Aframe
Premium
join:2008-01-30
Uvalde, TX
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to jackpot316
Re: Deliberate Limited Bandwidth 4pm to 12am ET
[BQUOTE
They just give us a read script Like
"sorry we have tecs working on the problem and we will contact you in a few days" I know pretty much everyone has went through this same thing I have.
Got the "working on it" from level 4 today. When I asked her to check signal level and xpol she did and said that it was low would check it out and call back in 5 minutes. She called back and told me that an installer would be out to replace the radio and we would go from there. I wish myself good luck.
later
Frank |
|
Arion
join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to how can that be
said by how can that be :
I dont understand aron how your speeds are above plan I have never seen speeds above plan and I have the same as you Do you by chance sell Hughes products or have a secret to success you care to share as i also have experianced these speeds at those times sense november
No I sure don't sell Hughes. I did a self install with a used DW6000 two years ago and last year at the fap change I upgraded to a HN7000S and went from Residential to Pro package. I have had quite good performance nailing my plan speeds of 1000 kbps down almost from the beginning. During the prime time it would slow down to about 400 kbps and sometimes slower.
About a month ago my off peak performance went through the roof with nothing done on my end. Within the last week my RSL has gone up about 10 points and I have not had the firmware update as of yet.
I haven't checked my gateway in quite a while (maybe I will now) but I surmise that they moved me to a different gateway and/or a lot of existing customers on my gateway have been moved to different ones. I really don't know.
In the last couple of years there have been a few times with fast dial up speeds that lasted for a day or two (wasn't fapped) but then when they balanced the traffic again as they do from time to time the speeds came back up. Were starting to get into peak time now and this is what I just ran.
:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Download Connection is:: 926 Kbps about 0.9 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB)
Download Speed is:: 113 kB/s
Tested From:: »testmy.net/ (Main)
Test Time:: 2008/02/18 - 1:59pm
Bottom Line:: 16X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 9.06 sec
Tested from a 2992 kB file and took 26.453 seconds to complete
Download Diagnosis:: 90% + Okay : running at 95.07 % of your hosts average (direcpc.com)
D-Validation Link:: »testmy.net/stats/id-TFJQ5GLA2
User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; InfoPath.2) [!] |
|
dmp
Premium
join:2003-12-15
Emmetsburg, IA
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to sovtman
FLOW CONTROL IS ON:
System Level Diagnostics
---------------------------------------------------------------
Monitoring interval MON FEB 18 17:37:35 2008 - MON FEB 18 18:37:36 2008
Problem(s) Detected [* - Triggering Statistic(s)] Uplink Queuing, RTT, Web Acceleration[I], DNS Acceleration[N]
Overall BAD
Transport BAD
PEP BAD
TurboPage BAD
DNS BAD
VSAT Internal GOOD
--
7000S-RoofMount/ Dell1.8P4-WinXP/ SP2-IE7x-2GBRAM/ LCCU-ProxyOFF/ SatMex5-1270MHz/ 3networked-Switch |
|
clintonv
join:2006-12-22
Live Oak, FL
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to Arion
Not a real big surprise, but until Jan 8th 2008, I did not have this problem. This is clearly a case of limiting bandwidth on Hughes Net's part. They have overloaded the system.....I wouldn't really mind so much if they didnt LIE to you about what they are doing. Funny thing Hughes Net worked for me for 6 years, now it stops.
--
DW4000 Home on SatMex5/1250, Gateway 66.82.24.15, Signal ~82, Wired LAN, 2-WinXP Pro w/SP2
|
|
dMarks
Melting Faces For Fun
join:2007-02-09
Leslie, MI
 ·Millenicom
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to sovtman
Some transponders are more flow controlled than others but all can be controlled. Back when I first got Hughes, Feb 1st '07, I was put on a transponder that was flow controlled heavily. That's not a guess, that's exactly what a Hughes Executive Technician told me once I went through the process with the Attorney General. I was put on a different transponder which worked great for a couple months. Then things went into the crapper again until another transponder change was done (I had not contacted Hughes, they just did the change out of the blue) which gave me good speeds again until December. That's when I went through the process to get my contract canceled and switched to Millenicom.
While it is possible that a drastic change in speed could be due to prime-time traffic beginning, it is more likely that since Hughes is anticipating getting people on Spaceway III soon, they are using an automated Flow Control system while at the same time continuing with signing up new customers. I find it more likely that they cut speeds at a certain time in anticipation of heavier prime-time traffic, then loosen the restriction once prime-time is over.
That's just my opinion, but I base it off the fact that I know they have been using flow controlling on transponders even before Spaceway III launched (unless of course they lied to me about it when I first got my transponder switched).
--
Windows XP Pro SP2|AMD Athlon 64 FX-57|2GB Dual Channel RAM|2x GeForce 7950 GT 512MB|250GB HDD |
|
CarlsDad
join:2006-07-10
Sedro Woolley, WA
1 edit | reply to sovtman
I am receiving several phone calls a day from HughesNet customers complaining about slow speeds and basic unusable performance. The customers are spread across several satellites and include both 6000 and 7000 users. They all get good performance early in the morning and very late at night, but during normal peak hours their speeds drop to 100 to 200 and ping times jump to 1500 to 2000 ms. This effectively kills server connections and any thing but basic HTML pages will not load.
I am guessing Hughes has over loaded their NOC capacity and is not going to increase capacity due to the new Spaceway system coming online. Hopefully enough currant users (mostly older 6000 with no contract) will switch to the new system thus relaxing congestion on the currant network.
Until then I am pulling all plugs on any satellite Internet sales.
When network congestion gets bad enough, you can have speed test jumping from 50 to 900 back to back. It is not a matter of time, just a simple matter overall usage. One second there may be little traffic, but 2 seconds later more people are getting their email.
I bet during American Idol tonight, performance will be better than last night, which had little NEW programming. I also wonder how the writers strike might have affected this issue. With virtually no new programming, maybe more people are using the Internet to view alternate formats of TV programming, entertainment or streaming music. Something to think about! |
|
selling hughes
@direcpc.com
| said by CarlsDad  :I am receiving several phone calls a day from HughesNet customers complaining about slow speeds and basic unusable performance. The customers are spread across several satellites and include both 6000 and 7000 users. They all get good performance early in the morning and very late at night, but during normal peak hours their speeds drop to 100 to 200 and ping times jump to 1500 to 2000 ms. This effectively kills server connections and any thing but basic HTML pages will not load. I am guessing Hughes has over loaded their NOC capacity and is not going to increase capacity due to the new Spaceway system coming online. Hopefully enough currant users (mostly older 6000 with no contract) will switch to the new system thus relaxing congestion on the currant network. Until then I am pulling all plugs on any satellite Internet sales. When network congestion gets bad enough, you can have speed test jumping from 50 to 900 back to back. It is not a matter of time, just a simple matter overall usage. One second there may be little traffic, but 2 seconds later more people are getting their email. I bet during American Idol tonight, performance will be better than last night, which had little NEW programming. I also wonder how the writers strike might have affected this issue. With virtually no new programming, maybe more people are using the Internet to view alternate formats of TV programming, entertainment or streaming music. Something to think about! I applaud your integrity and judgment for suspending sales of Hughes systems until/unless some of these issues are worked out. While it is understandable that Hughes would suspend adding additional capacity to existing satellites in anticipation of being able to use Spaceway III to handle a good part of its bandwidth needs, the thing that shows lack of integrity on their part is that they have continued to take on new customers without the capacity to meet their bandwidth needs. Instead, the right thing to do would have been to temporarily suspend adding new accounts until Spaceway was up and running.
Also, for those trying to understand the flow control and bandwidth allocation percentage, I've been monitoring my bandwidth allocation percentage. I've seen it vary from as little as 9% to as much as 60%. In both cases, though, my system was still getting plan maximum speeds (I'm one of the fortunate ones who is not on an overcrowded gateway). So, I'm not really sure what the significance of the bandwidth allocation percentage is. On the other hand, I'm confident that, when flow control is enabled, that it is done at times when demand for bandwidth is the heaviest. I now that, at the NOC, Hughes has print outs for each transponder on each satellite, and those print outs show when, on that transponder, bandwidth demand is typically above the level of available bandwidth, and I'm confident that it is, at those times, when the flow control is enabled. The times, however, when it is enabled, may well be different from one transponder and satellite to another, depending on how heavily that transponder is overloaded. The idea of the flow control is ensure that everyone can get some bandwidth, even if at much slower speeds. Without it, some would be getting higher speeds, but others would not even be able to connect. |
|
sovtman
join:2007-04-20
Marlboro, VT
| reply to CarlsDad
said by CarlsDad :I am receiving several phone calls a day from HughesNet customers complaining about slow speeds and basic unusable performance. The customers are spread across several satellites and include both 6000 and 7000 users. Until then I am pulling all plugs on any satellite Internet sales. When network congestion gets bad enough, you can have speed test jumping from 50 to 900 back to back. It is not a matter of time, just a simple matter overall usage. One second there may be little traffic, but 2 seconds later more people are getting their email. That's interesting about getting your getting calls and suspending satellite sales. Brings a broader perspective to the issue.
My only contention with what you say is: I can set my clock by when my speeds are going to cut back. Will continue to check and document.
Tomcatt described his prime time speeds getting better in another thread. So I continue to hope. |
|
sovtman
join:2007-04-20
Marlboro, VT
| reply to CarlsDad
said by CarlsDad : It is not a matter of time, just a simple matter overall usage. One second there may be little traffic, but 2 seconds later more people are getting their email. Set my clock by it
February 19th, 04:03PM - 78/65 kbps
February 19th, 03:59PM - 624/65 kbps
February 16th, 04:02PM - 77/38 kbps
February 16th, 03:57PM - 728/88 kbps
February 15th, 04:01PM - 66/32 kbps
February 15th, 03:59PM - 605/38 kbps
It is interesting that my upload speeds stayed the same today. |
|
selling hughes
@direcpc.com
| said by sovtman :said by CarlsDad : It is not a matter of time, just a simple matter overall usage. One second there may be little traffic, but 2 seconds later more people are getting their email. Set my clock by itFebruary 19th, 04:03PM - 78/65 kbps
February 19th, 03:59PM - 624/65 kbps
February 16th, 04:02PM - 77/38 kbps
February 16th, 03:57PM - 728/88 kbps
February 15th, 04:01PM - 66/32 kbps
February 15th, 03:59PM - 605/38 kbps It is interesting that my upload speeds stayed the same today. As I said in my post above, my understanding is that flow control is applied to each transponder at times when usage patterns on that transponder show usage greater than available bandwidth capacity. Some time a go, someone from Hughes' engineering actually showed me the print outs from several transponders showing typical usage on those transponders each day. (My guess is that he would be losing his job for doing so if he were identified.) The print outs showed, for each transponder, at what times bandwidth demand was likely to be heavy and at what times it isn't. Based on those usage patterns, I'd be confident, Hughes has its flow control set to be enabled. I'd guess that the times vary from one transponder to another, but that, as your experience shows, for a given transponder, they happen at the same times in a regular pattern. Also, as I said above, the idea of flow control is to insure that, when there isn't enough available bandwidth to meet demand, that everyone will be able to get a share of that available bandwidth at lower speeds. Without the flow control, some would be getting faster speeds, but others would be unable to get on line. |
|
sovtman
join:2007-04-20
Marlboro, VT
| reply to selling hughes
said by selling hughes :
Also, for those trying to understand the flow control and bandwidth allocation percentage, I've been monitoring my bandwidth allocation percentage. I've seen it vary from as little as 9% to as much as 60%. In both cases, though, my system was still getting plan maximum speeds (I'm one of the fortunate ones who is not on an overcrowded gateway). So, I'm not really sure what the significance of the bandwidth allocation percentage is. I can't figure out BW allocation either. And your observations as not correlated to speed confirms my confusion. 
My point is simple, yes network congestion can cause bw degradation, but it defies simple logic (and common sense) to think that the consistent, dramatic drop in my service at 4PM ET everyday is merely a fact of network congestion. Something in the system (whether intentionally or through a screw-up) is throttling down my bandwidth at the same time everyday. Either HN is anticipating congestion or they messed something up. |
|
sovtman
join:2007-04-20
Marlboro, VT
| reply to selling hughes
said by selling hughes :
I'd guess that the times vary from one transponder to another, but that, as your experience shows, for a given transponder, they happen at the same times in a regular pattern. Your information makes sense. Anticipating congestion, they restrict bandwidth.
BUT, as a long time HN user, I have to say that this is a new experience for me. For years, I have been use to having slower speeds in the evening, sometimes going down to 200-300 for a few hours. I even started using a d/l manager to collect things on the non-peak hours to be a good sat-citizen. But when I saw sub-100 speeds, I thought, FAP? or something's wrong!
Now, I am, in essence, pretty close to FAPed 8 hours a day. |
|
selling hughes
@direcpc.com
| reply to sovtman
said by sovtman :said by selling hughes :
Also, for those trying to understand the flow control and bandwidth allocation percentage, I've been monitoring my bandwidth allocation percentage. I've seen it vary from as little as 9% to as much as 60%. In both cases, though, my system was still getting plan maximum speeds (I'm one of the fortunate ones who is not on an overcrowded gateway). So, I'm not really sure what the significance of the bandwidth allocation percentage is. I can't figure out BW allocation either. And your observations as not correlated to speed confirms my confusion. My point is simple, yes network congestion can cause bw degradation, but it defies simple logic (and common sense) to think that the consistent, dramatic drop in my service at 4PM ET everyday is merely a fact of network congestion. Something in the system (whether intentionally or through a screw-up) is throttling down my bandwidth at the same time everyday. Either HN is anticipating congestion or they messed something up. Actually, I think the use of flow control does have a logic to it (even though it may be a logic without ethics). Hughes knows, statistically, how much bandwidth demand there is likely to be during each hour of the day on any given transponder. What they are doing, then, is preemptively applying the flow control during those hours when they know that demand is likely to exceed available bandwidth. That means that, during that time, there may be times when the level of demand would allow speeds above the throttled level, but, unfortunately speeds will still be capped at the lower level. It also means, though, that, at other times, everyone will be able to get on line in spite of high bandwidth demand. Clearly, if Hughes was not badly overselling bandwidth, the amount of time when the flow control was enabled would be small. But, the more customers are crammed into a transponder, the more hours during the day when the flow control will be enabled.
With regard to the BW allocation %, I'm not even sure whether it is good to have a high number or a low number because I don't know whether the number shows how much bandwidth I have available for my use or whether it shows how much of my available bandwidth I've used. Without further clarification from someone with knowledge, I can't draw any conclusions about that stat. |
|
sovtman
join:2007-04-20
Marlboro, VT
1 edit | Couple things:
1) I have never seen my advanced page say that my "Flow Control" was ON. So not sure if the systematic degradation in my performance is technically "flow control." Probably a matter of semantics. But I do understand the model you are setting forth.
2) In Jan, I had a few days of sub-100kbps. Like three days straight. Escalated it, and the problem got better.
3) Sometime later in January the 4-midnight thing seemed to kick in.
4) My experience with degradation of service has always been a steady decrease. I have never not been able to get on. And I thought that the "burst-able" nature of network (if that is the right phrase) meant that everyone suffered when a transponder got very active. Hence the need for a FAP policy. Point being: I never experienced this poor performance during peak times.
My plan is to collected data on a few more days of throttle times, and call Executive Customer Care. Maybe it will all be for naught, but given #2 above, I am hoping that this problem will get better. What can I say: I am an optimist!
HN70000S | Pro | 83 W | 1430mhz |
|
egonot
join:2008-01-21
Mount Pleasant, TN | reply to sovtman
You could say "hughesnet sucks", actually a letter needs to be changed there. And its without lube or a kiss.
--
HN7000S pro $89 117w 1270 vert hor 256 2/3 tc sig80
recently downgraded FROM DW6000 lol 350dn / 10up |
|
CarlsDad
join:2006-07-10
Sedro Woolley, WA
| reply to sovtman
The issue with browsing is not always speeds but ping times that exceed what some servers consider normal.
Try running a ping test using the command line
ping -t yahoo.com
the ping will run until stopped. Normal ping times for satellite should be between 700 and 900 with some over 1000ms. When the ping time hits over 1700, that is when packets are usually lost and page loads are affected.
The fastest ping time will be at least 575ms. That is the absolute time it takes a radio signal to travel from your earth station to the satellite down to the NOC and back again. Add in some packet management overhead, the time it takes their server receive data from desired server, and ping times around 625 +-25 are about the best ANY satellite Internet system can expect to provide. |
|
ctutt
Premium
join:2007-07-11
Columbia, MO
| reply to sovtman
I've never consistently experienced the speeds I pay for in the 6 years and every upgrade I've been on sattelite. I now have the 7000S modem. Recently though, my speeds have been so slow (100-300 kbps) that some of my website host servers literally time out on me preventing me from maintaining my websites. I'm on the Pro Plan and on a good day (in very short bursts) I have gotten 1000 kpbs. I finally complained and tech service is running some tests. They have me running speed tests 3 times a day disconnected from my LAN Router. Just to see if the D-Link Broadband Ethernet Router really does make a difference I've been running the tests both ways. To my surprise, the router slows me down by approx. 200 kpbs. Would anyone have any thoughts on why and how to correct that? |
|
Arion
join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to sovtman
The bandwidth limitations certainly isn't affecting every transponder and every gateway. I'm well into prime time at 9pm eastern and just did a speed test and got more than 1000kbps down. And yet some times I have been quite slow during prime time as well.
:::.. Download Stats ..:::
Download Connection is:: 1197 Kbps about 1.2 Mbps (tested with 1496 kB)
Download Speed is:: 146 kB/s
Tested From:: »testmy.net/ (Main)
Test Time:: 2008/02/19 - 8:04pm
Bottom Line:: 21X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 7.01 sec
Tested from a 1496 kB file and took 10.235 seconds to complete
Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 22.77 % faster than the average for host (direcpc.com)
D-Validation Link:: »testmy.net/stats/id-4ZFSVJ021
User Agent:: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; InfoPath.2) [!]
--
HN7000S IA-8 1270 / 8-PSK 3/4 (14) / Router:67.142.140.95 /.74 1 watt / Pro / Pentium 3.2ghz, 1gb ram /Dual Boot WinXP Pro/LinxuS / Firefox 2.0.0.6 |
|
egonot
join:2008-01-21
Mount Pleasant, TN
| reply to sovtman
I always have thoughts thats my problem, But an answer? possibly NOT
but... unless you make the change in tcp properties of your broadband connection device(10/100 or wireless), you are using Hughes' DNS servers. Your router also has DNS capability, usually default setting "on" and can probably be turned off and back on to test the diffrence.
--
HN7000S pro $89 117w 1270 vert hor 256 2/3 tc sig80
recently downgraded FROM DW6000 lol 350dn / 10up |
|
sovtman
join:2007-04-20
Marlboro, VT
| reply to Arion
said by Arion :The bandwidth limitations certainly isn't affecting every transponder and every gateway. I'm well into prime time at 9pm eastern and just did a speed test and got more than 1000kbps down. And yet some times I have been quite slow during prime time as well. Thanks for the prime time snap shot. It is obvious that this is not a universal problem.
Two months ago, I was like you. I really didn't worry about primetime vs nonprimetime. It all felt reasonably fast too me. Once in a while, I would feel the dip in primetime, but it was more along the lines of going from 1000 to 400/500. Not great, but not part of doing business in the world of satellite internet.
So what we are talking about are at least two different experiences/phenomena:
1) "Normal" slow-downs when things get busy. Things slow down overall, but are variable.
2) Consistent, abrupt "throttled" download speeds --- either all day or at certain regular times during the day. (It feels like when I set a d/l speed on my d/l manager.)
I think it is important to distinguish between the two. Both are real phenomenon. Both vary according to sat/transponder. And nobody actually knows why #2 happens at all.
Wow this is almost as fun as figuring out the FAP parameters 7 months ago.
--
HN70000S | Pro | 83 W | 1430mhz |
|
