zincPremium
join:2004-02-17
Kitchener, ON | reply to NoOneImportant
Re: Teksavvy's throttling now? Just a vent, nothing is needed. AFAIK Bell doesn't have the technology to throttle like that. Instead what is possible if all downloads are going slow (not just torrents) then it's possible that Bell's network is saturated in the op's area... that wouldn't be anything that hasn't happened before. |
|
| said by zinc:AFAIK Bell doesn't have the technology to throttle like that. Even if Bell had the equipment, they probably would not have the legal clearance to actively interfere with wholesale traffic.
As you said in the rest of your post, Bell is most likely experiencing local link or equipment overload. Me and a few others in the Anjou and St-Leonard areas have encountered somewhat lousy speeds during peak hours over the last few weeks or months. In my case, line stats certainly are not to blame with 4dB up / 10dB down attenuation and 26dB down SNRM. Everything was great for the first two weeks from activation but it has been slowly going downhill with no change in line stats.
While downloading torrents, the highest I can push my upload before the whole thing starts falling apart is around 45KB/s. This is at least 20KB/s short of what I was expecting from a 800kbps sync. |
|
| said by InvalidError:said by zinc:AFAIK Bell doesn't have the technology to throttle like that. Even if Bell had the equipment, they probably would not have the legal clearance to actively interfere with wholesale traffic. As you said in the rest of your post, Bell is most likely experiencing local link or equipment overload. Me and a few others in the Anjou and St-Leonard areas have encountered somewhat lousy speeds during peak hours over the last few weeks or months. In my case, line stats certainly are not to blame with 4dB up / 10dB down attenuation and 26dB down SNRM. Everything was great for the first two weeks from activation but it has been slowly going downhill with no change in line stats. Yes, I'm in the same situation as you (Anjou). After 4PM the best download speed I can get is 600kbit. In the mornings it is 4.4megabit. It's been 2 months since I'm waiting for the ticket that TSI opened with Bell to come to a resolution. |
|
| reply to InvalidError
Read a post posted by FCKINFEDUP in the sympatico forum. Suppose he's right? |
|
 JGROCKYPremium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
1 edit | What thread?
Edit: just found it... Not sure this is related... I think it's more of a load thing from what we're seeing on the way they're doing this, if this is what they're doing. |
|
| from the times given in the complaints above and from the times given till the complainers mentioned the "load-balancing" stopped, its the same times exactly as the predefined times of the Bell throttle.
I guess the users who are affected should watch the times their speed drop to 30kB/s and when it stops.
But so far the times match bells throttle exactly.
So if bell is trying to toss technical terms such as "load balancing" to mean their throttle, then I think the only "load" is the "load" bell shoveled to you as the explanation 
sad day indeed for those affected. |
|
JGROCKYPremium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
1 edit | I personally used the words load balance as they said a sort of global throttle, when the loads were heavy, but the problem with using throttle in this case is they're spreading the pain in areas that are overloaded. So, as it seems a throttle is in place it may also be a load-balance tactic of sorts.
Will respond with more details as they become available, as right we're pretty much just guessing too.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
| said by JGROCKY:I personally used the words load balance as they said a sort of global throttle, when the loads were heavy, but the problem with using throttle in this case is they're spreading the pain in areas that are overloaded. So, as it seems a throttle is in place it may also be a load-balance tactic of sorts. Will respond with more details as they become available, as right we're pretty much just guessing too. A load balance that only affects BT? Sound like throttling to me. People affected can do other protocols at full speed. Even the start and stop times seem the same as with BS.
Thanks for taking the time to respond. |
|
|
|
sMURF
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON | reply to JGROCKY
said by JGROCKY:I personally used the words load balance as they said a sort of global throttle, when the loads were heavy, but the problem with using throttle in this case is they're spreading the pain in areas that are overloaded. So, as it seems a throttle is in place it may also be a load-balance tactic of sorts. Will respond with more details as they become available, as right we're pretty much just guessing too. Is throttling Bell's answer to everything?
While I wasn't affected by any throttling last night, I'm still pissed off. Does Bell even realize that demand will continue to rise? All the money they're spending on throttling technologies, all the money they gain by raping their customers, or all the money saved by using low skill scriptmonkeys in India could be used to upgrade their pathetic network.
I don't use torrents that often anymore, as I mostly use Usenet. However, I'd still like to know that torrents aren't crippled should I decide to use them, which is just one reason why I left Rogers.
Bell pisses me off, they need to get their shit together. |
|
jfmezeiPremium
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC
kudos:22 | reply to JGROCKY
I am very suspicious of "load balance".
Load balance would imply spreading the load on multiple links to provide more throughput.
From what I read here, it appears that they would be doing "load management" by reducing maximum throughput so that a few users don't take up all available bandwidth between a BAS and a DSLAM (or wherever there is a bottleneck).
Is raising DSL speeds beyond 5mbps results in such tactics, then I would rather they delay speed upgrades until they can raise speeds without any funky undocumented network "management" stuff.
Secondly, and more importantly, if they are doing load management or whatever they wich to call it, it should be done on all packets, not packets of a certain protocol.
My relationship is with Teksavvy. Not Bell. Bell is a supplier of data communications, like a transit provider and has no business messing with my traffic. They are paid to bulk carry it to Teksavy.
They can look at the PPPoE headers to determine the routing of the *PPPOE* packet, but they have no business looking at the TCPIP header to determine what type of data is being transmitted between me and my ISP.
First, Bell convinces Teksavvy to stop offering Login only accounts. and now it start to do funky network management stuff that negates the policies of the ISP.
Someone will have to put their foot down and tell Bell to stop this. |
|
