dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
551
Kash76
join:2003-09-08
Burnsville, MN

Kash76

Member

Benefits of SE over Qwest?

I am getting frustrated with my ping times at around 70-100ms with interlacing. Qwest now will not turn this feature off. I have a local ISP with a single static IP which is great, the only complaint is the ping times. I am willing to sacrifice speed to get my ping down. I have 5 down and ~700k up. I know that SE would be using the same lines, knowing that would I have any benefits of trying SE?

Thanks!
tkdslr
join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL

1 edit

tkdslr

Member

said by Kash76:

I am getting frustrated with my ping times at around 70-100ms with interlacing. Qwest now will not turn this feature off. I have a local ISP with a single static IP which is great, the only complaint is the ping times. I am willing to sacrifice speed to get my ping down. I have 5 down and ~700k up. I know that SE would be using the same lines, knowing that would I have any benefits of trying SE?
If your close enough to the CO that has a Covad DSLAM, then you have a distinct possibility of getting a much better SE connection. SE w/Covad uses bridged ATM connections (no PPPoE), thus interleave factor can be set much lower when there is some noise on the line.

Note: PPPoE is a really fragile protocol, even minimal data corruption and/or loss breaks the PPP connection and magnifies the noise effect.

Net effect, my ping times with Speakeasy/Covad to 1st hop SE router 500 miles away(Atlanta) was way lower(25 to 35ms) when compared to my last local ISP (10 miles) using Bell South's DSLAM programmed with a noise profile(47ms).

Note: Before BS Noise Profile was activated my local ISP ping times were in the 8 to 9 ms range.

BS defacto (one size fits all) noise profile 16ms.
SE/Covad offers a greater variety of interleave profiles. (2ms, 4ms, etc.)

»www.internetnz.net.nz/pd ··· port.pdf
»www.dslforum.org/techwor ··· -126.pdf

metrodust
Hey Thats Mine
join:1999-12-10
Seattle, WA

metrodust to Kash76

Member

to Kash76
Kash

i dont think you'll have anything close, you'll probably end up on the Chicago PoP. but you'll still have lower pings then with qwest (unless of course you cant get onto a covad dslam). give them a call and see if covad is in your CO, can't hurt right?
Kash76
join:2003-09-08
Burnsville, MN

Kash76

Member

Thanks for the replies. Is there a map on the net with the DSLAM locations?
tkdslr
join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL

tkdslr

Member

said by Kash76:

Thanks for the replies. Is there a map on the net with the DSLAM locations?
»/coinfo

Remote terminals is another story.
I suggest you plug in the necessary info into the Covad availability page and see if they can offer you ADSL service..

If the Covad answer is yes... then Speakeasy can service your location with ADSL service.
Kash76
join:2003-09-08
Burnsville, MN

Kash76

Member

It appears that Covad is located near me. Thanks!!
Mandr4ke
join:2002-05-31
Chicago, IL

Mandr4ke to Kash76

Member

to Kash76
Seems like SepakEasy has been routing throguh Quest in Chicago POP and it really sucks becasue all ping times have jumped an average 30-40 ms.. and thats connection from chicago to local game servers in chicago, this is really retarded!!