 7:48 pm, Enkidu <> wrote:

    > I don't believe that they could do it that way. TCP/IP doesn't contain
    > any session info (it's 'stateless')


    Yeah, that's why I put quotes on the word "connection", because
    clearly it's not TCP connections. I'm imagining it's something
    related to the ADSL connection.

    >so the router that is doing the
    > shaping would have to maintain the state info somehow, and IMO that's
    > unlikely to be the case.


    Other internet traffic at the same time, by myself and other members
    of the family, seemed to be affected by the download, which was using
    only a small fraction of the ADSL line, which speed tested at 8 Mb/s
    after ADSL2 went in.

    Regards, John
    John Little, Dec 9, 2009
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kenny D
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    633
    Remien, Carsten
    Dec 5, 2003
  2. Hypno999

    traffic-shaping limit ftp traffic

    Hypno999, Oct 7, 2005, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,611
  3. Skybuck Flying
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    4,803
    Skybuck Flying
    Jan 19, 2006
  4. Nova
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    933
    ~misfit~
    Mar 20, 2006
  5. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    668
    Ios2012
    Oct 4, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page