RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to sibisties
Re: While more affordable...
said by sibisties  :You forgot to mention the incredible upload speed for these tiers... It's an incredible 1Mbps ! That upload speed is a farce. With the 50Mbs (and possibly the 30Mbs) tier, I do not think that you can get the full download speed with only a 1Mbs Uplink speed (you need to send too many ACKs and will saturate the uplink). There is also the problem that even if the uplink can handle the volume, the speed will bog down due to not sending the needed "Send More" ACKs fast enough. |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | Also I could not get the web site to accept my street address to even look at the pricing or package plans.
I can't help but wonder who is running this company? |
|
otty
join:2008-10-24
Toronto, ON | It's run by Quebecor. The makers of your favorite tabloids and flyers/junkmail. They are purveyors of trash |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to RARPSL
uTP...erm...UDP FTW! |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| said by iansltx :uTP...erm...UDP FTW! Which of my two comments (The 1MBs Uplink or the Caps) is this in reference to? In either case, I am not able to determine what your reply means. |
|
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
 ·DSL EXTREME
·Brand X Internet
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Vonage
| reply to RARPSL
said by RARPSL :said by sibisties :You forgot to mention the incredible upload speed for these tiers... It's an incredible 1Mbps ! That upload speed is a farce. With the 50Mbs (and possibly the 30Mbs) tier, I do not think that you can get the full download speed with only a 1Mbs Uplink speed (you need to send too many ACKs and will saturate the uplink). There is also the problem that even if the uplink can handle the volume, the speed will bog down due to not sending the needed "Send More" ACKs fast enough. You are correct. For optimum results, the assymetry between download and upload speeds should not exceed 10:1.
With these it will be 30:1 and 50:1. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | reply to RARPSL
Neither. UDP doesn't reuqire ACKs so less overhead so you can actually get 50 Mbps of downstream speed on your cable connection  Until you hit the cap that is... |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to qworster
said by qworster :said by RARPSL :said by sibisties :You forgot to mention the incredible upload speed for these tiers... It's an incredible 1Mbps ! That upload speed is a farce. With the 50Mbs (and possibly the 30Mbs) tier, I do not think that you can get the full download speed with only a 1Mbs Uplink speed (you need to send too many ACKs and will saturate the uplink). There is also the problem that even if the uplink can handle the volume, the speed will bog down due to not sending the needed "Send More" ACKs fast enough. You are correct. For optimum results, the assymetry between download and upload speeds should not exceed 10:1. With these it will be 30:1 and 50:1. Of course the Sliding Window and especially SACK (Selective ACT) helps reduce the size of the Upload Stream but nothing overcomes a slow upload speed since you have to deliver the "I got all the packets up to this packet number - Keep Sending Packets" Handshake Responses and if the do not arrive and get processed before the buffer empties you will not get the full download speed. I do not know the bits-and-bytes internals but as you agreed I do not feel that a 1Mbs uplink can support a full blown 50Mbs (or probably 30Mbs) downlink. |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx :Neither. UDP doesn't reuqire ACKs so less overhead so you can actually get 50 Mbps of downstream speed on your cable connection Until you hit the cap that is... True BUT a download needs TCP not UDP flow since you have to do arrival handshakes to insure you get all the packets. UDP is only useful for streaming type downloads (ViOP/Video) as opposed to the file copy/transfer type operations that I was talking about. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO | ...though uTorrent is using uTP for file transfers now, and it's going over UDP... |
|
