UFB Poor Performance

Forums › Snap › UFB Poor Performance

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 19

777 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 683647 10-Sep-2012 01:43
SneakePimps: Not sure which server, but it was whatever the quickest for SFC. Other places were about the same around the 2Mb mark. I actually just chose the fastest out of the lot from multiple US servers. Also being 1:30am, I though it would be slightly faster... yeah, i reckon it's a problem with your connection rather than a problem with snap in general.

hads

363 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 683655 10-Sep-2012 06:25
I moved from Snap to Telecom quite a while back to get decent International speeds. They had issues with it then and it looks like they still do. I would take their canned help desk reply with several grains of salt. I've been considering trying them out again with a UFB connection, looks like a tougher choice than I thought. nicegear.co.nz - VoIP, DVB and other Linux compatible hardware

blair003

358 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 683683 10-Sep-2012 08:39
These from right now: I do get crap speed from Melbourne at the moment though.

blair003

358 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 683685 10-Sep-2012 08:40
PS: Snap VDSL

Skolink

934 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 683775 10-Sep-2012 12:15
Yes at work here in Chch with FX Networks (Enable) fibre it normally tests at 35/40Mbps to Auckland (30/60 today) and to Tampa,Florida where our corporate servers are, 3/1.5 (4/1.5 today). Makes sending large emails pretty tedious.

Peppery

272 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 683900 10-Sep-2012 15:19
I've always suspected international bandwidth would be a bottleneck for UFB, especially since it's so cost prohibitive. RIP Pacific Fiber. Last night I managed to get 346Mb/s to Vodafone's Auckland Speedtest server, while barely getting 10Mb/s to US using Speedtest.net. A multi-threaded HTTP download was much better, averaging about 90Mb/s from 3 servers. Not really surprising until the situation changes. World famous Twitter hacker.

Zeon

2367 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 683917 10-Sep-2012 15:31
As has been said before. Because of latency and its affect on TCP, in almost every single threaded application, including speedtest you will never get the same performance internationally as you do nationally. The point of UFB is mainly around better connectivity through the country. It's great for example for a school to have remote learning with specalist teachers in the city or for a doctors surgeries on the edge of town where Xrays can be sent in seconds to the Xray specialist center in town. In terms of consumer and business requirements its about encouraging more content to become closer and thus cheaper and faster.

hads

363 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 683921 10-Sep-2012 15:34
As has been said before, if you can get better International speeds on Telecom ADSL than another providers UFB connection then the other providers International links aren't good enough. nicegear.co.nz - VoIP, DVB and other Linux compatible hardware

Zeon

2367 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 683922 10-Sep-2012 15:34
E.g. we are apaprently meant to have a 100mbps CIR international and I get this speed to the US at 160ms:

stevenz

1965 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 683968 10-Sep-2012 16:28
SneakePimps: Asus RTN-16 with Tomato firmware. I'll give the direct connection a go, but I'm pretty sure the router I have is capable of the throughput. It's not the router. Those things are beasts and will happily handle anything you throw at them, especially with Tomato. "You are" = "You're" - Not "Your". "They are" = "They're" - Not "Their" or "There". You probably mean "lose" not "loose". There's no such word as "Alot". On the internet, wasting time, since '89.

Ragnor

6888 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 684041 10-Sep-2012 18:41
Max throughput on single TCP connection with 150-200ms latency and Snap using Telstraclear/Reach for international transit explains it. Suspect Reach still has that issue/limit in their route that we discussed a lot in that thread where the guy was comparing xnet vs telstraclear throughput to his server in the US. For the later the 12 page thread about it is here http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=44&topicid=89922

hads

363 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Reply # 684073 10-Sep-2012 19:39
Ragnor: Max throughput on single TCP connection with 150-200ms latency and Snap using Telstraclear/Reach for international transit explains it. Suspect Reach still has that issue/limit in their route that we discussed a lot in that thread where the guy was comparing xnet vs telstraclear throughput to his server in the US. For the later the 12 page thread about it is here http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=44&topicid=89922 Wow, that thread talks about the exact problem I had with Snap back in 2008 which no-one there could/would diagnose. I wonder if they changed upstream then. Around September the International speeds dropped from >1MB/s to pitifully slow, although I could still max out the connection with multiple TCP connections. The response I got from Snap was; "There is a number of factors building up to what you are experiencing, and I regret to inform you that we consider this as normal behavior for our network." It would be worth the OP trying multiple TCP connections to see whether it's the same here. nicegear.co.nz - VoIP, DVB and other Linux compatible hardware

mercutio

777 posts

Ultimate Geek

Reply # 684076 10-Sep-2012 19:46
hads: Ragnor: Max throughput on single TCP connection with 150-200ms latency and Snap using Telstraclear/Reach for international transit explains it. Suspect Reach still has that issue/limit in their route that we discussed a lot in that thread where the guy was comparing xnet vs telstraclear throughput to his server in the US. For the later the 12 page thread about it is here http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=44&topicid=89922 Wow, that thread talks about the exact problem I had with Snap back in 2008 which no-one there could/would diagnose. I wonder if they changed upstream then. Around September the International speeds dropped from >1MB/s to?pitifully slow, although I could still max out the connection with multiple TCP connections. The response I got from Snap was; "There is a number of factors building up to what you are experiencing, and I regret to inform you that we consider this as normal behavior for our network." It would be worth the OP trying multiple TCP connections to see whether it's the same here.? that could also be buba versus euba.

frizianz

96 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 684162 10-Sep-2012 22:39
What do you guys get to Internode in Australia's speedtest server? Certianally on my adsl i have no issues maxing out my line.

SneakerPimps

54 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 684169 10-Sep-2012 23:08
blair003: These from right now: I do get crap speed from Melbourne at the moment though. See, now what I don't understand is why this will differ from Snap UFB? Are there different routes for the different mediums? I would assume not especially if we're talking about the same provider, unless someone in the know can enlighten me. Here's my abysmal comparison. Whilst I love the upload, I've yet to see my connection reach more than 10Mb/sec. I called up Snap today, which was very friendly I may add (nice not be treated like an idiot), but I got almost the same word for word reply that mrchillie posted earlier. I understand what is being said, but I can't get my head around the above speed comparison with the same provider on two different mediums.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 19