Is Netflix too much traffic for your ISP?

Forums › Online streaming services › Is Netflix too much traffic for your ISP?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1293902 29-Apr-2015 22:02

50n0f508: Anyone from Vodafone looking at this forum? I'm on hold with Vodafone technical support so I expect I might get through to somebody in 45min if I'm lucky.

See other threads here on Geekzone, Make sure you get a fault ticket logged for peak time slow speed and note down the fault ticket number

Edit: No speedtests done over WiFi and only test to local Vodafone server

John

Sideface

9350 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1293936 29-Apr-2015 22:41

50n0f508: Anyone else on VF cable having these issues tonight? Getting about 20mbps when it should be 100

I'm on VF cable 100/10Mbps in Wellington.
Like many other users I experienced severe congestion over the ANZAC holiday weekend, with speeds falling as low as 3Mbps for hours at a time. (there were 4 different forums running in this topic)
Much better today - speeds 100/10Mbps on the VF Wellington server most of the day - now down to 85/10Mbps at 10pm - a huge improvement over the weekend.

Sideface

50n0f508

41 posts

Geek

#1294852 1-May-2015 10:11

My internet speed between 7:30 to 11:00 is still up and down like a yoyo; at 7pm I have 90mbps, from around 7:30 it starts to decline gradually to 65-75 and then between 8 and 10 it is all over the place – drops as low as 13 or 15, then when I run another test immediately after it will shoot up to 75, then 30, then 50, then 20 with a couple of spikes touching 80 or 90 then back down to 20 and so on. Obviously during this time Netflix will not go beyond 720p and frequently drops to 480p, never touching 1080p which is what I had prior to the NZ Netflix launch.

Weird thing is that even at 11:30 when my speed has stabilised and is in the high 90’s or 100 Netflix still does not go to 1080p on either PS3 or PC but in the morning Netflix on PS3 will output 1080p but not the PC. Iplayer and Youtube both do 1080p all the time so long as my speed is sufficient but it’s like Netflix is being limited to 3000kbps and will only do 720p during peak hours.

I spent AN HOUR on hold to Vodafone technical support last night (after the callback I was promised yesterday never materialised) to be told that I am not alone with the speed issues on Vodafone Cable and that they are working on it but that is what I heard a week ago. At this stage I am thinking that I would happily sacrifice 50mbps or so and go to VDSL if it meant I could get some stability. I really miss full HD Netflix!

Come on Vodafone, spend some of the money you must be saving by having woeful customer service on your hardware and get this fixed!

darylblake

1162 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1295832 2-May-2015 18:38

Im sorry. But if you have network problems and you are on UFB and you are not paying for a guaranteed CIR throughput, then you cant complain. This is why HSNS and Business plans are a LOT more expensive than typical residential plans.

Most unlimited plans are connected to a connection pool and sized by the ISP. If everyone on unlimited plans chooses to put through a lot of traffic at the same time and the network gets congested, then you have to understand that your connection will suffer.

If this is a problem, I suggest you look at coming off the unlimited plan or look for another ISP. I don't have this problem because my ISP doesn't offer me an unlimited plan.

It is also possible that some of the problems are caused by congestion on the chorus network and this could be due to infrastructure in your area. If you are a business and need internet at this time and it is unusable due to slowness, ask your ISP for a guaranteed service, (which will probably cost you more) but if you don't receive the guaranteed service then you have reason to complain.

Talkiet

4792 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1295849 2-May-2015 19:11

Actually. I'm going to provide a counterpoint here that I thought I'd never do, and might seem inconsistent with almost all of my earlier posts on topics like this.

It is worth chasing up performance issues (even perceived ones) on UFB, even when the performance is still probably great from an end user perspective. (I mean, can anyone really complain about 70Mbps instead of 100Mbps on a speedtest?)

While it's early days in UFB, there have been (and will continue to be) performance issues, both with LFCs and with RSPs. Sometimes these are what I'd call "normal" issues where the performance drop could be due to something understandable and related to an investment decision (by someone) like a handover link that congests at peak hours. If that's the case when if that's discovered and explained, then you're probably in the boat above.. ie. Tough, it's behaving as expected, and WAY WAY WAY WAY within any SLAs.

On the other hand, if you're NEVER getting close to peak rates (Lets say 26+Mbps for 30 and 93 for 100 - I KNOW these are conservative), then there's a chance there's actually a misconfiguration somewhere, and the RSP would want to know about it so they can fix it (or at least make an informed decision about how to act).

I've lost track of the number of times I have seen performance issues on best efforts services with no SLA, that at first glance seem "near enough" - but turn out to be the result of a small issue somewhere which could be fixed.

The RSPs DO want to know about these issues (or they should!)...

The tricky bit is the end user expectations. If the issue is a congestion issue (normal, expected), or if the issue is strange but not having a large impact, then the RSPs may make a completely valid and sound decision not to make any changes. A lot of people won't accept that - they think they pay their $90/month (or whatever) and should have 100% throughput all the time, or at least EVERY time they want to use it.

There's no point in making up figures about what YOU as a user THINK is acceptable... I've heard things like "I should be able to get 80% of my max rate any time of the day" or "It's totally unacceptable to ever go below 60% of the max speed".... Those are ludicrous statements that aren't reflected in your agreement with the RSP or the economics of the service. They are emotional appeals to what you think the RSP should be doing.

So anyway, It's usually worth reporting something if it seems wrong, and never getting close to headline speeds on UFB sounds wrong to me - but you can't EXPECT the RSP to fix/change/improve things every time.

And it's also fine to post here asking if people have the same issues, that can sometimes smoke out real issues... But there's no substitute for actually logging issues with your ISP. If your ISP chooses to allow Geekzone (or FB or Twitter) as official support channels then great. For the avoidance of doubt, Spark prefers a phone call (at this stage).

Cheers - N

[edit: For goodness sake, don't test on wireless!]

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1295855 2-May-2015 19:36

Talkiet: The tricky bit is the end user expectations. If the issue is a congestion issue (normal, expected), or if the issue is strange but not having a large impact, then the RSPs may make a completely valid and sound decision not to make any changes. A lot of people won't accept that - they think they pay their $90/month (or whatever) and should have 100% throughput all the time, or at least EVERY time they want to use it.

There's no point in making up figures about what YOU as a user THINK is acceptable... I've heard things like "I should be able to get 80% of my max rate any time of the day" or "It's totally unacceptable to ever go below 60% of the max speed".... Those are ludicrous statements that aren't reflected in your agreement with the RSP or the economics of the service. They are emotional appeals to what you think the RSP should be doing.

So anyway, It's usually worth reporting something if it seems wrong, and never getting close to headline speeds on UFB sounds wrong to me - but you can't EXPECT the RSP to fix/change/improve things every time.

Good points of course. Except for example on Vodafone's HFC case where some people on a 100 Mbps plan which can easily get to 100% of the speed at some times dip to under 5Mbps in evenings.

At that point you have to wonder if the company is actually invested in providing "good service" or just "service".

Talkiet

4792 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1295861 2-May-2015 19:48

freitasm:
Talkiet: The tricky bit is the end user expectations. If the issue is a congestion issue (normal, expected), or if the issue is strange but not having a large impact, then the RSPs may make a completely valid and sound decision not to make any changes. A lot of people won't accept that - they think they pay their $90/month (or whatever) and should have 100% throughput all the time, or at least EVERY time they want to use it.

There's no point in making up figures about what YOU as a user THINK is acceptable... I've heard things like "I should be able to get 80% of my max rate any time of the day" or "It's totally unacceptable to ever go below 60% of the max speed".... Those are ludicrous statements that aren't reflected in your agreement with the RSP or the economics of the service. They are emotional appeals to what you think the RSP should be doing.

So anyway, It's usually worth reporting something if it seems wrong, and never getting close to headline speeds on UFB sounds wrong to me - but you can't EXPECT the RSP to fix/change/improve things every time.

Good points of course. Except for example on Vodafone's HFC case where some people on a 100 Mbps plan which can easily get to 100% of the speed at some times dip to under 5Mbps in evenings.

At that point you have to wonder if the company is actually invested in providing "good service" or just "service".

I'm absolutely not going to make any comments about specific ISPs, but there was an earlier point in my post where I give a feel for the sort of thing that I'd class as TOTALLY FINE for any purpose "(I mean, can anyone really complain about 70Mbps instead of 100Mbps on a speedtest?)", assuming there weren't related service impacts beyond just attainable bandwidth.

I'd honestly would complain about 5Mbps at peak for a 100Mbps service, even without a relevant SLA, but I'd complain and give a reasonable amount of time to resolve, then I'd switch providers.

I don't get the same people complaining ad nauseum about their provider.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1295864 2-May-2015 19:58

I keep complaining about my provider because Chorus decided that because this area has HFC then nothing else is needed - it's this or ADSL 10Mbps. I was told that this specific address may have fibre by October 2015 instead of June 2016 as originally planned so as soon as it's done I am switching out of Vodafone.

50n0f508

41 posts

Geek

#1295867 2-May-2015 20:13

To be honest, I will happily put up with 70% of the advertised speed as long as I can watch Netflix in 1080p and not suffer too many drops in quality but at the moment this is not the case. Even with 70-90 mbps it just will not go past 720p. Iplayer and youtube will do 1080p however. The reason I'm not letting up with Vodafone is that I think it is unacceptable that did not anticipate any issues that Netflix et al would present for their network especially as they are partners with Netflix. They take my money, they should provide what they say they will and not just say "it will do".

Sideface

9350 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1295873 2-May-2015 20:33

Talkiet: ... I'd honestly would complain about 5Mbps at peak for a 100Mbps service, even without a relevant SLA, but I'd complain and give a reasonable amount of time to resolve, then I'd switch providers. ...

... except that in my case there is no provider to switch to (until 2019). I'm badly located for VDSL, and fibre will not be available for another 4 years.

The yellow line is my connection.

Each dot represents the average downstream speed at that time of day for the past week.

Sideface

raytaylor

4014 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1295919 2-May-2015 21:31

Is vodafone able to leverage the UFB network or chorus business fibre as a backhaul for its cable network?

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

Screeb

698 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1296058 3-May-2015 11:39

Talkiet:
There's no point in making up figures about what YOU as a user THINK is acceptable... I've heard things like "I should be able to get 80% of my max rate any time of the day" or "It's totally unacceptable to ever go below 60% of the max speed".... Those are ludicrous statements that aren't reflected in your agreement with the RSP or the economics of the service. They are emotional appeals to what you think the RSP should be doing.

If the RSP is the one deciding what is "acceptable", rather than the customer, then something is very wrong. The RSP serves the customer, therefore the customer is the one who defines what is and what is not acceptable - they are the ones who choose to purchase your service, based on what they expect to get. If you don't think what they define as acceptable is economical, then either you need to do a better job at managing customer expectations before they sign up (make it clear what to expect) - not tell them "tough" after they've already signed a 12 month contract - , or you need to find a way to reduce costs or make investments in order to deliver what the customer wants. If you still can't meet expectations (for a reasonable portion of customers), then maybe you shouldn't be offering the service at that speed/price (or you should offer an additional one).

There are always going to be some people who aren't happy, but there's no point in blaming them. Instead, try to find a solution - educate nicely, offer a new tier of service, or if all else fails, accept that you can't serve those people and suggest they find a different RSP that meets their needs.

(This is not directed at any I/RSP in particular, just a generic statement)

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1296133 3-May-2015 15:16

raytaylor: Is vodafone able to leverage the UFB network or chorus business fibre as a backhaul for its cable network?

Backhaul isn't a problem.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1296144 3-May-2015 15:57

raytaylor: Is vodafone able to leverage the UFB network or chorus business fibre as a backhaul for its cable network?

congestion is at the Node

JohnButt

374 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1296164 3-May-2015 16:06

johnr:
raytaylor: Is vodafone able to leverage the UFB network or chorus business fibre as a backhaul for its cable network?

congestion is at the Node

I wonder which node? From our observations, cable panelists all have the same issues, more so in Wellington, than Chrischurch but similar. Looking at speed dips and times to download websites shows similar results across the board for cable.

However the missing bit for this debate is that the issue is new, ie there was no problem a couple of months ago, so it can be fixed. Capacity increases on affected routes, nodes or links could solve the problem at any time.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9