Slashdot Mirror


ISPs Offer Faster Speeds, Why Don't We Get Them?

Ron Williams asks: "I'm infuriated every time I see that companies are raising their speeds when they can't maintain their current speeds. Here's my biggest issue: my grandmother signed up for the 3Mbps DSL plan through Verizon, however a speed test said she was only getting 750Kbps. Why pay for the extra bandwidth when she's not getting it? She downgraded to the 768K plan expecting to still have 750K. Wrong, instead her speed dropped to 300K. So, how about instead of companies constantly claiming to increase their speeds, they get their actual speeds correct. Comcast has done the same thing, I had their 6Mbps plan at one point, I got 2.5Mbps usually and sometimes 3Mbps, so they're all doing the same thing. In closing, with all these speed increases, why is my Internet not getting faster?" What practices and tools do you use to test your bandwidth speed and how have you approached your ISP when the performance repeatedly fell short of your expectations? One thing to note is that you'll never get the top speed advertised for any connection due to transmission overhead; even so, you should be able to get close (within about 10-20%). Also, ISPs oversell their bandwidth, so if you run your speed tests when other customers are using their connection, you will notice the performance hit.

43 of 688 comments (clear)

  1. No surprise here move along by rodgster · · Score: 3, Informative

    Last time I checked, you get no SLA (Service Level Agreement) with consumer DSL or cable Internet accounts. To the best of my knowledge you get no SLA with commercial DSL or cable accounts either (at least I don't and don't know of anyone who does). You have to buck up and pay for T or Frame or OC lines before you get an SLA.

    Yes they oversell their capacity. Some places it isn't too bad (my connection), sometimes it becomes as slow as dial-up. I'd vote with my dollars appropriately.

    --
    Who will guard the guards?
    1. Re:No surprise here move along by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'd vote with my dollars appropriately.

      Easy to do if you're in a broadband-competitive area (I am, and I have Comcast, and if things aren't working to my satisfaction I call them up and say the magic word "Speakeasy".) I know people that only have one option for broadband, and things can get a mite more difficult (I'm not picking on Comcast alone, seems like most broadband providers are only as co-operative as they have to be in a particular service area.)

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:No surprise here move along by Flexagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ... you get no SLA...

      My cable connection (Comcast) is the same, and specifically includes a disclaimer that no guarantee is made that I will actually receive the rated throughput.

      In practice, it blazes in the off-hours, sludges out during prime time. And the most noticable effect when it's bad is latency, not throughput.

    3. Re:No surprise here move along by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My cable connection (Comcast) is the same, and specifically includes a disclaimer that no guarantee is made that I will actually receive the rated throughput.

      Doesn't matter. If they never give you the speed you pay for, it's fraud. Otherwise, why wouldn't they sell you 12M internet?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    4. Re:No surprise here move along by rmerry72 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Is if fraud when hard drive companies sell you a "250GB" HDD?

      Well, no, actually. A 250MB hard drive is exactly that: 250,000,000,000 bytes. That's the same definition of 1GB (ie 1,000,000,000 bytes) that ALL hard drive manufacturers use, and have been for quite a while. Most will actually state x,000,000,000 bytes. So its fair, and you're are getting what you pay for. It's the same thing here, you pick the description that makes you look the best.

      Only if that description is acturate; Otherwise its fraud. Marketting is about putting the best spin on what you've got to sell. Saying your selling something your not is fraud. And marketing in general strays very close or a touch over the line.

      With bandwidith it is reasonable to expect some loss, but you should be able to get at least 90% most times, and then deduct network and traffic overheads. If your only getting 25% of the bandwidth delivered that's a cause for suspictions of being ripped off.

      Overselling is a poor excuse, one used by airlines all the time. If I buy a seat on a flight I expect to get one - even if everybody else they have sold a seat to does as well.

      --
      We do not inherit the Earth from our parents. We borrow it from our children.
    5. Re:No surprise here move along by The_Mr_Flibble · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well I don't know what it's like over in the states but over here (uk) there's a little something the providers don't make a large fuss about and that's the contention ratio
      and in some cases it's really bad (something like 40:1 on a standard home dsl) so if you have a 2 meg adsl so if you only get connection speeds of 100kbs there isn't much the provider will do about it (yes I have seen this happen with a certain large provider over here who would not do anything because it was indeed in range)

      So have a look at the contract you signed for your dsl and see what sort of ratio they try to give you.

      If you have a problem with contention ratio then you may need to pay a bit more for say business broadband which has a lot lower contention ratio.

      btw over here if say you have a 1mb adsl and you pay £20 a month for it and all your traffic goes over transit connections (which isps have to pay per mb for) and you use that 1 mb constantly the isp will loose a lot of cash as they will be paying about £30 a meg for the transit then they still have to pay the cost of the dsl connection as well.

      In conclusion read the contract!

    6. Re:No surprise here move along by keraneuology · · Score: 3, Interesting
      After the promotional period Comcast said they were doubling my rate to just under $65/month. I spoke with three different 800-operators and sent an email to corporate asking them to reconsider and they refused. A couple of them told me outright that if I really wanted to switch to DSL ($17.99/month vs $6x.00/month) I should go for it, but that they do not consider price reductions under any circumstances.

      Bye bye, Comcast.

      --
      If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
  2. my dsl, my test... by yagu · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yeah I wonder about that, I'm supposed to have DSL (Verizon), always suspected it to be a bit slow: here are my test results: download: 783kbs, upload: 138kbs. I don't have my contract here, but that seems slow. I'm moving from this house, or I'd check further into it. (I just checked, I'm paying for the high speed connections, my test results are about 1/3 what "up to" speeds should be...)

    My download speeds feel sluggish, the upload speeds are a little painful. My biggest objection to the upload speed results is they are just barely better than ISDN. WTF?

    (BTW, go here if you want to see what your speeds are... It's a test site to see if your connection speed supports VOIP. Mine BARELY could.)

    1. Re:my dsl, my test... by jdreed1024 · · Score: 4, Informative
      (BTW, go here if you want to see what your speeds are... It's a test site to see if your connection speed supports VOIP. Mine BARELY could.)

      I have 3Mbit down/384k up service (and was getting 3Mbit down and 360k up on their test, and it still told me I couldn't use VoIP with good QoS, yet I use VoIP all the time on my network and get quality equal to or better than my cell phone. It's not clear to me that their test is all that useful - or their metrics are screwed up. If they consider 33 ms ping times bad, I'd like to know where they can find a better residential connection.

      Really though, this whole story is a non-issue. I have yet to see an ad for any residential serviice that doesn't say "speed not guaranteed". The speeds they quote you are always "up to this number", not "you always get this number". For cable it's a shared medium between other users on your head end, so unless you're the only user, you're not going to be able to max out the line. 802.11b is supposed to be 11 Mbit per second, but I rarely get that, because it's divided among the other users of the access point. It doesn't mean Avaya and Enterasys are scamming consumers because their access points don't always give 11Mbit/sec. DSL is very sensitive to your distance from the CO and quality of the wiring, so of course it's not guaranteed. Even a LAN is not guaranteed. For short and medium transfers, I rarely get 100 Mbits out of my local network. These "connection testers" are mostly useless - a better test is to download large amounts of data (BitTorrent, for example) and look at the average throughput.

      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
  3. Not the case for me! by Quick+Sick+Nick · · Score: 3, Funny

    Jesus Christ! Call Whine 11 or something!

    ...Anyway, I have 8 MB Comcast and I am very pleased. I just used http://www.testmy.net/tools/test/d_load.php to measure my connection speed and here is the result:

    :::.. Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 8212 Kbps about 8.21 Mbps (tested with 5983 kB) Download Speed is:: 1002 kB/s Tested From:: http://testmy.net/ (Server 1) Test Time:: 2006/06/01 - 8:12pm Bottom Line:: 143X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 1.02 sec Tested from a 5983 kB file and took 5.969 seconds to complete Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.3) Gecko/20060426 Firefox/1.5.0.3 Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 62.71 % faster than the average for host (comcast.net) Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-YLBMP5VFC

    My download speed really is that fast if I am downloading from a good webserver. And even when I'm not, the bandwidth gets used in bittorrent :)

    Sorry you are having problems....

  4. Municipal Broadband by mysqlrocks · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do what the city I live in did and start your (the citizens) own ISP. I get the speed I pay for on a fiber optic connection. Plus they offer TV and telephone service. Better service, cheaper rates, and it's owned by the people that use it.

    1. Re:Municipal Broadband by mysqlrocks · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's a cooperative?

      No, it's municipal broadband as my subject line said. That means that the city runs it. We, the people, collectively own the assets of the city since we are the voters and the taxpayers and this is a democracy. Since they only provide service within the city, then everyone that is able to receive service owns the network. We "own" it in the same we that we own the parks and other public spaces.

      If I don't like the way the network is run I can vote to change it. Now, you may argue that I can "vote with my dollar" if I am customer of MegaCorp Broadband. The problem with that logic is that not everyone has an equal vote. In a democracy, everyone gets one vote no matter how much money you have. We, the citizens, decided we were tired of getting screwed by MegaCorp Broaband (Adelphia or Verizon as the case may be here and now) and that we would have provide our own service. Now, I can get my Broadband, my electricity (yes, the electric company is run by the city here too), and my water from the city and I can feel confident that I, as a citizen, can have a say in how these services are run regardless of how much money I may have.

  5. Re:Shocking! by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny
    What does gramma need with 3Mbps anyway?!

    Someone's gotta seed the Matlock and Bob Hope torrents.

  6. SLA? by Jordan+Catalano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    SLA? Bullshit. If I buy a car called "Toyota 85MPH Blue Car" it had damned well better not be goverened to 55MPH. "But when you bought the car, the dealer never signed an agreement guaranteeing speed." Bull-shit.

    1. Re:SLA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      SLA? Bullshit. If I buy a car called "Toyota 85MPH Blue Car" it had damned well better not be goverened to 55MPH. "But when you bought the car, the dealer never signed an agreement guaranteeing speed." Bull-shit.
      I don't think anyone is claiming that the ISP is intentionally capping the speed at half the advertised rate (they'd be committing fraud if this was happening) -- instead, they are just overselling their capacity.

      It's more like buying a Ferrari with a top speed of 196mph, and then finding that you can rarely go faster than 60 because other drivers are always in your way.

    2. Re:SLA? by kahanamoku · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, thats is EXACTLY what the post is claiming...

      She downgraded to the 768K plan expecting to still have 750K. Wrong, instead her speed dropped to 300K.

      Using your example, the user has thus now bought a car that only does 60MPH and now magically the traffic has slowed to 30MPH

      --
      ----- Concentrate on promoting more than demoting.
    3. Re:SLA? by batkiwi · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can almost guarantee that if someone is paying for 6mbps ADSL, they are syncing to the DSLAM at 6mbps. Do they guarantee speed XYZ for ABC hops with ### latency? No, THAT would be an SLA.

    4. Re:SLA? by afaik_ianal · · Score: 5, Funny

      Does everything become political?

      You must be new here.

    5. Re:SLA? by LegendLength · · Score: 5, Funny

      Humans: 0, Car analogies: 68294

    6. Re:SLA? by mo^ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I must admit to always thinking that the Car Analogy should be included as a form of Godwin's Law.

      --
      bah!*@%!
    7. Re:SLA? by kclittle · · Score: 4, Funny
      Does everything become political?

      You must be new here.

      Hell, you must be new to the human race :).

      --
      Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
    8. Re:SLA? by avdp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To be fair, you ISP only owns parts of the highway: the on ramp (some might own a bit more than that). I bet you'd find that a bandwidth test against a server in their network would probably report numbers very close to what they're selling you. But there are quite a few bottleneck on the internet, including the bandwidth connection of the website you're trying to reach (including the bandwidth test sites I have seen).

    9. Re:SLA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      >>Hmmm... Shouldn't that be more like Ford's Law?

      How about the Corolla Corollary?

      *rimshot*

    10. Re:SLA? by Associate · · Score: 4, Funny

      I like the 'Corolla Corollary'.
      If we use 'Ford's Law', I would expect my computer to spontaneously flip over and catch on fire because of a faulty five cent connector.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    11. Re:SLA? by tinkerghost · · Score: 5, Interesting

      To be fair, you ISP only owns parts of the highway: the on ramp (some might own a bit more than that). I bet you'd find that a bandwidth test against a server in their network would probably report numbers very close to what they're selling you. But there are quite a few bottleneck on the internet, including the bandwidth connection of the website you're trying to reach (including the bandwidth test sites I have seen).
      I might buy that for the overall issue of not recieving the bandwidth promised. However when you concider:
      She downgraded to the 768K plan expecting to still have 750K. Wrong, instead her speed dropped to 300K.
      Note that all the numbers are in bits per second since he referenced them that way earlier in his statement.
      You can see that the problem is not a bottleneck issue. If your 3Mb/s connection generates 750Kb/s and the problem is a bottleneck, then dropping the maximum speed available to you is not going to change anything. Your throughput at the bottleneck will be just as fast - 750Kb/s.
      This is more likely a QoS implimentation which assigns specific allotments of bandwidth to the various levels of service. "OK, we have 100Tb/s of bandwidth, our 3Mb/s customers pay the most so we will give them 50Tb/s, 2Mb/s gets 25Tb/s ... Oh, and that sucker paying $20 a month for his dialup ... ehh, cut him off & tell him it's his modem is broken."
      You can see the difference between bottlenecking & segregated bandwidth issues. If there's a bottleneck, everyone up to the throughput of the bottleneck doesn't know it's there. Everyone over that limit sees it exactly the same. With the bandwidth segregation, each tier will show differently based on the load at the time.

    12. Re:SLA? by blugu64 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Personally I like the Isuzu Axiom ;)

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
  7. Bit Versus Byte by Wizarth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Something I've heard from my friends a lot is that they don't realise companies sell their connection speeds in BITS per second.

    Myself, I have 512Kb/s down, and as a rule of thumb I divide by 10 to get it in bytes. I get at best 54KB/s downloads, which works out by this rule.

    I know, a byte is 8 bits, but as a rule of thumb, dividing by 10 seems to include overhead.

    I know my 512Kb/s ADSL connection doesn't rate against these 3Mb/s cable connections, but, this is my experience, learn from it what you will.

  8. Re:Don't have that problem with my fiberoptic by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny
    I can see a consistent 30Mbps when I download very large files.

    • Have you got wireless?
    • Do you use WEP?
    • How comfortable is your backyard?

    Just curious...

  9. Re:Shocking! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What does gramma need with 3Mbps anyway?!

    Irrelevant. They sold her on 3 Mbps, they aren't delivering it. It's not my business or yours what she wants it for.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  10. my solution: I installed a DSL splitter by dmoen · · Score: 5, Informative
    At my old house, I was on a 1.5 Mb/s DSL plan, but I never got more than 1.0 Mb/s, and just before I moved, it had degraded to 600 Kb/s. I was using the standard 'put a filter on every phone jack' method, the only method that the ISP would tell me about. I tried the 3 Mb/s plan, but the speed was actually worse, so they bumped me back down to 1.5 Mb/s.

    I just moved to a new house. This time, I decided to do things right, and had a DSL splitter installed at the point where the phone line enters the house. [My splitter looks just like the one in the picture.] The previous owner had had unacceptably low DSL speed, but with the splitter installed, I'm within about 8% of the theoretical maximum on the 3 Mb/s plan. The phone line between the NID mounted on the outside wall of my house and the phone exchange is likely not perfect, which may account for the 8% degradation.

    Note that the rated maximum speed (3 Mb/s in my case) accounts for not just the actual payload data being transmitted, but all of the protocol overhead as well: TCP headers, IP headers, etc (there are multiple protocol layers, each with overhead). Your typical internet speed test is not able to directly account for all of the protocol overhead, so your data will be transmitted slower than the rated line speed.

    Doug Moen

    --
    I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
    1. Re:my solution: I installed a DSL splitter by ivan256 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I hate to tell you this, but a splitter is just a filter. Your service improvement is due to putting a single filter in front of all your inside wiring rather than putting filters on every single jack, but it's still just a filter. You get raw phone connection to the data terminals on the splitter, and a filtered connection on the phone terminals.

      There's no reason to pay $57 for what your DSL provider gave you for free plus a fancy plastic enclosure. Just cut the RJ-11 jack off one of the filters they give you and wire up your own 'splitter' in a $2 junction box.

  11. I suck up. by patryn20 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To be blunt, where I am there is only one choice for internet service. The single provider may change, depending on what municipality, but in the end you only have one choice in your apartment. So, when I have an issue I suck up. I act stupid and helpless and ultra sickly sweet. I thank them profusely every step of the way.

    It may not be as satisfying as being intelligent or righteously indignant on the phone, but it gets great results. I consistently get a tech out same day (from ATT (SBC), no less). I have problems where my circuit speed will drop drastically (from 3Mbps to 145Kbps) on a regular basis, and now that I have started being saccharine sweet, it is generally fixed almost immediately.

    Simply point out that it is running incredibly slow (say something about images and pages taking FOREVER to load, don't sound techie) and that you logged in following THEIR instructions (thank you guys for giving me those previously, oh thank you thank you) and checked the speed and saw that it was slower than normal (from what you guys told me before), and that you would greatly appreciate it if they could fix it (since I am so helpless and LOVE you guys), and please help me, and oh lord thank you so much for giving me your time.

    Other than that, make sure your router isn't causing you problems. Swap it out with a borrowed one or something. I had a bad one that was destroying my throughput. Check cables, wall sockets, everything. Make sure you can eliminate everything on your end before you call them.

    However, if they ask you to test things again, gleefully (pretend) to do it. It makes them happy and gets you better service later. After all, it is not really that hard to sit there reading the newspaper and drinking coffee and simply saying "Nope, still doesn't work."

  12. there's a joke somewhere in here by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Funny

    about grandma, and a webcam, and why that makes it our business

    but i'm not telling that joke, nope

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  13. Re:Don't have that problem with my fiberoptic by hivebrain · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I pay $55/month for 30 down / 5 up. I think you can get 15 and 2 for about $40. I also get my TV through the fiber now -- $30 cheaper than digital cable through Comcast, more channels, HDTV, yadda, yadda.
    I'm in the northern VA suburbs of DC and I know that Verizon's already in a wide variety of towns in the area.

  14. SLAs mandated on $$ lines by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Informative
    To the best of my knowledge you get no SLA with commercial DSL or cable accounts either (at least I don't and don't know of anyone who does). You have to buck up and pay for T or Frame or OC lines before you get an SLA.

    That's because the FCC mandates SLAs on T/Frame/OC lines.

  15. Gas Mileage by 246o1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Gas mileage is not determined by the companies, it is determined by a set of specific tests under federal law. If you were able to run those tests and find a discrepancy, then you would have a case as far as fraud/mislabeling/etc. goes. Tests are quite easy to run on bandwidth, so it's an entirely different situation.

    --
    Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
  16. I'm also getting my full bandwidth by Lenolium · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Thank the bandwidth gods for UTOPIA, a community fiber-optic system. 15Mbit symmetric. I've had LAN's slower than this, and I get a 2ms ping time to XMission's border router. Logged on to counter-strike, and found a few games being hosted at my isp with under 10ms pings. It's amazing what can happen when you get the damn telcos out of the way. :::.. Download Stats ..:::
    Connection is:: 14320 Kbps about 14.32 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB)
    Download Speed is:: 1748 kB/s
    Tested From:: http://testmy.net/ (Server 2)
    Test Time:: 2006/06/01 - 11:34pm
    Bottom Line:: 250X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.59 sec
    Tested from a 12160 kB file and took 6.956 seconds to complete
    Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.0.3) Gecko/20060326 Firefox/1.5.0.3 (Debian-1.5.dfsg+1.5.0.3-1)
    Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 85.68 % faster than the average for host (xmission.com)
    Validation Link:: http://testmy.net/stats/id-QIOGKAJMB

  17. False advertising != lack of SLA by jd · · Score: 4, Informative
    It is perfectly true that the "unwashed masses" do not get a "Service Level Agreement" (SLA). However, they DO get a rating for their connection, and (provided the network is neutral) SHOULD be guaranteed "best effort" for packet delivery. What is being described in the article does not sound like "best effort", and the inability to reach the claimed "rated speed" (presumably even at off-peak times) suggests that the actual rating for the line is much lower than that advertised.


    Now, there are certain exceptions. In general, you can't drive a dense network at much beyond 1/3 the rated speed - thin-wire ethernet was bad for that - so you can expect similar sorts of problems on a shared line such as cable. The entire design of cable - a single line with taps off it - is exactly what thick-wire and thin-wire ethernet were like.


    However, the article mentions DSL. DSL is not a shared line, it is essentially a dedicated line. The service only becomes shared at the teleco's CO (as that's where the DSL modems are, on the other side). At that point, everyone gets plugged into one or more routers. Now, when you change the speed of the modem, they simply program the DSL modem on their end to take a slower connection. They do not (at least, if they are network neutral) mess with the routers to change the priority of your network traffic.


    Interestingly, when I worked for a company that got SDSL installed (no service agreement), the engineer ramped up the listed speed beyond what we'd paid for, but the actual speed we ended up with was what we'd bought . This doesn't conflict with what I've just said - we were on the edge of the service area and the speed we were supposed to get simply didn't operate. At all. Apparently, if the copper is poor, not all frequencies are guaranteed to work, and it's not an upper limit - lower speeds can be affected too.


    Anyway, to the poster of the original story, I'd strongly suggest getting an INDEPENDENT person that you can trust to check the phone wiring from the DSL modem as far out as practical. At the very least, check the wiring in the house. It is possible that poor wiring, a rusty connector or a loose connection somewhere is killing the speed. If that is the case, then fixing the problem would be very cheap and easy, and would save a LOT of money - you'd have more bandwidth without shelling out the extra cash.


    If the wiring is good, then the fault lies with the ISP, and I'd suggest calling a consumer advocacy group for advice on what to do - if, indeed, you can do anything. If only a handful of people care enough to actually do anything, you probably can't - although there are usually multiple DSL providers in an area, and some are better than others.


    If a LOT of people are VERY frustrated AND willing to spend hard cash to get this fixed once and for all, you might want to investigate the pros and cons of setting up a DSL cooperative. The teleco can't deny you equal access to the CO (that's law), but industrial-strength network equipment (DSL modems, high-end routers, T3 or T4 line) - that isn't cheap. And, yes, you probably would need to go to a T3 or T4 in order to make the whole thing fast enough to pay for itself. This is NOT a recommended option, without some serious funding behind it. However, if the funding is there, it is the one path you can take that (a) guarantees you the results you want, (b) guarantees the ISP has consequences it WILL notice, and (c) guarantees you the undivided attention of every disenchanted geek and abusive ISP on the planet - at least, for a week or two.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:False advertising != lack of SLA by Detritus · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Now, there are certain exceptions. In general, you can't drive a dense network at much beyond 1/3 the rated speed - thin-wire ethernet was bad for that - so you can expect similar sorts of problems on a shared line such as cable. The entire design of cable - a single line with taps off it - is exactly what thick-wire and thin-wire ethernet were like.

      Broadband data networks over CATV are very different than shared-media Ethernet. Ethernet uses baseband signalling, everyone shares a common channel (CSMA). With cable, there can be multiple independent downlink channels. There is a single uplink channel that uses TDM to support multiple users. Each cable modem is assigned a shared 6 MHz downlink channel and a time slot on the uplink channel. There is no contention for access to the media.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  18. My ISP undersell...!? by grahamsz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I ditched comcast for a local fixed wireless ISP (Mesa Networks) who seem to be holding customers despite having both DSL and Cable in the area.

    I'm paying for a 3Mb/1Mb connection, yet according to the speedtest on speakeasy's site i'm actually getting 4022kbps/1044kbps.

    If I use more distant speed test locations then it seems to be closer to what i'm paying for, however it looks like they must have raised the cap on the local end so that I can get transfers at the speed i'm paying for. On top of that, my connection bursts to 9/3 which makes small transfers really snappy :)

  19. my cable provider delivers by Cederic · · Score: 3, Interesting


    I have a 10Mbps cable connection. Sure, most 'net servers aren't able to give out files that fast. But the ones that are..

    3-4 weeks ago I downloaded a 142MB file. Firefox reported it as coming down at one megabyte/sec. I'm not sure whether it lied, but the file was downloaded in under 2 minutes.

    Surprised the hell out of me. Made me happy.

    Cable company is NTL. Their technical support is absolutely atrocious. Luckily their connection is very stable, so I rarely have to call them. And the download speed is very nice indeed.

  20. Re:Welcome to fascism, kid. by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've heard of this phenomenon. I think they call it "lobbying".

    In most parts of the world this is better known as 'corruption'.

  21. Yeah, it is DSL... by thebdj · · Score: 3, Insightful

    this is absurd. Of course your speeds with DSL might suck depending on your location, and the way they determine what speed you get, of course a speed decrease will lower your actual bandwidth. You'll note the speed decrease is actually a bit less with the lower speed, but they are actuall still comparable and probably somewhat attributable to other networking factors.

    Before complaining about your DSL line being slow, I think you really should read up on how DSL (and most likely ADSL to be specific) works. You are hardly ever going to get max bandwidth out of a service line though I honestly cannot complain about the speeds I am getting with Cable. So, remember, before starting a bitch-fest...know what the hell you are talking about...

    --
    "Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."