dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3798
share rss forum feed


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

Re: Cox speed upgrade degraded my service

The real router for the money is the Ubiquity Edge Lite.. BUT its BRAND new and just in pre production and the OS is getting worked out. Its based on Vyatta and open source...

Again its not quite in production yet..

But its 1 million pps and 3 Gb/s speeds. Its also a very fast Linux box you can install anything on..

Its what im using now.. But I have a Vyatta box handy.

»www.ubnt.com/edgemax



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

4 edits
reply to xymox1

Im very happy to see that Cox is not participating in this, but im sure soon will be.. It started today.

»www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/25···ght_isp/

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for···ormation

I am letting Cox investigate my latency issues and jitter I have previously posted in this thread. This started when they upgraded speeds to the 175/35 level.

It would be interesting if the throttling ability mentioned above turned out to be related to my issue. To be able to throttle a individual user on Cox in bandwidth ( QoS ) might require adding some sort of extra appliance or device that might introduce latency / jitter. Of course I might be completely wrong too. Being able to implement the throttling required by the 6 strikes system does require individual QoS for each and every ISP subscriber. The way the system works doing walled garden and redirection also requires direct manipulation of any ISP client's connections.



bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5

said by xymox1:

Being able to implement the throttling required by the 6 strikes system does require individual QoS for each and every ISP subscriber.

not really, they could just build a modem configuration with a reduced upstream and downstream bandwidth and apply that to users that have been flagged as copyright violators


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Yea I was thinking that, but they are also talking about a walled garden where it redirects you to a page to accept a notice no matter what page you go to. Then once you accept the notice you gain instant access to the net again. So like a wifi walled garden. So if they are going to be able to do that to any subscriber at random, it means they need to push every subscriber through a device that can do firewall like actions on each and every subscriber I think. And if they are capable of doing that then it seems doing QoS and throttling can all be done on the same device ?

Im not sure if this was possible before, I think the ISP just routed ( layer 2 ) and did not have the technical ability to QoS ( layer 3 ) a specific subscriber ?

Doing a firewall like that on a million subscriber ISP level is pretty serious stuff. I would think this stresses even the best equipment ?

Its one thing to QoS a whole protocol, or block things for your whole network, its a whole other issue to QoS per subscriber.

Does anyone know exactly what gear these ISP's are using to impliment this ? I cant find any specific white papers on how to impliment this on the Cisco site.

I sure am glad not to see Cox in the group of ISP's involved in this. However im sure its just a matter of time.



bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5

said by xymox1:

Im not sure if this was possible before, I think the ISP just routed ( layer 2 ) and did not have the technical ability to QoS ( layer 3 ) a specific subscriber ?

It's actually quite simple to just do that with the modem config. They just give you IP space that only goes to the walled garden. I think they do this today via their abuse tracking system


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Ah great point..

Like when you hook up a new modem.

Yea that makes more sense. I was thinking the ISP's would not spend extra money to enforce this new system.

Im glad to hear that.


Vorg
Premium
join:2002-06-18
Tucson, AZ
reply to xymox1

I've been noticing alot of rubber banding in StarTrek online and CBS streaming quality is often worse then a youtube 360 res video.




chrisf8657

join:2002-01-27
Glendale, AZ
reply to xymox1

Which server you use will also affect the Jitter/Ping.
One server gave me 200+ms ping and 37ms of Jitter.



--
~~Chris~~

Need a pro computer tech? See my profile for my website - I offer remote support services!

XS

join:2011-09-02
Gilbert, AZ
reply to xymox1

Did your IP change when you upgraded?I have noticed just getting a different IP can cause latency spikes.