dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2728
share rss forum feed

Doonz

join:2010-11-27
Beaumont, AB
reply to 18286719

Re: BB250 Useage Limit?

SOrry 50 unmetered for 180 which i would still pay. since its around 15TB of bandwidth



18286719

join:2013-02-02
Whistler, BC

sounds like your about as crazy as whoever designed the plan moneybags.
--
Shaw Broadband 100/5 - Cisco DPC3825 - Asus RT-AC66U


Doonz

join:2010-11-27
Beaumont, AB

said by 18286719:

sounds like your about as crazy as whoever designed the plan moneybags.

No ive just had the misfortune of actually having to pay for bandwidth in Dc's Dedicated is not cheap. Shared is always decent tho

rotohoto

join:2012-03-31
canada
kudos:1
reply to 18286719

said by 18286719:

i even spoke with a shaw employee the other day who said word for word shaw will always take there own routes before paying other corperations to use theres ,even if it means taking a path that takes much longer.

The practice of preferring a settlement free path over a transit path is extremely common, and not unique to Shaw.
That's... basically the entire point of peering.
But you knew that, right?


18286719

join:2013-02-02
Whistler, BC

3 edits

it is unique to shaw compared to other canadian isps yes it is. because other isps peer with bigger, better, companies (like hurricane electric, peer 1, or level 3) so that they only have to use there lines where it makes sense. telus has fiber across the country aswell, and so does bell, but neither of them go across the entire country adding 40ms to a route just to use there own backbone, they simply peer with someone who can give them a more optimal path. and most importantly of all, they never go through Edmonton for no reason. fuck edmonton.
--
Shaw Broadband 100/5 - Cisco DPC3825 - Asus RT-AC66U


kevinds

join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:2

Vancouver to Edmonton to Winnipeg to Chicago
is very close in distance to
Vancouver to Calgary to Winnipeg to Chicago

For East coast traffic
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel.



18286719

join:2013-02-02
Whistler, BC

3 edits

i disagree, i seen 80ms to dallas going through calgary, 125 through edmonton.... why the fuck should my traffic ever go through edmonton.

here is through Edmonton to Houston.
C:\Users\Connor>tracert 204.2.20.30

Tracing route to phonoscope-204-2-20-030.phonoscope.com [204.2.20.30]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms router.asus.com [192.168.1.1]
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 20 ms 15 ms 19 ms 64.59.156.243
4 18 ms 15 ms 15 ms rc2bb-tge0-4-0-16.vc.shawcable.net [66.163.69.21
8]
5 33 ms 31 ms 31 ms 66.163.75.202
6 30 ms 32 ms 31 ms rc1we-hge0-4-0-0.ed.shawcable.net [66.163.70.66]

7 63 ms 51 ms 43 ms rc3sc-tge0-0-0-9.wp.shawcable.net [66.163.78.70]

8 73 ms 78 ms 75 ms rc3ec-tge0-11-0-13.il.shawcable.net [66.163.78.5
0]
9 72 ms 74 ms 75 ms xe-0-6-0-2.r05.chcgil09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [128.2
42.186.169]
10 72 ms 73 ms 76 ms ae-6.r21.chcgil09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.2.2
6]
11 96 ms 98 ms 93 ms ae-3.r21.dllstx09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.2.2
00]
12 98 ms 108 ms 98 ms ae-0.r20.dllstx09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.2.5
8]
13 104 ms 99 ms 113 ms ae-3.r04.hstntx01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.5.2
26]
14 116 ms 108 ms 100 ms bbr1.phonoscope.com [128.241.5.5]
15 125 ms 103 ms 116 ms phonoscope-204-2-20-030.phonoscope.com [204.2.20
.30]
Trace complete.

next is through Calgary to Dallas

tracert 108.61.239.220

Tracing route to 108.61.239.220.choopa.net [108.61.239.220]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms router.asus.com [192.168.1.1]
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 18 ms 15 ms 15 ms 64.59.156.243
4 18 ms 15 ms 14 ms rc2bb-tge0-13-0-4.vc.shawcable.net [66.163.69.81
]
5 17 ms 23 ms 23 ms rc2wh-tge0-6-0-3.vc.shawcable.net [66.163.69.174
]
6 25 ms 27 ms 29 ms rc2so-tge0-5-0-0.cg.shawcable.net [66.163.77.22]

7 41 ms 43 ms 44 ms 66.163.75.122
8 56 ms 57 ms 57 ms rc3ec-tge0-11-0-15.il.shawcable.net [66.163.77.2
02]
9 60 ms 86 ms 59 ms equinix.xe-1-3-0.cr2.ord1.us.nlayer.net [206.223
.119.61]
10 57 ms 61 ms 62 ms ae3-60g.cr1.ord1.us.nlayer.net [69.31.111.153]
11 83 ms 80 ms 84 ms xe-3-3-0.cr1.dfw1.us.nlayer.net [69.22.142.5]
12 84 ms 85 ms 81 ms as20473.xe-5-1-2.cr1.dfw1.us.nlayer.net [69.31.6
3.238]
13 * * * Request timed out.
14 * * * Request timed out.
15 * * * Request timed out.
16 * * * Request timed out.
17 * * * Request timed out.
18 * * * Request timed out.
19 * * * Request timed out.
20 * * * Request timed out.
21 * * * Request timed out.
22 * * * Request timed out.
23 83 ms 83 ms 83 ms 108.61.239.220.choopa.net [108.61.239.220]

last but not least San Jose to Houston.

tracert 209.62.1.2

Tracing route to ev1s-209-62-1-2.theplanet.com [209.62.1.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms router.asus.com [192.168.1.1]
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 18 ms 20 ms 15 ms 64.59.156.243
4 24 ms 14 ms 15 ms rc2bb-tge0-13-0-1.vc.shawcable.net [66.163.69.49
]
5 46 ms 51 ms 50 ms rc3sj-tge0-8-1-0.cl.shawcable.net [66.163.78.126
]
6 43 ms 73 ms 38 ms te1-7.bbr01.eq01.sjc01.networklayer.com [206.223
.116.176]
7 43 ms 35 ms 37 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.sjc02.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.165]
8 47 ms 43 ms 49 ms ae0.bbr02.cs01.lax01.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.151]
9 53 ms 53 ms 55 ms ae7.bbr01.cs01.lax01.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.166]
10 76 ms 79 ms 81 ms ae19.bbr01.eq01.dal03.networklayer.com [173.192.
18.140]
11 85 ms 83 ms 85 ms ae0.bbr01.sr02.hou02.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.219]
12 86 ms 92 ms 89 ms po31.dsr02.hstntx2.networklayer.com [173.192.18.
235]
13 80 ms 83 ms 80 ms te4-1.car14.hstntx2.networklayer.com [74.55.252.
222]
14 84 ms 79 ms 79 ms ev1s-209-62-1-2.theplanet.com [209.62.1.2]

Trace complete.


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to Doonz

said by Doonz:

Actually its the attitude of "Being over his cap" He agreed that he would use the allotted amount of Bandwidth based on his package.

Like I said I would love to do business with him and sue him daily to recoup cost associated with his behaviour.

Oh please, your attitude is considerably more ridiculous.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to 18286719

said by 18286719:

it is unique to shaw compared to other canadian isps yes it is.

No, it is not unique to Shaw. What rotohoto said is the case.

said by 18286719:

because other isps peer with bigger, better, companies (like hurricane electric, peer 1, or level 3)

That is not peering, that is transit.

I've run into a similar situation with TSI here in the east. I access a network that's based out of Calgary. The network in question has transit from Rogers, Shaw and peering with Hurricane. TSI has peering with Rogers, Shaw and transit with Hurricane. Hurricane would provide the best path but because of the peering with Rogers that is the path that is preferred and yet that is the worst path for the destination network.

All of these providers have different network designs and different policies as to how they decide to use peering vs transit capacity. There are situations where each respective network will have better routes to a particular destination depending on the location of origin. Telus' for all intents and purposes does not peer in Seattle; pretty much all of their traffic goes through Chicago. That results in some pretty poor routes for networks situated on the west coast or even the central US. Pretty stupid for a network in the west. Bell routes a lot of their traffic via New York/Chicago and refuses to peer with networks in Toronto. Videotron routes almost all of their traffic through New York and refuses to peer with networks in Toronto. These are a combination of design and network policy issues but depending on the use case it can have an impact on latency and throughput.


18286719

join:2013-02-02
Whistler, BC

1 edit

said by 34764170:

No, it is not unique to Shaw. What rotohoto said is the case.

ok can you support your claim with evidence, cause im fairly confident you cant show me another canadian isp that goes through edmonton for no reason..

also plz post ips and traceroutes for what you are talking about...

people keep saying sometimes shaw routing will be better, but people cant show me 1 ip where thats true, odd..

also telus does peer at seattle im 100% sure
--
Shaw Broadband 100/5 - Cisco DPC3825 - Asus RT-AC66U

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by 18286719:

said by 34764170:

...

ok can you support your claim with evidence, cause im fairly confident you cant show me another canadian isp that goes through edmonton for no reason..

also plz post ips and traceroutes for what you are talking about...

people keep saying sometimes shaw routing will be better, but people cant show me 1 ip where thats true, odd..

The point of my post had nothing to do with being routed through Edmonton.

and I could say the same about your claims of how poor Shaw's routing is. I've seen one destination network. How odd.


18286719

join:2013-02-02
Whistler, BC

cool, i said going through edmonton was unique to shaw and it is, your tried to argue but ur wrong, u still have 0 proof to back up anything your saying, and shaw is the ONLY CANADIAN ISP PUTTING TRAFFIC THROUGH EDMONTON FOR NO REASON, i dont know whats hard to understand about that, people just LOVE to argue with me..... no plz either say your wrong or explain which other canadian isp goes through edmonton for no reason. when you answer that, then continue to talk about other stuff, i dont care either way i kno im right and that i will fix this with TSI. i simply posted to explain to doonz, this is a pointless arguement brad you dont even have shaw. stop.

the funniest part is you say im wrong, then reply saying you wernt talking about that. well whats what i was talking about so i dont know what conversation your having.
--
Shaw Broadband 100/5 - Cisco DPC3825 - Asus RT-AC66U


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

2 edits

said by 18286719:

cool, i said going through edmonton was unique to shaw and it is, your tried to argue but ur wrong

The post above what you replied to was about peering vs transit not routing through Edmonton. Jesus christ you have issues. You're arguing with them because you have some serious mental issues. I pity you.

said by rotohoto:

The practice of preferring a settlement free path over a transit path is extremely common, and not unique to Shaw.



18286719

join:2013-02-02
Whistler, BC

1 edit

im defending myself, everytime i complain about 1 shaw thing, its like 8 million fanboys start calling me wrong, there is obviously an issue with routing for some bc users like to to certain destinations, weather that is acceptable or not, depends upon the user, in my case i have decide its not, stop looking for minor errors in my grammar ect and pay attention to the point, if you cant understand the point that i am trying to make and that i dont give a fuck what ur saying, i dont know whatelse to say. ALL I AM COMPLAINING ABOUT IT MY TRAFFIC GOING THROUGH EDMONTON FOR NO REASON, I DONT CARE THE TECHNICAL TERMS WHY IT DOES BUT IT DOESNT HAVE TO!. END
--
Shaw Broadband 100/5 - Cisco DPC3825 - Asus RT-AC66U



herpingderp

@shawcable.net

One user complaining about a routing/peering problem won't fix it. If this was a problem that thousands of people were complaining about then it would be more justified. Look at Google Fibers peering to Comcast. It's shitty but Comcast refuses to fix it.

Expand your moderator at work

zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw
reply to Shaw250User

Re: BB250 Useage Limit?

I've noticed some bad ping times (routing) to certain areas, but you don't really notice it unless your using something that needs to send data real time. Even if a lot of people are experiencing it, they may not notice it unless there using something needs quick ping time?


S_G

join:2013-11-21
reply to 18286719

Connor, there seems to be a gap between your beliefs and reality. Please take a step back and consider the following.

- 1ms of travel time via optical fibre covers ~200KM. That's only ~4ms of added 'wait' for data moving from Vancouver to Edmonton.
- Each time a router receives a packet from one network destined for another it has to select the correct route from its table and queue the packet appropriately
- Each route selection takes into account the performance of a given route. The link speed (1Gbps/2Gbps/10Gbps/100Gbps/400Gbps/etc.) and number of known router transitions are all automatically weighed and the believed path is selected.
- Only when the packet reaches the front of the queue will it be sent to the next router in turn. The bigger contributor to latency is the depth of a queue on a router.

To improve performance you must reduce the number of routers involved. The distance between, and location of, the routers matters less than the number found on a given route or the link speeds between them.

With that understanding, lets take a look at the Calgary -> Dallas example. The network map published by GTT (they purchased nlayer, your target server's provider) shows their Dallas node has 6 routes in :
»www.gtt.net/_includes/uploads/no···arge.jpg

Shaw peers directly with nlayer, which you can see in your traces. This peering occurs, presumably, in Illinois (i.e. Chicago?) based on the name Shaw has given to the router. Given that Chicago:Dallas is a "direct" leg, its cost is going to be relatively low. Vancouver:Dallas is (at best) a 3 leg route, meaning its advertised cost is going to, naturally, be higher and is influenced by the capacity between Dallas--Denver, Denver--Seattle, and Seattle--Vancouver.
There are a large number of networks running down the west coast of the continent, meaning that the routers at the peering points are going to be very heavily utilized. That means the "cost" of using a Vancouver--Seattle peer is going to be high on the peer's side as well as Shaw's.

THAT is the reason your traffic goes where it does. It is BETTER for it to go through Edmonton. If it went through Seattle it would be WORSE.


kevinds

join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:2
reply to 18286719

said by 18286719:

I DONT CARE THE TECHNICAL TERMS WHY IT DOES BUT IT DOESNT HAVE TO

Can you come up with a replacement to BGP that could accomplish this? Even conceptually, if it is good, someone else can code it...
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel.

kevinds

join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:2

1 edit
reply to 18286719

Also, Shaw's headquarters used to be in Edmonton, so it is possible they have more capacity through there

Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg 2467km
Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg 2297km

150 km difference is not much (and as I said before, very close to the same distance), fiber doesn't always follow the highway, often follows the railroad, but it doesn't make that much change.

The real routing question is if it uses Vancouver to Seattle or Winnipeg to Chicago.

--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel.

Expand your moderator at work


SouthAB

@shawcable.net
reply to 18286719

Re: BB250 Useage Limit?

Southern AB Tracert, went through Seattle... Seems to be a location issue for Connor M? However pings seems the same so who cares?

Tracing route to ev1s-209-62-1-2.theplanet.com [209.62.1.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms my.router [192.168.0.1]
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 12 ms 31 ms 21 ms rc3no-tge0-0-0-8-19.cg.shawcable.net [64.59.133.25]
4 20 ms 10 ms 10 ms rc2so-tge0-12-0-5.cg.shawcable.net [66.163.71.25]
5 33 ms 39 ms 47 ms rc5wt-tge0-11-0-0.wa.shawcable.net [66.163.70.222]
6 38 ms 37 ms 41 ms te1-5.bbr01.wb01.sea01.networklayer.com [206.81.80.140]
7 74 ms 75 ms 67 ms ae0.bbr01.cs01.den01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.145]
8 112 ms 71 ms 72 ms ae12.bbr02.eq01.dal03.networklayer.com [173.192.18.138]
9 87 ms 84 ms 83 ms ae0.bbr02.sr02.hou02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.221]
10 85 ms 86 ms 81 ms po32.dsr02.hstntx2.networklayer.com [173.192.18.239]
11 78 ms 77 ms 79 ms te4-1.car14.hstntx2.networklayer.com [74.55.252.222]
12 86 ms 81 ms 83 ms ev1s-209-62-1-2.theplanet.com [209.62.1.2]

Trace complete.


corbin

join:2013-09-13

2 edits
reply to kevinds

said by kevinds:

Also, Shaw's headquarters used to be in Edmonton, so it is possible they have more capacity through there

This isn't a real thing. Not a fact at all.

Clarification: Shaw's Headquarters did used to be in Edmonton. It has nothing to do with capacity deployments.
Expand your moderator at work

kevinds

join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:2
reply to corbin

Re: BB250 Useage Limit?

More capacity, I just said it was possible, thank you for confirming

Expand your moderator at work