Seriously slow speeds in the evening

[Dazzled]

JJDisco. OK. Evening only made me think first of exchange congestion, and then of lights and TVs and the like. Radio interference is common, and sometimes it is severe. The effect is a speed loss as fewer bits are available for the analogue to digital conversion process. Phone lines are completely unshielded, not only the modem cables, but also your house wiring.

[Dazzled]

Pondok: That' jitter is the sort of thing I was talking about earlier - the 30ish ms results are expected, but many successive pings appear to be held in the exchange queue for a little while. DSLAMs etc have a memory buffer to hold packets ready for a brief period when they are preoccupied. Since your target is your ISP it's only exchange and backhaul being tested. Check it again when speed seems OK.

[pondok]

are you getting normal speed now?

for me, the speed is a bit better during the day time
around 2-3Mbps

this is tested during "okay" speed

PING 220.233.0.4 (220.233.0.4): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=69.998 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=30.229 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=125.128 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=28.180 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=27.125 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=26.683 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=38.612 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=87.117 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=27.546 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=26.896 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=10 ttl=59 time=48.036 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=11 ttl=59 time=27.152 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=12 ttl=59 time=38.507 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=13 ttl=59 time=27.643 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=14 ttl=59 time=27.562 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=15 ttl=59 time=28.514 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=16 ttl=59 time=61.083 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=17 ttl=59 time=37.551 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=18 ttl=59 time=83.088 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=19 ttl=59 time=29.158 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=20 ttl=59 time=80.544 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=21 ttl=59 time=40.954 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=22 ttl=59 time=60.753 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=23 ttl=59 time=94.853 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=24 ttl=59 time=100.512 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=25 ttl=59 time=72.515 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=26 ttl=59 time=27.419 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=27 ttl=59 time=112.662 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=28 ttl=59 time=26.819 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=29 ttl=59 time=31.266 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=30 ttl=59 time=55.728 ms

[shoner]

are you getting normal speed now?

for me, the speed is a bit better during the day time
around 2-3Mbps

this is tested during "okay" speed

PING 220.233.0.4 (220.233.0.4): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=69.998 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=30.229 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=125.128 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=28.180 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=27.125 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=26.683 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=38.612 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=87.117 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=27.546 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=26.896 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=10 ttl=59 time=48.036 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=11 ttl=59 time=27.152 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=12 ttl=59 time=38.507 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=13 ttl=59 time=27.643 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=14 ttl=59 time=27.562 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=15 ttl=59 time=28.514 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=16 ttl=59 time=61.083 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=17 ttl=59 time=37.551 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=18 ttl=59 time=83.088 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=19 ttl=59 time=29.158 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=20 ttl=59 time=80.544 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=21 ttl=59 time=40.954 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=22 ttl=59 time=60.753 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=23 ttl=59 time=94.853 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=24 ttl=59 time=100.512 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=25 ttl=59 time=72.515 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=26 ttl=59 time=27.419 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=27 ttl=59 time=112.662 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=28 ttl=59 time=26.819 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=29 ttl=59 time=31.266 ms
64 bytes from 220.233.0.4: icmp_seq=30 ttl=59 time=55.728 ms

Your speed issue is currently being worked on. There is no immediate solution as our supplier has confirmed that they have some network related issues.
We have escalted this case the the supplier and their management is aware of the situation. Steps are being taken to remedy the issue. At the moment there is no ETR.

We sincerely apologies for the inconvenience caused.

[JJDisco]

Your speed issue is currently being worked on. There is no immediate solution as our supplier has confirmed that they have some network related issues.
We have escalted this case the the supplier and their management is aware of the situation. Steps are being taken to remedy the issue. At the moment there is no ETR.

We sincerely apologies for the inconvenience caused.

Mmmm that sounds familiar. If my case is anything to go by Pondok. That ETR will never happen and there are no steps to remedy the issue.

Anyone from support willing to actually fix my speed problems???

[shoner]

Mmmm that sounds familiar. If my case is anything to go by Pondok. That ETR will never happen and there are no steps to remedy the issue.

Anyone from support willing to actually fix my speed problems???

I believe we have already advised you about your speed issue. However I will get an engineer to contact you shortly to see what other avenues we can use to remedy this situation.

[udara]

Your speed issue is currently being worked on. There is no immediate solution as our supplier has confirmed that they have some network related issues.
We have escalted this case the the supplier and their management is aware of the situation. Steps are being taken to remedy the issue. At the moment there is no ETR.

We sincerely apologies for the inconvenience caused.

Mmmm that sounds familiar. If my case is anything to go by Pondok. That ETR will never happen and there are no steps to remedy the issue.

Anyone from support willing to actually fix my speed problems???

I have tried calling you but i haven't been able to get through, I have sent you an email with all the current information that we have

[JJDisco]

And so it is now officially 6 months since I originally raised the issue. To be told well nothing... No wait I was told that it had been fixed by the supplier. Umm no

My download speeds right now are
Your current bandwidth reading is:

1.90 Mbps

which means you can download at 243.4 KB/sec. from our servers.


Your current bandwidth reading is:

3.32 Mbps

which means you can download at 425.01 KB/sec. from our servers.

Your current bandwidth reading is:

3.25 Mbps

which means you can download at 416.09 KB/sec. from our servers.

Seriously. 6 FREAKIN MONTHS

Can I get some kind of service please. And if you do actually decide to call leave a message. I'm sick of having missed calls with no details from you and having to guess what it may have to do with

[ShaminG]

Dear JJDisco,

I believe the initially reported issue has been resolved back in mid October. I have arranged a support engineer to be in contact with you tomorrow to carry out further investigation on this.

[JJDisco]

No it was never resolved. I was sent an email to say that it had been resolved and I then had a series of emails with udara which clearly pointed out that nothing had been resolved and that the statement that it was resolved was an error on Exetels behalf.

[udara]

No it was never resolved. I was sent an email to say that it had been resolved and I then had a series of emails with udara which clearly pointed out that nothing had been resolved and that the statement that it was resolved was an error on Exetels behalf.

As per the conversation that I had with you i have sent you an email with the tests that you need to conduct.