Telecom Big Time: new Telecom Broadband plans?

Forums › Spark New Zealand (including Skinny and BigPipe) › Telecom Big Time: new Telecom Broadband plans?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 45

8223 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230096 1-Jul-2009 22:45

Very aggressive move in the market, must be worried about their market share erosion.

If they have invested in proper equipment (NetEnforcer, PeerApp etc), have smart people managing the rules and keep the bandwidth pool at an appropriate level for the number of customers this could be a great success.

On the other hand if any one of those three things are not up to scratch expect Go Large 2.0 and more irreparable brand damage. Many times this year I've heard people say Telecom was a slow ISP and they wouldn't switch to them (based word of mouth/experience from over a year ago with the Go Large fiasco) even though they have probably been one of the best peak time performers in the last 6 months+ imo.

Mud sticks and so on (see Xnet/Slingshot)

It's going to be very interesting to measure peak time performance for gaming.

Presumably per user shaping will be effective against bit torrent encryption, TOR / SSH tunneling. Lets hope they have the proper hardware to avoid a latency blow out.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#230101 1-Jul-2009 22:56

[Incorrect - Go large was not limited to 3.5mbit down, either by profile, or by the nominal 128kbit up. It is perfectly possible to get just over 9mbit out of Go Large with the 128kbit upstream.]

Hello

Incorrect :-) I will clarify

Go Large is a full speed downstream plan as are all plans. Yo will thus see a modem connect rate of up to 7.6 mbit on ADSL1 or up to 20Mbit on ADSL2+

The 128k upstream restriction will limit realtime downloads to about 4.2Mbit. When you download, you are downloading packets. Packets when downloaded, are acknowledged to the send server, to confirm the checksum is correct, and tells the server to send the next packet, or to resend if there was a checksum error (CRC). These packet acknowledgements comsume a small percentage of upload by supporting the download. When the 128k upstream is maxxed, you will find that the download cannot exceed about 4.2mbit. This can vary as this overhead may be smaller or larger dependant upon the file type, send means (http, ftp, etc) or error rate.

Tony
Telecom NZ / ORT

Talkiet

4793 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230114 1-Jul-2009 23:31

tdgeek: [Incorrect - Go large was not limited to 3.5mbit down, either by profile, or by the nominal 128kbit up. It is perfectly possible to get just over 9mbit out of Go Large with the 128kbit upstream.]

Hello

Incorrect :-) I will clarify

Go Large is a full speed downstream plan as are all plans. Yo will thus see a modem connect rate of up to 7.6 mbit on ADSL1 or up to 20Mbit on ADSL2+

The 128k upstream restriction will limit realtime downloads to about 4.2Mbit. When you download, you are downloading packets. Packets when downloaded, are acknowledged to the send server, to confirm the checksum is correct, and tells the server to send the next packet, or to resend if there was a checksum error (CRC). These packet acknowledgements comsume a small percentage of upload by supporting the download. When the 128k upstream is maxxed, you will find that the download cannot exceed about 4.2mbit. This can vary as this overhead may be smaller or larger dependant upon the file type, send means (http, ftp, etc) or error rate.

Tony
Telecom NZ / ORT

Chuckle... that's a good explanation of how strongly asymmetric paths can affect throughput, but it doesn't always limit to 4.2ish mbit. I'll clarify further :-)

This 4.xMb/sec max on a 128k up line is not strictly correct. Yes I know it's on the Telecom website and it's quoted all over the place - but at least in some cases, it's not correct. The theoretical limit with a 128k upstream with latencies typical on ADSL lines is about 9.xMb/sec. I have regularly seen high 8.xMb/sec on one of my ADSL lines at home (15xxx/160 - where 160 is the atm sync rate which translates into about 128kbit IP).

See this calculator... http://www.wand.net.nz/~perry/max_download.php - note that the delayed ACK is set at 2. Change that to 1 and watch what happens.

I believe that the 4.5Mbit figure was arrived at calculating a ACK for each packet which isn't the way it's always done.

Regards
N (Also Telecom, but not ORT :-)

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.

Lias

5590 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#230116 1-Jul-2009 23:40

Ragnor: Very aggressive move in the market, must be worried about their market share erosion.

If they have invested in proper equipment (NetEnforcer, PeerApp etc), have smart people managing the rules and keep the bandwidth pool at an appropriate level for the number of customers this could be a great success.

I suppose it's too much to hope that TNZ will actually massively invest in backhaul to allow us to actually use it properly :-)

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup.

Ragnor

8223 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230117 1-Jul-2009 23:50

Probably something like this

Note: this is from ~2007 and out of date (it assumes the average sync speed 4Mbit etc etc)

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230118 1-Jul-2009 23:55

Wow. Go Paul Renolds. This is the year of Telecom. I have gone from hating to loving, I have switched across to XT from Vodafone and been impressed again by Telecom and their billing systems/network/customer service/web site just working instead of needing constant prodding.

Now, with this refresh of plans, and the posititive feedback I keep hearing about Xtra, sorry Telecom Broadband :) having very good peek time speeds, I'm looking to switch back to Telecom for my home broadband as well. I was looking at Orcon but now I keep hearing of peek time congestion and XNET's been buffering youtube for the last 9 months since the leechers all pilled on.

I have a feeling Telecom will pull off Go Large v2 well, as they have had the pool of existing Go Large users to model their traffic flows on and get the numbers right.

Not allowing static IP addresses I assume is a given, the question is will I have to purchase a telephone line to get Telecom broadband still???

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

Detruire

1772 posts

Uber Geek

#230119 1-Jul-2009 23:59

I highly doubt Telecom will offer Naked DSL any time soon.

rm *

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230120 2-Jul-2009 00:04

Detruire: I highly doubt Telecom will offer Naked DSL any time soon.

Me too. But 12 hours ago I would have said the same thing about offering a unlimited flat rate full speed broadband connection.

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

Talkiet

4793 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230121 2-Jul-2009 00:08

Ragnor: Probably something like this

Note: this is from ~2007 and out of date (it assumes the average sync speed 4Mbit etc etc)

Heh - what's the source for that pic please? I don't believe that it was accurate in 2007 and it's certainly not accurate now.

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.

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230124 2-Jul-2009 00:12

Talkiet:
Ragnor: Probably something like this

Note: this is from ~2007 and out of date (it assumes the average sync speed 4Mbit etc etc)

Heh - what's the source for that pic please? I don't believe that it was accurate in 2007 and it's certainly not accurate now.

Cheers - N

I recall it being accurate, it was from the techsplodger blog, Juda a reporter writes it.

I remember one example of the Conkon (spelling???) DSLAMS which had up to 40 from memory DSL cards in them but only a 4 Megabits backhaul, so thats 40x7.6 Megabits going upstream to a 4 Megabits backhaul.

Yup, fast as your phone line will allow, to the box outside your house, then real slow from there onwards :)

But thats all water under the bridge now, Telecom's plowing money into their network at a burn rate of 3 Million a day of new Capex and backhaul now is not really a issue, it's that single fibre out of NZ which is the main issue. Wonder who owns that.. Oh yeah thats right Telecom Broadband :)

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

Ragnor

8223 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230125 2-Jul-2009 00:20

I don't think it was originally from techsploder but another blog. I can't remember the name of that blog, it no longer exists as far as I know. Juha probably referenced them in an article?

Image data in the png indicates 17/11/2007, either way all these sort of things are just based on speculation and clues gleaned from various sources.

Telecom are not required to disclouse contention ratios right?
Feel free to give us some accurate 2009 numbers Talkiet

but I suspect you can't, probably not allowed to disclouse that type of information?

exportgoldman

1202 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230129 2-Jul-2009 00:39

Ragnor: I don't think it was originally from techsploder but another blog. I can't remember the name of that blog, it no longer exists as far as I know. Juha probably referenced them in an article?

Image data in the png indicates 17/11/2007, either way all these sort of things are just based on speculation and clues gleaned from various sources.

Telecom are not required to disclouse contention ratios right?

I think you are right about the Juda blog, I remember the blog having lots of green in it and it being pretty to look at, but I spend a while googling and can't find it.

One figure I know for a fact as Telecom publish it, is that the Committed Information Rate (CIR) or only real guarentee of traffic is 30kbps or the same as dialup across their broadband network. I'm fairly sure this is still the case now, as some ISPs are in discussions of a better CIR for doing things like VoIP.

Normal ratios are 50:1 for residential and 20:1 for business

Tyler - Parnell Geek - iPhone 3G - Lenovo X301 - Kaseya - Great Western Steak House, these are some of my favourite things.

Fraktul

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#230132 2-Jul-2009 00:57

Seems to me it is just illustrating a simplification the concept of contention within broadband networks.

Talkiet:
tdgeek: [Incorrect - Go large was not limited to 3.5mbit down, either by profile, or by the nominal 128kbit up. It is perfectly possible to get just over 9mbit out of Go Large with the 128kbit upstream.]

Hello

Incorrect :-) I will clarify

Go Large is a full speed downstream plan as are all plans. Yo will thus see a modem connect rate of up to 7.6 mbit on ADSL1 or up to 20Mbit on ADSL2+

The 128k upstream restriction will limit realtime downloads to about 4.2Mbit. When you download, you are downloading packets. Packets when downloaded, are acknowledged to the send server, to confirm the checksum is correct, and tells the server to send the next packet, or to resend if there was a checksum error (CRC). These packet acknowledgements comsume a small percentage of upload by supporting the download. When the 128k upstream is maxxed, you will find that the download cannot exceed about 4.2mbit. This can vary as this overhead may be smaller or larger dependant upon the file type, send means (http, ftp, etc) or error rate.

Tony
Telecom NZ / ORT

Chuckle... that's a good explanation of how strongly asymmetric paths can affect throughput, but it doesn't always limit to 4.2ish mbit. I'll clarify further :-)

This 4.xMb/sec max on a 128k up line is not strictly correct. Yes I know it's on the Telecom website and it's quoted all over the place - but at least in some cases, it's not correct. The theoretical limit with a 128k upstream with latencies typical on ADSL lines is about 9.xMb/sec. I have regularly seen high 8.xMb/sec on one of my ADSL lines at home (15xxx/160 - where 160 is the atm sync rate which translates into about 128kbit IP).

See this calculator... http://www.wand.net.nz/~perry/max_download.php - note that the delayed ACK is set at 2. Change that to 1 and watch what happens.

I believe that the 4.5Mbit figure was arrived at calculating a ACK for each packet which isn't the way it's always done.

Regards
N (Also Telecom, but not ORT :-)

All well and good but that is TCP only - UDP performance is a totally different beast. UDP usage is oundoubtably increasing significantly, so considering performance of a network only looking at TCP throughput is no longer as relevent for many consumers as it has been in the past. Also TCP stack tuning can of course alter these figures substantially, with some trade offs of course.

raytaylor

4017 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#230136 2-Jul-2009 01:22

Hmm that seems rather reasonable - almost profitable.
A typical family I think uses about 5gb without teenagers so a $60 plan I think works out to be something like the equivalant of a 15gb-ish plan.

If they are concerned about microsoft and apple updates they should start looking at akamai - i dont think i have heard of telecom using akamai yet. I know slingshot and xnet do.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#230150 2-Jul-2009 07:24

Hi Fraktul, N, and Talkiet

You are all correct, my explanation was simplified so that all can get a basic understanding, and of interest to others in the forum.

I did mention "This can vary as this overhead may be smaller or larger dependant upon the file type, send means (http, ftp, etc) or error rate. "

Cheers

Tony
Telecom, ORT

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 45