OMG IBB Are that bad...

ricey

:mad: I got in IBB last week just to try it out for myself because i really need a good upload speed and can no way afford SDSL.
I got it put on last thursday the guy who put it in done the test on his laptop
and was only getting speeds of 150kB/s on his laptop and that was defo not right because i was getting the 3mb package! so he said look someone will rign you 2m and sort that out for you, that night i was using the connection and getting speeds with bittorrent of around 350kB/s up and down at the same time and was like wow this is what i want that was the night i got it put in!!
tonight i am using my old DSL connection i have with Digiweb i held on to my account with them so i couod fall back on it if IBB feked up and my god what a ball$ of a company, my up and downspeeds are like 350kb/s HA HA 3mb my boll0x. All i can say is how are thay getting away wth this kind of service? like no way in hell would i pay for it, even if i had no other option on broadband.
So out the door it is with IBB, well not just yet i have told them i want to cancel my account as it is a TOTAL FU€K UP and the nice chap from IBB told me my connection will be fixed by 2m! and i will not be paying until it is.
So thinking of getting IBB......DONT and for all who have them already STOP the payments to them that is the only thing companys like them care about want it fixed then you know what to do.
Cheers ya`ll....!

LegacyUser

Its a little slow tonight alright - but its workable, and not always this bad.

beller b

We told you s.........................................No I won't say it....
Do you not read any of the post on the broadband forum?

ricey

Ya i read them all....just had to see 4 myself how much of a boll0x it really is.


its a little slow tonight...lol

Still i done the clever thing (well i suppose i should hav not went 2 IBB) i kept my
DSL account and thats cool always 3mb but only 256k up...o well

beller b

Lot of bother to go to ......Did you think we were all having you on?

LegacyUser

ricey wrote:

its a little slow tonight...lol

Excuse me!! I've been with them for over a year now and I find it acceptable. What are you trying to do, download the entire internet??

If the engineer was was only getting "150kB/s on his laptop" then why did you sign off on it?? That was a bit silly!

beller b

How would YOU define acceptable?

LegacyUser

I can browse the web, download and upload files via FTP. Use VPN for work and I have no problems at all. I get over 1MB upload and download at peak time which I find is adequate.


Oh, and I also edit code in VI over telnet - alls fine from where I am. Which mast are you guys on?? I'm Ballycoolin.

beller b

& what package are you on?

ricey

Ya taught it was all bull$hit....na i just wanted to see 4myself big mistake.

A bit silliy is dam right but it worked perfect for a day of two after that.

and i aint taught about downloading the hole internet not yet anyway!

LegacyUser

beller b wrote:

& what package are you on?

Breeze 2mb.

BTW - when I signed up it was for a 1MB and they sent me a letter saying to reboot the modem and I'd have a 2MB line.

Deadwing

correct me if im wrong here, im not an expert, but when i was bb training in errorcom, we were told 'the general speed of a line, for example, a 1mb line, would be 1/10th the total, ie 100kps download. ditto for a 2mb line it would be 200kps.' Now in the first post it says hes got a 3mb line, and downloading at 350kps, is that not perfectly acceptable??

that night i was using the connection and getting speeds with bittorrent of around 350kB/s up and down at the same time and was like wow this is what i want

BlueShaun

ricey wrote:

that night i was using the connection and getting speeds with bittorrent of around 350kB/s up and down at the same time and was like wow this is what i want that was the night i got it put in!!
tonight i am using my old DSL connection i have with Digiweb i held on to my account with them so i couod fall back on it if IBB feked up and my god what a ball$ of a company, my up and downspeeds are like 350kb/s HA HA 3mb my boll0x.

Err, 3mb is 375kb/sec. How is that unacceptable, given that (i didnt see it specified, so i dont know) there is usually a contention ratio? ie shared bandwidth......

Unless u were expecting 3mbyte broadband, which is 24mbit? correct me if im wrong comp people (mods...feel free to edit this.)

Mutant_Fruit

Broadband is sold in bits. A 2meg line is 2048kilobits per second (kbps or kb/s).

Downloads are measured in bytes. 2048kilobits per second (kbps or kb/s) = 256kilobytes per second ( kB/s)

Take overheads into account, and you get a realistic max of about 230kilobytes per second. i.e. 1840 kilobits per second.

And FFS there are enough IBB threads around to find one to post this on! Can i propose we start auto-deleting new IBB threads til people get the hint and reuse existing ones as necessary? (if it is a totally new topic, then fine, make anew thread, but this topic is far from new).

azzeretti

Blueshaun -> I was just about to post the same thing! Seems to be the problem is with peoples (not everyone, I agree there are problems) expectations of this service. If you are on a 3Mb line with 8:1 conntention then 340kb might be how it is. And it makes sense technically for this results, when testing. I assume (don't know for sure) that IBB are counting the 3Mb with full duplex i.e you get 3Mb with and/OR down.
If this is the case then most of the people complaining about there speed have set their expectations way to high.

NOTE: Before anyone starts lashing, I do know there are some unnacceptable areas using IBB and I am not talking about those problems above.

Mutant_Fruit

IBB is a full duplex service. You can get full speeds up AND down at the same time.

i.e. 2meg = about 200kB/sec AND 200kB/sec down at the same time. (you can't afford to choke either your upload or your download).

Stark

azzeretti wrote:

Blueshaun -> I was just about to post the same thing! Seems to be the problem is with peoples (not everyone, I agree there are problems) expectations of this service. If you are on a 3Mb line with 8:1 conntention then 340kb might be how it is. And it makes sense technically for this results, when testing. I assume (don't know for sure) that IBB are counting the 3Mb with full duplex i.e you get 3Mb with and/OR down.
If this is the case then most of the people complaining about there speed have set their expectations way to high.

NOTE: Before anyone starts lashing, I do know there are some unnacceptable areas using IBB and I am not talking about those problems above.

Contention contention. On a 2Mbit/s line you should be guaranteed 128kbit/s if every single person on the network tries to download at the same time. But normally you don't have every single person downloading at once so the speed ususally works out at a lot higher. I've had broadband packages on DSL with 48:1 contention ratios and I've been able to get nearly the full line speed at all but the busiest of peak times.

On IBB, it seems no matter what time you login at, the speeds are always ****. And often the speed drops below the "guaranteed minimum" as well. We've seen plenty of examples of people here getting less than dialup speeds.

azzeretti

Stark wrote:

Contention contention. On a 2Mbit/s line you should be guaranteed 128kbit/s if every single person on the network tries to download at the same time. .

Unless IBB have gaurenteed this (which I don't know if they have or haven't) and have QOS in place for each connection what you say in the first instance is wrong.

Stark wrote:

We've seen plenty of examples of people here getting less than dialup speeds.

Exactly why I say at the end of the post that this doesn't apply to all instances. If you are on a 2MB line with 8:1 contention then there are times (a lot of times) when your speed will be around the 340k mark, thats just simply math(s).

Like I said, I don't know that ins and outs of the service IBB provide, obviously if people are getting below dialup speeds there is a problem, not in question. But the example above is an example of perception and expectation.
Apologises if this annoys anyone

Blaster99

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

IBB is a full duplex service. You can get full speeds up AND down at the same time.

i.e. 2meg = about 200kB/sec AND 200kB/sec down at the same time. (you can't afford to choke either your upload or your download).

Great, except IBB claims that it's not full duplex. And from my own experience it isn't full duplex.

In the response to stuff about contention, most providers provide the bandwidth necessary for their customers, regardless of contention. This is the norm in the market. If IBB sells a 2Mpbs 24:1 service, you should view it as a 128kbps service that might work at 2Mbps. In most cases you will not be disappointed if this is the expectation. But it all depends on where you're at. IBB's problem is clearly that their wireless backhaul is useless so any site that relies on wireless backhaul is to be avoided. Where they use fibre, it seems to work well, e.g. full speed all the time.

robroy

I hate to sound stupid, but is anyone confusing Megabits per second of DSL line speed with download rates shown in MegaBYTES ber second.

1Byte = 8 bits

3MegaBits would give 375KiloBYTES per second and as this would not actually be achieved in practise, due to various packet overheads etc., 350 KBytes would be a good performance for a 3Mb connection.

The sizes shown for downloaded files are all KB (byte) and any download software I use show a KB download rating.

PowerHouseDan

Its Half Duplex Service and Have a Email Complaint reply stating that.

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

IBB is a full duplex service. You can get full speeds up AND down at the same time.

i.e. 2meg = about 200kB/sec AND 200kB/sec down at the same time. (you can't afford to choke either your upload or your download).

beller b

Hang on a minute! Your on a 2mbit service & your happy with 1 mbit speeds? LOL
If you paid for a pint in the pub & the barman handed you a glass I suppose you'd sup it & say nothing..That the problem,that why IBB are getting away with it..

beller b

The problem with IBB is they claim one thing but advertise another.Thier ad using the road traffic example clearly states the same up & download speeds......

azzeretti

In fairness, and I hate playing Devils advocate, but the road analagy is a perfect way to explain syncronise DSL. It's not so much advertising the speed but more so the difference between their service and the ASync service others provide.
In regards your pint example, it simply doesn't stand up. The technical details e.g contention rate, are there and anyone expecting to get 3MB down when testing is just setting their expectations too high. I don't blame IBB for this, simply the end user.

Again, I feel I need to point out that this is only for people who are complaining about getting 340k down and not the other users who are having other difficulties which seem to be due to over subscribing.

LegacyUser

beller b wrote:

Hang on a minute! Your on a 2mbit service & your happy with 1 mbit speeds? LOL
If you paid for a pint in the pub & the barman handed you a glass I suppose you'd sup it & say nothing..That the problem,that why IBB are getting away with it..

Yeah I am actually happy. When I signed up it was a 1MB line. They upped it to 2MB .. which has been a farce .. there is no difference at all between the 1MB and 2MB. But when I signed up it was a 1MB line.

Less of the personal attacks please beller.

beller b

What it WAS is beside the point.I am on a 2 mbit service from BT.Any test I do I get download of about 1.7mb. That used to be a 1 mbit service but if I was only getting 1 mbit I would not be happy....BTW how do you justify the statment "there is no difference at all between 1MB and 2MB"?
PS my previous post was not meant to be a personal attack...sorry if it seemed so..

PowerHouseDan

Beller sorry if you have said havent kept up with ALL the Ibb threads. Did you cancell your Direct Debit and Move too Bt?

beller b wrote:

What it WAS is beside the point.I am on a 2 mbit service from BT.Any test I do I get download of about 1.7mb. That used to be a 1 mbit service but if I was only getting 1 mbit I would not be happy....BTW how do you justify the statment "there is no difference at all between 1MB and 2MB"?
PS my previous post was not meant to be a personal attack...sorry if it seemed so..

beller b

Not quite, powerhousedan.. I was one of the lucky ones.I escaped these gangsters at the start(With a litte help from IBB themselves, bless them)
Its a story I posted before,I cant remember where so her's the highlights
Ordered IBB ripwave,modem arrived no signal (I live 500m from ballymun mast)
Then ordered breeze. IBB told me LOS was passed.
Engineers arrived to install,looked out window of van & said "you wont get a signal here"(It was lashing rain,I think that had something to do with it) btw still 500m from mast I can see it from my garden.
Had enough at that stage,eventually got my €99 euro refund & cancelled DD.got 3 months free from eircom, got sick of Smarts lies & ordered BT. Best thing I ever did..
Funny in way I suppose I should really be grateful to thier engineers for not wanting to getout in the rain..

Mutant_Fruit

powerhousedan wrote:

Its Half Duplex Service and Have a Email Complaint reply stating that.

Really? So if its half duplex, what speeds should i be getting if i try to max out my upload and download at the same time? I'm going to go try that now. I'm fairly sure i can get at least 180each way (at the same time!) stably.

I know that back on the 0.5meg service i could usually download and upload at 50kB/sec at the same time (when it worked).

PowerHouseDan

Email one:


Mr. Desmond



Please find below the graphs for your connection. I think that this will illustrate what we are seeing from our side.




You reach his maximum throughput capacity set on the radio regularly. Your connection is a 2Mb pipe operating at half duplex meaning that is your upload and download total capacity at any one point in time. If he are uploading at 1Mb, it leaves 1Mb for download. If you download at 2Mb, you have no upload capacity. 2Mb is the total capacity available for download and upload combined.

Email two when i questioned the half duplex.

The reason for the difference between uploads and download speed - the base station sends the download, the transmission radio has greater power output than the customer premises radio. Therefore the actual throughput from the customer premises will depend on distance and quality of signal. Download speeds will generally be less affected.



We simply state that we provide a symmetrical 2Mb service. We do not state that we will provide 2Mb up and down simultaneously, simply that we will make a maximum of 2Mbps available to the customer. Should the customer feel that the contract is misleading in any way, he is welcome to find the points that he finds to be misleading, and point them out to us for consideration.



Actual speeds will vary from time to time based on the site the customer is downloading from, quality of connectivity to that site across the internet, congestion at that site and contention at his highsite. We do not guarantee 2Mbps all the time. It is a maximum speed and we clearly advertise it as being contended at 24:1, giving a guaranteed connection speed of 84kbps at peak time minimum, or a download speed at worst of 10kBps. He is getting a lot more than that most of the time.

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

Really? So if its half duplex, what speeds should i be getting if i try to max out my upload and download at the same time? I'm going to go try that now. I'm fairly sure i can get at least 180each way (at the same time!) stably.

I know that back on the 0.5meg service i could usually download and upload at 50kB/sec at the same time (when it worked).

Mutant_Fruit

I believe ya alright, but that doesn't seem to hold true for what my connection is doing. I can't find a decent torrent that will max my upload speed... even if i limit my download speed to 60kB/sec, i can't get my upload to go over about 120kB/sec, so bear that in mind when you see the results here.

This is me leeching Two torrents. Both legal, one filled with seeds, the other a mixture of 30seeds and about 250 leechers. once again, even limiting my download to 60 won't let my uploads get above about 120.

The_B_Man

ur download is 221kB/s and ur upload us 100kB/s. together they're over 300kB/s.

or if ur goin by the speeds in Azureus: 79.3 + 98.4 + 84.3 = 262kB/s
not bad for a 3megabit connection. although, my brain is gone at the moment so can someone make sure im not gettin the bits & bytes mixed up?

Mutant_Fruit

Firstly, azureus's speed counter isn't great. I was hoping you'd look at the average speed from the timer i set going in DUMeter. The problem with azureus's is that it shows the instantaenous speed, and at that particular moment i must have just lost a connection to a seed, as my download speed dipped. Average speed over 3.5 mins is 220kB/Sec. Thats why bittorrent isn't the best testing device, its too unstable.

not bad for a 3megabit connection.

Yeah, wouldn't be bad for a 3meg connection, but considaring i'm on a 2 meg connection i think its pretty damn good.

Stark

azzeretti wrote:

Unless IBB have gaurenteed this (which I don't know if they have or haven't) and have QOS in place for each connection what you say in the first instance is wrong.

I'm going on what IBB have told me. I'm on 2Mbit/s with 24:1 contention and they told me I was guaranteed a minimum speed of 128kbit/s

madrab

thats wierd, cus they usually try and fob me off with 20-ish kB is min i should get, but then they usually make up crap to tell you)

Mutant_Fruit

Exactly why I say at the end of the post that this doesn't apply to all instances. If you are on a 2MB line with 8:1 contention then there are times (a lot of times) when your speed will be around the 340k mark

If an ISP advertises a 2meg service, what they mean is that you should generally be able to get the full 2 megs, but during peak hours you may not be able to. Contention covers them for this, and thats perfectly acceptable. We're not paying enough for dedicated bandwidth.

An isp that offers a 2meg connection that more often than not maxes out at less than 1/5 of this could possibly be sued for false advertising. Simply because they do not supply a service that can regularly obtain the advertised speeds. Therefore the advertisement is misleading. They should advertise it as a 400kbps service, with a peak transfer rate of 2meg, which is quite a bit different from advertising a 2meg service.

Take a look at NTL, and any of the ADSL providers. Generally all their users can reach their maximum speeds (maximum speed depends on distance from exchange for ADSL) at any time in the day. Ok, the have the occasional glitch at times, but overall 95% of users seem to be happy and get full speeds. There is no reason why IBB can't offer a similar experience.

In short, if IBB can't offer you a 2meg service and fob you off with a "20kB/sec is well within the limits of the connection", try threatening them with a lawsuit for false advertising. I'm not sure if it'd pass in a court or not, but its worth a shot.

todd10k

robroy wrote:

*snip*

3MegaBits would give 375KiloBYTES per second and as this would not actually be achieved in practise, due to various packet overheads etc., 350 KBytes would be a good performance for a 3Mb connection.
*snip*

yep. sounds about right.

currently on 3meg irish BB breeze. i could show you some nice screenshots of my line downloading at well below minimum contractual obligations, high latency, packet loss, etc. (its 128kilobits aka 12.8 kilobytes or something close, by the way. get it right. ) my connection dropped below this, meaning they failed in their end of the bargain to guarantee me my service, meaning they are in breach of contract with me, and i can terminate my contract at any time.

just waiting for smart....come to blanch. plllleeeaaasssseee.

robroy

todd10k wrote:

(its 128kilobits aka 12.8 kilobytes or something close, by the way. get it right. )

128 x 1024 = 131,072 bits ( to keep out of hex )
div 8 = 8192
div 8 = 16 kBytes

Dividing Line speed kilobite by 10 is a very rough and gererous rule of thumb used to make some allowance for overheads in transmission data that must be sent in addition to the actual data the client wants to send or receive.
Dividing by 8 is the accurate conversion, dividing by 10 is easier and is often quoted by ISPs as it errs in their favour.

Blaster99

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

There is no reason why IBB can't offer a similar experience.

What's the performance like in your neck of the woods these days?

todd10k

robroy wrote:

Stuff.

aye, i know. but....thats why i said "or something close"

besides even by my scale theyre still looking at breach of contract.

really wish they'd die painful, searing, needle stabbing, donkey riding, flesh rippingly good deaths. the lot of them.

....bet i could run a better network...

*goes off to sob in the corner*

Adey2002

I got rid of IBB and am now with icecomms.net

http://www.onspeed.com/en/speed_test.php ===> 1673kb/sec
ftp.esat.net/mirrors/.0/ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ls-lR.gz ===> 232KB/sec 11.2Mb in 49 seconds

Pinging www.jolt.co.uk - Minimum = 15ms, Maximum = 48ms, Average = 23ms

Pinging www.boards.ie - Minimum = 43ms, Maximum = 52ms, Average = 46ms

nadir

Im on the 2 Meg service, ket me just put some things straight
* when it works properly it is full duplex , 200+ each way (regardless of what they say)
* it usually goes at about a tenth of this 20 each way

In regards your pint example, it simply doesn't stand up. The technical details e.g contention rate, are there and anyone expecting to get 3MB down when testing is just setting their expectations too high. I don't blame IBB for this, simply the end user.

the Pint example is perfect, all we are saying is that, they are advertising something they are not delivering on.

Congestion // Contention is a moot point.
the internet server provider should do their statistics, such that when we want to download the service should be available to us.
If I were getting 100 up and down, I still would not be happy, it is not what we have been told we are supposed to get. Granted some slowdown during peak hours would be acceptable, but not speeds like we are getting.
If they cant handle the load, they shouldnt advertise it.
It's pissing me off, because I have been unable to contact them by phone for the last month, they just wont pick up.
From previous encounters, I know that they also dont read their e-mail.

One interesting trend I found, everyone seems to get a good service at the start, and then get shafted after a couple of months. I wonder if this is their policy. I havnt done any proper tests since the QOS days.
Maybe I will run some more tests soon.
I have ntop and mrtg setup at home, some packet sniffers, and some netcat scripts, I remember changing ip's also seemed to improve performance, they seem to have changed some stuff on their network over the last month, I'll check into it.

Mutant_Fruit

Blaster99 wrote:

What's the performance like in your neck of the woods these days?

I've stopped playing FPS online. I got bored of CS after 3 years So i don't reallly keep an eye on pings like i used to.

As far as i can tell, theres a good bit of ping spiking in the tallaght highsite (its noticeable in World of Warcraft, but thankfully NOT a game ending experience like it would be in CS). Theres also a rediculous amount of packetloss, not in the tallaght highsite itself, but in whatever router they have 3 hops down. I've emailed about it, and i'm going to ring and complain about it. Packetloss in the internal network is by far the most unforgiveable mistake an ISP can make, whatever about not having enough external bandwidth, losing packets in your own circuit is just idiocy.

Other than that, the download performance is generally quite good (as can be seen from my screenshot). I can max out 99/100 times easily enough on any download. I just wish they'd fix that damn packetloss. The ping spikes and packetloss are probably related.

EDIT:
This is what the incoming traceroute is like to the tallaght tower:
1 56 ms 54 ms 57 ms **************************
2 54 ms 56 ms 58 ms rt001kil.netsource.ie [212.17.32.101]
3 60 ms 77 ms 70 ms 193.1.208.197
4 56 ms 60 ms 62 ms dn42-ae0-50-ibis-access.irishbroadband.ie [62.231.52.158]
5 55 ms 55 ms 56 ms dn03-fe-1-3-1-150-tallaght.irishbroadband.ie [62.231.38.65]
NO packetloss at all on this side of the journey.

If anyone can access their IBB connected PC, can they do a traceroute to anywhere (preferably a netsource address) and just compare the route outgoing packets take to the one incoming packets take?

Mutant_Fruit

Rightio, seems like connections coming INTO the tallaght tower use 62.231.52.158. That router is grand, its perfect! Not a problem with it.

However, outgoing connections from the tallaght tower go through 62.231.52.157. This router is a pile of ****. I'm going to ring them up now and bitch about it. Its currently giving 12% packet loss.

If anyone on any other ISP could do a continuous tracert (using PingPlotter) or continuous ping to 62.231.38.65 to verify that incoming connections are NOT experiencing packetloss right now, that'd be great.

Red Alert

I'm on 3Rock and today it just disappeared. I was at work and couldn't access my server back home from there. A whole day with no service! WTF are they thinking? I'm now barely crawling along. Are their technical (lack of) 'support' open tomorrow?

LegacyUser

Adey2002 wrote:

I got rid of IBB and am now with icecomms.net

Pinging www.boards.ie - Minimum = 43ms, Maximum = 52ms, Average = 46ms

OMG, you moved. I get better ping to boards.ie on IBB than you do with your new provider-

Reply from 82.195.136.36: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=56
Reply from 82.195.136.36: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=56
Reply from 82.195.136.36: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=56
Reply from 82.195.136.36: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 82.195.136.36:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 13ms, Maximum = 17ms, Average = 14ms

And I am NOT trolling - I seriously ALWAYS get a good connection from IBB.
It has to be something to do with the mast.

I am on IBB 2MB Breeze Lite on the Ballycoolin mast.

zuma

AFAIK icecomms.net is not part of INEX and connects through somewhere in the UK so his UK pings are in the teeens!!!

Gopher971

Ok this has gone beyond a joke....

On odlums DN19 but situated in Drumcondra and my connection is atrocious .

Pinging boards.ie from my router

PING boards.ie (82.195.136.36): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=0 ttl=57 time=1675.3 ms
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=1964.1 ms
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=2131.4 ms
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=1975.5 ms
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=1993.6 ms
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=1404.4 ms
64 bytes from 82.195.136.36: icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=2292.4 ms
--- boards.ie ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 30% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 1404.4/1919.5/2292.4 ms

Yup folks, thats an average round trip time of 1919.5..... and 30% packet loss.

Tracert isn't much better....

traceroute to boards.ie (82.195.136.36), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 DN19-odlums-lo0.irishbroadband.ie (83.141.66.129) 2106.201 ms 1757.476 ms 1908.955 ms
2 DN05-fe-1-3-1-13-esb.irishbroadband.ie (62.231.52.105) 1976.098 ms 2264.007 ms 2254.438 ms
3 DN04-as1-0-guinness.irishbroadband.ie (83.141.117.1) 2145.288 ms 2566.567 ms 1868.103 ms
4 DN42-as0-0-ibis-access.irishbroadband.ie (62.231.52.153) 2314.807 ms 2098.455 ms 1901.726 ms
5 62.231.52.157 (62.231.52.157) 2069.203 ms 2338.547 ms 3454.992 ms
6 * suez-inex.hosting365.ie (193.242.111.23) 1553.491 ms 2302.904 ms
7 * 6.150.reserved.hosting365.ie (82.195.150.6) 1681.404 ms 1551.054 ms
8 boards.ie (82.195.136.36) 1502.488 ms 1578.162 ms 2033.708 ms
Trace complete



I think i'll switch to dialup...*Sheesh*

Mutant_Fruit

Same in tallaght at the moment. Even WoW is suffering badly. I'm getting 27% packetloss at the moment, down from 43% earlier.

Can we all bitch at em (again) tomorrow. I'm planning on spending my lunchbreak on the phone to em.

LegacyUser

Jeeez!! That is bad! I have to say I must be lucky then. I am going via Ballycoolin and its grand.


2 5 ms 10 ms 11 ms DN40-fe-0-0-1-150-ballycoolin.irishbroadband.ie
62.231.38.241]
3 13 ms 20 ms 17 ms 83.141.117.18
4 10 ms 17 ms 10 ms DN04-fe-1-3-0-352-guinness.irishbroadband.ie [83
141.117.17]
5 8 ms 11 ms 10 ms DN42-as0-0-ibis-access.irishbroadband.ie [62.231
52.153]
6 13 ms 15 ms 11 ms 83.141.117.45
7 27 ms 13 ms 22 ms suez-inex.hosting365.ie [193.242.111.23]
8 66 ms 14 ms 13 ms corerouter1.hosting365.ie [82.195.128.7]
9 15 ms 12 ms 12 ms boards.ie [82.195.136.36]

Tony

Mutant_Fruit wrote:

Same in tallaght at the moment. Even WoW is suffering badly. I'm getting 27% packetloss at the moment, down from 43% earlier.

Can we all bitch at em (again) tomorrow. I'm planning on spending my lunchbreak on the phone to em.

Yep I'm in Tallaght also and last few days have been dial up speed