Change to AUP - Section (d)

Open discussion regarding technological or telecommunication issues
Locked
ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:00 am

Peleus wrote:Hmm looks like I'm in the top 100 as well.

1) FA - Can you please post how much the "100th" person has downloaded, so we know how we stand in comparison?

2) As some feedback for your shaping system - currently can't browse the majority of websites without it timing out. Maximum download speed is 2 kbps. I understand that the purpose is to slow the usage down, but it's essentially become unusable. Obviously this will come across as bias because it appears that I'm subject to the restriction, but I don't think any of us likes having been told one thing - acting on that information - then being told another thing half way through and being punished as a result. Hey you can do whatever you like from December 1st - at least then it's fair for us to act on what we know the rules to be.

3) Saying all that - don't let that stop anyone ignore the content of the post, and simply state "OMG you're in the top 100 - get off the network".

P.s. I've downloaded less than 100gb, which while large isn't the ridiculous 200gb+ total's being mentioned.
1) No - I'm about to get on a plane for 15 hours and don't have time.

2) I wouldn't have thought 64kbps was unusable but perhaps it is these days

3) You miss the point that from December the blocks will be in place to ensure no user exceeds the 3 x average limit.

cdonges
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:18 am
Location: Toowoomba, Australia

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by cdonges » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:06 am

ForumAdmin wrote:I wouldn't have thought 64kbps was unusable but perhaps it is these days
I don't know what the speed actually is but it's unable to bring up this forum page.

If you weren't about to get on a plane I would suggest you apply the shaping to yourself for a few minutes and try.

Satyrfk
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 10:23 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Satyrfk » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:39 am

ForumAdmin wrote:
2) I wouldn't have thought 64kbps was unusable but perhaps it is these days
Of course its unuseable these days, Anyone could see that, Even MSN has bloody pop up videos with sound (which are annoying as shit). Those of us shaped by this crap arent even getting that speed, i did a speed test on a dial up 70k file and it took 30 seconds at like 1.9kb/second, i used to get better speeds on my 28.8k modem on a free isp back in the day.

I think shaping the top 100 heaviest users is a bit of a wide margin which wasnt thought out too well, I think im on about 96.8gb (hey you said unlimited, and xbox offers streaming hd content now!) But its a bit of a gap from 200gb, and 500gb to shape someone who in comparison really hasnt used much at all. I see people over a whirlpool over 100gb who arent shaped.


makes me a sad panda =(
internet in australia is pathetic

flak
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:17 am

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by flak » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:42 am

Peleus wrote:I guess saying that you shouldn't be running critical services on a residential connection isn't so helpful at the moment.
I also have HSPA with Exetel and 3 as a fallback if necessary, but I would rather have functional ADSL2, especially when the reason for it being non-functional is arbitrarily imposed, it makes things much simpler.
ForumAdmin wrote:It seems strange that a 64 kbps connection would produce such unusability but I accept that's what you are experiencing. We will cease the trial sometime later today when we have collected enough data to make it a useful test.
While it may be strange, it is my experience. Perhaps my expectations are too high based on 10 years of not experiencing 64kbps.

Can you provide some guidance as to what level of off-peak usage will be acceptable for the remainder of the month for those who were shaped this morning?

flak
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:17 am

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by flak » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:47 am

Just experienced my first VOIP call during the shaping pilot, it was terrible. Please exclude VOIP from the shaping.

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:02 am

flak wrote:Just experienced my first VOIP call during the shaping pilot, it was terrible. Please exclude VOIP from the shaping.
At 12 noon the off peak shaping will end.

The live trial of off peak shaping will end at that time for the balance of November.

I suppose it confirms (assuming your experience is typical) my long held view that "shaping" and "broadband" are mutually exclusive....I have always wondered at why I see so many posts saying that "shaping" is an essential offering.

Is the sending and receiving of emails affected? Is access to your on line banking affected?

Peleus
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Wollongong

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Peleus » Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:09 am

Online banking was effected for me at least - due to StGeorge timing out.

Going off the download speed it would be about a 18.4 kbit connection I was on, rather than a 64. I don't know how you're shaping is working, and how it effects different users though, so I can't say if this is the experience of everyone.

flak
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 7:17 am

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by flak » Sat Nov 21, 2009 10:21 am

ForumAdmin wrote:Is the sending and receiving of emails affected? Is access to your on line banking affected?
A simple text email using non Exetel mail server was sent and received in about a second.

Online banking was responsive with Westpac, until I actually tried to login...

"Online Banking will be unavailable on Saturday 21 November from approximately 05:00 to 07:30 AEDT due to scheduled maintenance."

Only 3 hours outside their window...

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:06 am

Peleus wrote:Online banking was effected for me at least - due to StGeorge timing out.

Going off the download speed it would be about a 18.4 kbit connection I was on, rather than a 64. I don't know how you're shaping is working, and how it effects different users though, so I can't say if this is the experience of everyone.
I think that the effective available speed dropped from the gross 64 kbps to much less than that because of the different Cisco overheads on the 10000s and the 7300s and burst allowance settings. That can be easily fixed by simply raising the gross from 64 kbps to some higher number.

We have ended the test an hour or so early so there should be no 'unusability' now.

We will test it again at a higher gross setting when we have looked at the data more seriously.

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:07 am

flak wrote:
ForumAdmin wrote:Is the sending and receiving of emails affected? Is access to your on line banking affected?
A simple text email using non Exetel mail server was sent and received in about a second.

Online banking was responsive with Westpac, until I actually tried to login...

"Online Banking will be unavailable on Saturday 21 November from approximately 05:00 to 07:30 AEDT due to scheduled maintenance."

Only 3 hours outside their window...
Thank you.

JasonM

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by JasonM » Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:13 am

What if shaping was 128kbps? 72kbps?

MTU on shaped connections might affect banking and other services, it should be dropped to the lowest setting (576, some modems won't allow less than 1000).

ForumAdmin
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:16 am

This brief test demonstrates how a very few users can 'soak up' huge amounts of bandwidth when they use efficient downloaders on very fast connections.

If you look at the MRTG report for total bandwidth you will see that by heavily constraining 100 users the bandwidth usage dropped by almost 500 mbps from the previous night. Now a Friday night/morning is always going to be different to a Thursday night but not by very much and most heavy downloaders schedule their downloads irrespective of the night. At a cost of around $A50.00 per mbps this means that to provide 100 users with their 'preferred' bandwidth usage would cost Exetel $A25,000 per month = $250.00 per user above the costs of the port and operations which would add another $A25 or so dollars.

I wonder whether any of those users would want to pay that much?

cdonges
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:18 am
Location: Toowoomba, Australia

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by cdonges » Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:25 am

ForumAdmin wrote:I wonder whether any of those users would want to pay that much?
Why not find out? Just jack up the plan costs for high downloaders and they will leave. Then you can be happy.

alinos
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:28 am
Location: vic

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by alinos » Sat Nov 21, 2009 12:19 pm

64KBPS isnt unusable these days it was the fact that we werent getting 64kbps

since i couldnt actually load up any pages i just triggered a random download it was rare for it to go above 1kb/s download half the time it was downloading in bytes

i woulda run a speed test but the sites timed out before i could get there

i have no problem that you capped me although it woulda been nice to know i was one ofthe top 100 especially since i didnt see the block page either

also the guy whos running the 5GB unlimited plan OP plan id assume your one of the people they refer to when they say upgrade time

i was unable to load any of the exetel pages home or forums and the non flash timed out :P

again shapping is fine whateva Telstra used to shape me to was fine the only thing it affected aside from making things load longer was an inability to use GMAIL in non basic html mode
i was still able to play cod4/5 with the same ping i had when i was unshapped , i didnt try 4/5 last night but on mw2 well since it runs its P2P setup it was istant boot at 12 :P

Peleus
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Wollongong

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Peleus » Sat Nov 21, 2009 1:11 pm

FA - What is your attitude / belief towards people using their full usage provided by Exetel?

Not so much in regards to unmetered, but in regards to those who were using their full 60gb. It seems as though you are saying that it's only 1-2% of heavy users which actually take up this bandwidth, and usage - and now you seem to be upset that these people are on your network. Right now the only thing stopping people who are using less downloads from doing more is their lack interest in it. They may simply be a normal "mum & dad" consumer, who doesn't know or care about things like HD streaming - it's not the bandwidth that's available to Exetel which is determining their usage patterns.

If these are the only people you want on your network, why not simply have a regular offpeak period - but lower it to what the average user uses. You mentioned that 26.5gb was the average use off peak, simply set the limit to 35gb off peak and be done with it. That way you don't have these heavy users on your network and you're happy. If you're then concerned about wasting bandwidth, then great - increase the off peak allowances, to the point which the excess bandwidth is soaked up - and everyone gets to download what they want. You're "light" customers aren't being effected by these who are using the "excess" because they didn't want to download that much in the first place. You're happy because you're utilizing the full bandwidth that Exetel is paying for - based off your peak period.

It just seems as though you've got a problem with people using a heap of bandwidth in offpeak (not the ridiculous situation of the 500gb downloading, but rather considering those who use the full 60gb offpeak) and classing them as bad customers to have. You say that you don't want heavy downloaders - yet you have some of the highest limits in the industry - you say you want everyone to have an equal opportunity to download in offpeak - yet people do, the only thing stopping those who are not utilizing their full plan is no interest in it.

Why even often this style of plan in the first place if they aren't the customers you want? I might be misinterpreting what you're saying on the forum because obviously we can't see your tone, but that's how it comes across.

Locked