A contented service is bad,but?

Ricky91t

This service is growing more and more of a joke everyday!
http://www.irishisptest.com:443/myspeed/db/report?id=394859 <This morning
http://www.irishisptest.com:443/myspeed/db/report?id=394637 <Last Night

barnicles

Ricky91t wrote: »

This service is growing more and more of a joke everyday!
http://www.irishisptest.com:443/myspeed/db/report?id=394859 <This morning
http://www.irishisptest.com:443/myspeed/db/report?id=394637 <Last Night

If your getting that IP then Permanet must have changed their stance on IP addressing.

barnicles

Well at least you''re getting DSL in 2009!

Ricky91t

barnicles wrote: »

If your getting that IP then Permanet must have changed their stance on IP addressing.

Yeah they did changed it between Nov last year and December,
I know but i have little hope that our copper wire will be any good :rolleyes:

My parents' Permanet connection has also been abysmal lately. They had to cancel their Blueface line because the phone was unusable. I'm still paying for it myself so am considering downgrading it to the basic 512/128 since they're certainly not getting the advertised speeds (1512/512). They've no other choice except maybe KBB but I doubt my sis would be happy with the no P2P policy.

Ricky91t

Karsini wrote: »

My parents' Permanet connection has also been abysmal lately. They had to cancel their Blueface line because the phone was unusable. I'm still paying for it myself so am considering downgrading it to the basic 512/128 since they're certainly not getting the advertised speeds (1512/512). They've no other choice except maybe KBB but I doubt my sis would be happy with the no P2P policy.

Well the way ISP's are going(i'm assuming by p2p you mean music downloads)Might not be that long till they enforce something like that on permanet

Anyway one week later after emailing my speedtest,Suposedly the Three email i sent them using outlook through their smtp account all weren't received :rolleyes:

Anywho heres the mail

I checked your modem. The radio signal levels are very good and there is no sign of packet loss.



We are investigating a possible speed issue, arising from a few reported instances, but to date we have not identified anything that would constitute a fault. We are still investigating and expect to have a conclusion within the next 3 - 4 weeks.



We have installed equipment on our core base station and this will allow us to thoroughly monitor traffic levels and determine where congestion is occurring

barnicles

They can't, because they can't track people because the mast has one IP.

watty

They can track people. The public IP or Private isn't relevant. Barnicles you are thinking of the IP that appears on the Internet. The ISP always knows who you are. Even if each mast only has one public IP.

barnicles

Watty, everyone on one permanet mast shares one IP.

turmace

Watty is correct, every residential customer on Permanet must have a unique private IP address. Otherwise the IP packets wouldn't be able to find their way back.
The customers do however share a public IP. There may be more than one public IP per mast or more than one mast per public IP depending on how they backhaul the IP traffic.
Permanet would have no problem with tracing IP traffic to/from a specific user.

Ricky91t

barnicles wrote: »

Watty, everyone on one permanet mast shares one IP.

They seem to do a lot of stuff by nowing your mac address to,But i'm sure we all have private IP's or something

Some_Person

Watty is correct, each customer has their own WAN IP and all customers are behind the same public IP, it's the same with my wisp. That backhaul is terrible too the way it's bouncing back and forth between Dublin and London.

Marlow

watty wrote: »

If it's WiFi based technology then 10 people is pushing it.

Not quite right. It depends on the radio, on the software driving it and on the CPU in the board on the basestation. 10 people on WiFi based technology is pushing it, if the queuing is done somewhere further down in the network, but not at the base. If queuing is done at the base/sector and you've got optimized dynamic timing in the drivers you can do up to 30 connections per sector. Anything above that is evil and results in major bandwidth breakins.

As for the contention, there is no regulation of for example unlicensed wireless which a lot of wisps use. All they have to do is to register with comreg, that they are supplying a public service, so that Comreg has a contact in case of a complaint.

After that, they can sell whatever they want. The only way to fix that is to vote with your feet (ie. find another solution). If you don't have a choice, that is obviously not very helpful.

As for the public IP, some of the smaller ISPs around don't allocate unique public ip's to their customers. That's as much a legal issue for themselfes (in case of abuse, as the documentation rests with the ISP in that case) as it's stupid. Only way to get around that would maybe be to tell the ISP what kind of legal issues they can get

/Martin

About Permanet, they use a wireless system based on DOCSIS cable known as DoxLink. The modem they provide is a standard DOCSIS 1.0 cable modem. The downstream uses 16QAM on frequencies around 250-260 MHz (downconverted by the transceiver) while the upstream is around 20-30 MHz using QPSK. Of course the real transmission frequencies are in the 3.5 GHz range. But because they're using 16QAM they'd have much less capacity than a real DOCSIS network could, my UPC cable modem is receiving a 256QAM signal.

Marlow

Karsini wrote: »

About Permanet, they use a wireless system based on DOCSIS cable known as DoxLink. The modem they provide is a standard DOCSIS 1.0 cable modem. The downstream uses 16QAM on frequencies around 250-260 MHz (downconverted by the transceiver) while the upstream is around 20-30 MHz using QPSK. Of course the real transmission frequencies are in the 3.5 GHz range. But because they're using 16QAM they'd have much less capacity than a real DOCSIS network could, my UPC cable modem is receiving a 256QAM signal.

That's still no excuse for the lousy speeds the OP is getting. Digiweb Metro uses exactly the same technology and you don't have people complaining about their speed there. The only thing they ever complain about is their CAP

/Martin

Oh no, it certainly doesn't. They seem to be completely oversubscribed. I wonder could we see mass bootings on the scale of IOL No Limits?

watty

Marlow wrote: »

That's still no excuse for the lousy speeds the OP is getting. Digiweb Metro uses exactly the same technology and you don't have people complaining about their speed there. The only thing they ever complain about is their CAP

/Martin

No. Not exactly at all.

Very, very different RF gear and DOCSIS settings. Metro is more like Cable DOCSIS, though not as high as 256QAM*.
Very different link budget.
Totally different (and local) Infrastructure more like a national fibre/HFC/Cable provider than a local WISP.

right now Metro Limerick to Galway via Dublin


Real latency to Dublin INEX 25ms

C:\watty>ping www.heanet.ie

Pinging samhain.heanet.ie [193.1.219.57] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=58
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=58
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=58
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=58

Ping statistics for 193.1.219.57:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 26ms, Average = 24ms

*Exact QAM visible in your Modem Stat page.

Marlow

watty wrote: »

No. Not exactly at all.

Very, very different RF gear and DOCSIS settings. Metro is more like Cable DOCSIS, though not as high as 256QAM*.
Very different link budget.
Totally different (and local) Infrastructure more like a national fibre/HFC/Cable provider than a local WISP.

Watty, all I was pointing out, that using Docsis over wireless can't be the excuse for the speeds. It doesn't matter if a provider is national or local. There are local WISPs that deliver a superiour service and are peered at INEX and other places. There are also national providers that have no peering beyond their single transit and deliver rubbish. So being national or local has nothing to do with it.

We consider ourselfes local, even though we spread into 4 counties, I'm in Roscommon and I get these speeds on 3 meg:



So being local is still no excuse for being rubbish.

/M

watty

With most things, indeed it's not the exact technology is the problem but how it is applied (inadequate link budget, poor backhaul, too many subscribers etc etc)

Exceptions would maybe be any CDMA based tech as inherently suited best and invented for two users on a single secured conversation, not for Point to Multipoint phone or Data services.
(CDMA-1, EVDO, 3G/UMTS/w-CDMA/HSDPA, IPW/T-CDMA, ripwave S-CDMA).

Sensibly Scaleable Point to Multipoint uses TDMA, DVB (vsat, DOCSIS downlinks), OFDMA, FDMA + TDMA (GSM/EDGE) never CDMA as each extra code sequence in the same channel (1.25Mhz CDMA/EVDO or 5MHz 3G/W-CDMA) decreases everyones SNR and increases BER, causing speed to drop, capacity to drop to less than 50% and Mast radius to drop even to 1/4 radius, 1/16th cell area size!).

Even with 16QAM DOCSIS you simply limit number of subscribers. Comreg DOES specify 48:1 max. This is based on actual SUBSCRIBERS, not actual real time contention of simultaneous connections.

16QAM at 6Mhz channel is only about 7Mbps sector capacity. Thus if you sell 2Mbps package = 3.5 users, so max subscribers allowed by Comreg = 3.5 x 48 = 168 per sector.

If speed falls to 200kbps then 25 users SIMULTANEOUSLY downloading. Since it uses very efficent MPEG2-TS mux to DVB-c standard for downlink, people reading a web page while connected use virtually no traffic. Typically would mean over 100 people using PC simultaneously.

Of course if there is no rolling cap and no throttling of the 10 to 20 users of 168 people that would run 24x7 torrents will be eating enough to make speeds sub 300kbps all the time.

So if network is unmanaged and/or they sell to more than 160ish people per sector, the contention will be terrible.

They need at least 35Mbps 1:1 contented backhaul per mast. They could be lacking there as it all seems to go to UK.

watty

Marlow wrote: »

So being local is still no excuse for being rubbish.

/M

Absolutely!

There is no excuse for being rubbish unless it is that you are clueless, which can start with installing the wrong infrastructure (NBS anyone?).

Marlow

watty wrote: »

Absolutely!

There is no excuse for being rubbish unless it is that you are clueless, which can start with installing the wrong infrastructure (NBS anyone?).

Non national providers (yes .. those that do deploy in rural ireland) where excluded from the tendering process for NBS.

/M

watty

Which is stupidity.

1) Tender 1: Network & Infrastructure Management & Co-ordination. One company with proven infrastructure and national network management experitise rated 70% of score.

2) Tender 2: Break up into electoral areas. Up to 3 vendors per area. Outside area vendors only can tender into areas with no existing coverage. Tender to give 100% coverage, including areas in theory already with cable/fibre/DSL/Wireless.

The present "one gets everything" plan is worse that what is done in Africa.

Marlow

watty wrote: »

The present "one gets everything" plan is worse that what is done in Africa.

A well, we'll just start selling bitstream and consider ourselfes national then :-D But I think we're going slightly off topic now.
/M

watty

watty wrote: »

Even with 16QAM DOCSIS you simply limit number of subscribers. Comreg DOES specify 48:1 max. This is based on actual SUBSCRIBERS, not actual real time contention of simultaneous connections.

16QAM at 6Mhz channel is only about 7Mbps sector capacity. Thus if you sell 2Mbps package = 3.5 users, so max subscribers allowed by Comreg = 3.5 x 48 = 168 per sector.

Yep, this was what I was referring to when I explained the technology behind Permanet (as opposed to it simply being because it's DOCSIS over wireless). I just didn't know the exact figures, thanks for that.
When I signed up to them in December 2005 the speeds were great because we were among the first to sign up to them in the area. But they have no download cap so I'm sure there's plenty using torrents 24/7.

watty

Note the figures are only to illustrate the Arithmetic. I don't know what channel width/Symbol rate Permanet have/use

watty

watty wrote: »

Note the figures are only to illustrate the Arithmetic. I don't know what channel width/Symbol rate Permanet have/use

I don't either, the cable modem doesn't display this info except for the return path. I'll check the SNMP information next week when I'm down in Kerry and see if I can get it that way.

Ok I got some info. According to the SNMP data the downstream channel is 6 MHz wide.

Attached is a text file from DocsDiag with the -vvv switch.