Telecom Global Gateway Internet Packet Shaping

Forums › Spark New Zealand (including Skinny and BigPipe) › Telecom Global Gateway Internet Packet Shaping

caraloft

3 posts

Wannabe Geek

#44299 26-Oct-2009 22:07

All broadband providers apart from maybe a couple use Global Gateway for international data.

Snap Internet (who we changing away from) uses both global gateway and telstra's network for internation traffic, it's dynamic, so one minute you may be going through telstra and the next it's going through Global gateway.... we've been with Snap for around 6 mths and really do notice it when our traffic is routed through Global, we get packet loss and lag issues.

The only times we do not get packet loss or lag issues is when our data is being routed through Telstra.... (which is becoming less and less through telstra).

SNAP seem to be shaping as well.

....so we are changing back to Telstra this week.
it also seems when we are routing through global gateway, the sites we often go to are being blocked.... on Telstra, we get around 200 - 220ms ping to US servers, where as when we are going through Global, we get 300 - 350ms or worse with packet loss.

We are on max/max internet, connecting at 19Mb/sec down, 1mb/sec up.... so yes we do pay for our data, we aren't on a flat rate either, and are just around the corner from a new fibre box.

Advice to anyone who is a gaming enthusiast....

SAY GOODBYE TO GLOBAL GATEWAY AND HELLO TO TELSTRA (PDQ)!

1 | 2

1200 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#267084 26-Oct-2009 22:45

We have both a TelstraClear and Telecom link at work, and last week we had massive problems with international bandwidth and timeouts to web pages which seem to be because TelstraClear was under a DOS attack (I heard this from somewhere but can't confirm it.)

So ironically we were using Global Gateway last week because of Telstra's problems.

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

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67150 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#267085 26-Oct-2009 22:54

I am not sure of last week, but in the previous weeks TelstraClear had been the target of a DoS and this has been noted in the NOG list.

allstarnz

1705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#267086 26-Oct-2009 23:00

Do vodafone use Global Gateway? Or they have another partner?

caraloft

3 posts

Wannabe Geek

#267108 27-Oct-2009 07:04

vodafone use alter.net
428ms ping to google through my vodafone vodem connecting at almost full speed - not gprs. A total of 28 jumps to get back..... through Sydney, Tokyo as well.

cr250bromo

222 posts

Master Geek

#267114 27-Oct-2009 08:49

I'd be very surprised if global gateway (or any other upstream bandwidth provider for ISPs) shape traffic. ISPs generally pay for 100% CIR so their upstream provider guarantees that bandwidth will be reserved for them.

Most likely scenarios your traffic is being shaped/queued before it leaves the ISP, the ISP simply doesn't have any more bandwidth on that link, or due to peering arrangements further upstream the traffic takes a more circitious route.

Ragnor

8035 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#267391 27-Oct-2009 18:45

portunus: I'd be very surprised if global gateway (or any other upstream bandwidth provider for ISPs) shape traffic. ISPs generally pay for 100% CIR so their upstream provider guarantees that bandwidth will be reserved for them.

Most likely scenarios your traffic is being shaped/queued before it leaves the ISP, the ISP simply doesn't have any more bandwidth on that link, or due to peering arrangements further upstream the traffic takes a more circitious route.

+1 this

Remember you're using a shared network best effort residential grade internet service.. your ISP does not provision international bandwidth at 1:1 with number of customers * 24Mbit.. it's more like number of customers * 10Mbit / 100 (note: this is an example).

This is reflected in the low cost you pay for shared bandwidth internet access, dedicated bandwidth is actually very expensive and chances are that you couldn't afford even 4Mbit of dedicated bandwidth for yourself as it runs in the hundreds per month.

The "system" works kind of like the motorway system there are 1000 cars going south at 8am, you don't build a 1000 lane road, you build a 4 lane one and it's vehicles go into a queue and proceed in order.

There are several "middlemen" companies that buy large amounts of Southern Cross Cable transit then resell it to smaller ISPs (all ISP's in NZ are considered small by international standards) eg:

Asianetcom aka Pacnet
Global Gateway aka Telecom
Alter.NET
Reach

Most ISP's have transit from more than one supplier for redundancy. Lots of ISP's use Asianetcom predominatly.

Telstraclear does have a reputation for good performance but they are not immune to problems (as seen in the last few months), there are many factors that can impact performance - many are outside the ISP's direct control.

Telecom (not Big Time) usually have pretty good performance too.

Also routing is not always symmetric so the route your traffic takes to a destination might not be the same as the route coming back, ISP's don't have much control over the route back nor do they have much control over the route once they hand it over to their upstream providers.

Lias

4104 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#267431 27-Oct-2009 20:13

This is reflected is the low cost you pay for shared bandwidth internet access, dedicated bandwidth is actually very expensive and chances are that you couldn't afford even 4Mbit of dedicated bandwidth for yourself as it runs in the hundreds per month.

Telecom is still living in a dreamworld (much like oldworld media), where they think they can keep shafting consumers to maximize profits forever.

If they keep pushing us to far they are going to find themselves renationalized (and any party offering to do so would get my vote!)

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

nzbnw

2369 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Spark

#267447 27-Oct-2009 20:50

Lias:

Telecom is still living in a dreamworld (much like oldworld media), where they think they can keep shafting consumers to maximize profits forever.

If they keep pushing us to far they are going to find themselves renationalized (and any party offering to do so would get my vote!)

Not sure what you are trying to say? I'm guessing something with excess usage charges on Telecom's Broadband plans?

Also renationalized is spelt renationalised, and any party proposing the nationalisation of private entities put's itself in a risky position, something I doubt you will see centre right or left parties proposing.

nzbnw

Valok

23 posts

Geek

#267479 27-Oct-2009 21:38

but still bender, u cant argue "where they think they can keep shafting consumers to maximize profits forever". oh and have a large flat white with 2 sugars plz

Lias

4104 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#267513 27-Oct-2009 22:51

nzbnw:
Lias:

Telecom is still living in a dreamworld (much like oldworld media), where they think they can keep shafting consumers to maximize profits forever.

If they keep pushing us to far they are going to find themselves renationalized (and any party offering to do so would get my vote!)

Not sure what you are trying to say? I'm guessing something with excess usage charges on Telecom's Broadband plans?

nzbnw

I'm saying we could all have much better broadband if telecom didnt generate a profit for its shareholders. Finland has just passed a law guranteeing 1mb broadband as a human right for all citizens, rising to 100mb by 2015. Telecom wont give us things like that out of the goodness of its heart, it will either not do them, or do them and charge us like a wounded bull. So mysolution is turn telecom into a stae owned not for profit, dedicated to providing world class broadband to us as cheaply as possible, without the commercial drive to wring every cent of profit out of me.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67150 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#267516 27-Oct-2009 23:06

Lias: I'm saying we could all have much better broadband if telecom didnt generate a profit for its shareholders. Finland has just passed a law guranteeing 1mb broadband as a human right for all citizens, rising to 100mb by 2015. Telecom wont give us things like that out of the goodness of its heart, it will either not do them, or do them and charge us like a wounded bull. So mysolution is turn telecom into a stae owned not for profit, dedicated to providing world class broadband to us as cheaply as possible, without the commercial drive to wring every cent of profit out of me.

Why Telecom? That's not the only telco in New Zealand. Vodafone is a much larger corporation - actually the largest mobile operator in the world. Why not mandate that Vodafone do its part too?

While at this, why not ask Orcon to do it? Orcon is owned by Kordia, a SOE (State Owned Enterprise).

If broadband is to be a citizen's than obviously you wouldn't want a private company to do it, right? So let's force Orcon to do it then...

Lias

4104 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#267520 27-Oct-2009 23:14

freitasm:
Lias: I'm saying we could all have much better broadband if telecom didnt generate a profit for its shareholders. Finland has just passed a law guranteeing 1mb broadband as a human right for all citizens, rising to 100mb by 2015. Telecom wont give us things like that out of the goodness of its heart, it will either not do them, or do them and charge us like a wounded bull. So mysolution is turn telecom into a stae owned not for profit, dedicated to providing world class broadband to us as cheaply as possible, without the commercial drive to wring every cent of profit out of me.

Why Telecom? That's not the only telco in New Zealand. Vodafone is a much larger corporation - actually the largest mobile operator in the world. Why not mandate that Vodafone do its part too?

While at this, why not ask Orcon to do it? Orcon is owned by Kordia, a SOE (State Owned Enterprise).

If broadband is to be a citizen's than obviously you wouldn't want a private company to do it, right? So let's force Orcon to do it then...

Because Telecom is the former SoE, it's the incumbent, and it controls the infrastructure.

Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

Ragnor

8035 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#267526 27-Oct-2009 23:53

Lias:

Telecom is still living in a dreamworld (much like oldworld media), where they think they can keep shafting consumers to maximize profits forever.

The government sold Telecom and other assets because it was basically bankrupt and needed to pay down debt built up during the mad 80's where everything was state run.

Lias:

If they keep pushing us to far they are going to find themselves renationalized (and any party offering to do so would get my vote!)

You are in the minority, not many people want to go back to inefficient badly government agencies doing everything that wasted money tons of money. I prefer my government to the stick to the core stuff and tax me as little as possible thanks.

Lias:

I'm saying we could all have much better broadband if telecom didnt generate a profit for its shareholders. Finland has just passed a law guranteeing 1mb broadband as a human right for all citizens, rising to 100mb by 2015.

Finland has a number of advantages we simply do not have eg: they mostly consume content in their own language instead of content from oversears/the us. They are connected via land to europe. They have higher population density. I believe they have a much higher tax burden, for example there is a capital gains tax of 28% for individuals and 26% for companies.

Lias:

Telecom wont give us things like that out of the goodness of its heart, it will either not do them, or do them and charge us like a wounded bull. So mysolution is turn telecom into a stae owned not for profit, dedicated to providing world class broadband to us as cheaply as possible, without the commercial drive to wring every cent of profit out of me.

Telecom has just invested a truckload of money into rolling out a 3G mobile network nationwide, rolling out ADSL2+/VSDL equipment in exchanges and cabinets and doing fibre to the cabinet.

History has shown state run monopolies tend to be bloated inefficient and wasteful, there's no competition to keep them in line. The structual seperation of Telecom has been working well so far imo and the governments proposal for the NBN are pretty solid so far. Telecom will not be able to run a vertically integrated retail and wholesale operation under the prosposed system the government has decided on.

insane

2415 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#267528 27-Oct-2009 23:55

Ragnor:

ISP's don't have much control over the route back

The rest was pretty spot on as usual :) apart from the above, its relatively easy to add AS prepends to make a particular path back seem very unattractive, therefore prioritising another route back for a given subnet. Its part of traffic balancing and fixing those odd upstream routing issues that canno't be resolved yourself.

PenultimateHop

637 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#267538 28-Oct-2009 05:51

Because I'm bored and the hotel Internet is driving me nuts...

caraloft: SNAP seem to be shaping as well.

I would be looking at my ISP rather than their upstreams as the first point of issue.

Ragnor: There are several "middlemen" companies that buy large amounts of Southern Cross Cable transit then resell it to smaller ISPs (all ISP's in NZ are considered small by international standards) eg:

SX doesn't sell "transit", it sells IRUs for services (e.g. STM1/4/16/64) on their network - very much a L1 service.

It's entirely up to the transit provider (e.g. Pacnet) to connect their equipment and arrange for peering or transit at the far end.

Ragnor: Asianetcom aka Pacnet

Other way around. Pacnet was formerly known as Asianetcom (formerly Asia Global Crossing).

Ragnor: Alter.NET

This is Verizon. The Alter.net domain name is a 20 year legacy from the UUNET network which has been through many parent companies.

Ragnor: Reach

Not entirely sure any more, but Reach don't (or didn't) tend to sell direct to the public. This would almost always be fronted by the Group operating companies such as TelstraClear or Telstra Australia. However Reach is indeed the international network of the Telstra (and PCCW) group.

A few other international carriers in NZ would include Sprint (AS1239 - unless they've pulled the plug entirely recently), Vocus Communications (ASxxxx - Australian crowd), and AT&T (AS2687, not AS7018).

Ragnor: Also routing is not always symmetric so the route your traffic takes to a destination might not be the same as the route coming back, ISP's don't have much control over the route back nor do they have much control over the route once they hand it over to their upstream providers.

Indeed, there are only a finite set of knobs that can be twiddled and there's no real requirement for anyone on the Internet to listen to them in detail. They provide more of a set of hints that you want your traffic to follow certain paths.

Lias: Finland has just passed a law guranteeing 1mb broadband as a human right for all citizens, rising to 100mb by 2015

I've been following this with quite a bit of interest, but I'm yet to see anything that says it is free. In fact, they compare it to services that are usually charged for, such as banking.

insane: apart from the above, its relatively easy to add AS prepends to make a particular path back seem very unattractive, therefore prioritising another route back for a given subnet. Its part of traffic balancing and fixing those odd upstream routing issues that canno't be resolved yourself.

Yes, but localpref is a heavier hammer than AS Path prepending. You can prepend to infinity and still not get traffic where you want it.

The joys of traffic engineering.

1 | 2