Comments on: broadband service control in the orcon network http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/ linkstate.org Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:13:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Barry http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-59 Barry Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:27:41 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-59 How does skype traffic get classified - is it P2P, browsing or default? How does skype traffic get classified - is it P2P, browsing or default?

]]> By: Glenn Peoples http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-25 Glenn Peoples Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:39:10 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-25 There simply has got to be a better way than this. 25% of traffic is being choked to the point where downstream transfer rates are typically 0kB/sec in daylight and evening hours, even when those who use this sort of traffic are the customers who - more than most others - have actually paid for extra data. Seriously I would understand it if p2p traffic were limited to half of what a user could normally expect, but blocked out altogether (speaking from my own current experience with Orcon) really is too heavy handed. There has to be a much better approach than this. As it is, I've had to simply stop buying more data, because there's just no possible way I can use the extra data that I buy (I'm on the gold plan, and not adsl+). I simply fail to see how this can be called fair. It isn't fairer to all, it is generous to some and stingy to others. it is absolutely normal and fair for users of bandwidth to impact other users of bandwidth. users of http traffic impact other users of http traffic. The way it is currently set up, users of p2p traffic are being treated as though they are not allowed to impact the network to the extent that other users are. If they are going to be limited at all, why not ONLY limit them to the extent necessary to ensure that they don't impact the network more than other users? I for one would think that to be quite fair. As it is, they are simply being told that Orcon is not for them. There simply has got to be a better way than this. 25% of traffic is being choked to the point where downstream transfer rates are typically 0kB/sec in daylight and evening hours, even when those who use this sort of traffic are the customers who - more than most others - have actually paid for extra data. Seriously I would understand it if p2p traffic were limited to half of what a user could normally expect, but blocked out altogether (speaking from my own current experience with Orcon) really is too heavy handed. There has to be a much better approach than this. As it is, I’ve had to simply stop buying more data, because there’s just no possible way I can use the extra data that I buy (I’m on the gold plan, and not adsl+).

I simply fail to see how this can be called fair. It isn’t fairer to all, it is generous to some and stingy to others. it is absolutely normal and fair for users of bandwidth to impact other users of bandwidth. users of http traffic impact other users of http traffic. The way it is currently set up, users of p2p traffic are being treated as though they are not allowed to impact the network to the extent that other users are. If they are going to be limited at all, why not ONLY limit them to the extent necessary to ensure that they don’t impact the network more than other users? I for one would think that to be quite fair. As it is, they are simply being told that Orcon is not for them.

]]> By: Andrey http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-6 Andrey Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:27:54 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-6 Thats all nice and dandy but the fact remains that Orcon just doesn't have enough international bandwidth. Plus Deep Packet Inspection does bugger all when you use encrypted torrent traffic. Thats all nice and dandy but the fact remains that Orcon just doesn’t have enough international bandwidth. Plus Deep Packet Inspection does bugger all when you use encrypted torrent traffic.

]]> By: Paul Campbell http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-5 Paul Campbell Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:26:14 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-5 Thanks for being open and publishing this - I see (from Dunedin) something that looks somewhat different from this - I run VOIP (Vonnage, we brought our US phone number with us when we moved back to NZ) and Cisco VPN (for secure mail and some consulting work to an old employer) - and everything often seems to go to pot in the (NZ) afternoons - VOIP becomes unusable and the VPN just drops out (I guess it's in your 'generic' pool) - am I seeing the results of your traffic shaping? or are there other bottlenecks I may be running up against (getting packets to Auckland for example) PS: how about some better peering? the current international outage (looks like asian?) that you're suffering has also knocked about half the NZ web sites out as well ... Thanks for being open and publishing this - I see (from Dunedin) something that looks somewhat different from this - I run VOIP (Vonnage, we brought our US phone number with us when we moved back to NZ) and Cisco VPN (for secure mail and some consulting work to an old employer) - and everything often seems to go to pot in the (NZ) afternoons - VOIP becomes unusable and the VPN just drops out (I guess it’s in your ‘generic’ pool) - am I seeing the results of your traffic shaping? or are there other bottlenecks I may be running up against (getting packets to Auckland for example)

PS: how about some better peering? the current international outage (looks like asian?) that you’re suffering has also knocked about half the NZ web sites out as well …

]]> By: thomas http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-4 thomas Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:46:46 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-4 This might be a topic to cover off in a future post, but in short, LLU and UBA (Telecom wholesale DSL) connections are dimensioned differently within the broadband pool. This is a reflection of the restricted backhaul allocation on the Telecom wholesale network. Our LLU is all ADSL2+, UBA is a mix of ADSL2+ and ADSL - but they're not treated any differently. This might be a topic to cover off in a future post, but in short, LLU and UBA (Telecom wholesale DSL) connections are dimensioned differently within the broadband pool. This is a reflection of the restricted backhaul allocation on the Telecom wholesale network. Our LLU is all ADSL2+, UBA is a mix of ADSL2+ and ADSL - but they’re not treated any differently.

]]> By: Alex http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-3 Alex Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:28:14 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-3 It's really great to have this level of detail available :). It would be nice if the Orcon blog allowed for comments. I have a quick question - is the ADSL2+ traffic put into the same policy as the old ADSL traffic? If it is in the same policy, how do the different line speeds impact contention for bandwidth within a given category - ie P2P. Should the ADSL2+ user expect to have the same performance as the ADSL user, or is it more proportional? Cheers, Alex It’s really great to have this level of detail available :).

It would be nice if the Orcon blog allowed for comments.

I have a quick question - is the ADSL2+ traffic put into the same policy as the old ADSL traffic? If it is in the same policy, how do the different line speeds impact contention for bandwidth within a given category - ie P2P. Should the ADSL2+ user expect to have the same performance as the ADSL user, or is it more proportional?

Cheers,
Alex

]]> By: Paul Kershaw http://linkstate.org/2008/06/15/broadband-service-control-in-the-orcon-network/#comment-2 Paul Kershaw Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:19:50 +0000 http://linkstate.org/blog2/?p=6#comment-2 Hmmmm... sounds fishy... http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080708-google-slams-bell-canada-open-internet-is-extraordinary.html Hmmmm… sounds fishy… http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080708-google-slams-bell-canada-open-internet-is-extraordinary.html

]]>