  DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Could certainly be true I had Verizon's 50Mb FiOS tier and had trouble finding servers, even test servers that could feed my appetite. Speedtest was able to do it, Speakeasy could do it sometimes, Linkline was simply hammered by it. | |
|
 |  aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Could certainly be true said by Dogfather:I had Verizon's 50Mb FiOS tier and had trouble finding servers, even test servers that could feed my appetite. Speedtest was able to do it, Speakeasy could do it sometimes, Linkline was simply hammered by it. Many of the speedtest sites are no problem for me hitting 50mbs. | |
|
| | | At my last job I had 3 T3 lines feeding the site. Speed test server were very able to tell me that I had well over 100Mbps throughput. | |
|
 MrMoodyFree range slavePremium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | Caps quote:
10GB cap that's only in place daily between 4pm and 9pm.
If you must have caps, this is the way to do it. Although in the US it would probably have to run 3PM to midnight.
--
"The sacrosanct free market would supposedly regulate itself. The problem with that approach is that regulations are just rules. If there are no rules, the players can cheat." - Ellen Hodgson Brown, JD | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Caps said by MrMoody: quote:
10GB cap that's only in place daily between 4pm and 9pm.
If you must have caps, this is the way to do it. Although in the US it would probably have to run 3PM to midnight. And 3PM to midnight would be fine. All the anti-cap militants that complain about windows and other updates and stuff could just schedule their updates to after midnight when there isn't a cap. | |
|
| | | Don't ask about Canada. The internet will likely go the way of the dinosaur or the do-do bird in that country. | |
|
|  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | said by MrMoody: quote:
10GB cap that's only in place daily between 4pm and 9pm.
If you must have caps, this is the way to do it. Although in the US it would probably have to run 3PM to midnight. And the cap would probably be 3GB.
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
|
|  MikePremium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
W.O.W.
FairPoint
World of Warcraft
Site Tools
Verizon Wireless
| Re: speedtest The only thing a speed test consists of is a utility downloading a file, measuring the transfer rate, and either converting it or displaying all sorts of other info.
It relies on the other end to have similar power.
Years ago when everything in the US was just about 768k/128k a provider could just throw a test on a OC-3 or even a T3 and it could take just about everyone. As speeds get faster, the bandwidth on the back end needs to go up as well. | |
|
|  dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18 | Pick an NDT test... local of course, or as close as possible.
Here is Cal Berkeley:
»ndt-202.net.berkeley.edu:7123/
(Scroll down at Berkeley site for more links)
Located at Berkeley - CA; 1000 Mbps (Gigabit Ethernet) network connection.
These tests will determine:
The slowest link in the end-to-end path (Dial-up modem to 10 Gbps Ethernet/OC-192)
The Ethernet duplex setting (full or half);
If congestion is limiting end-to-end throughput
The only REAL way to test the connection is to saturate it with actual data transfers.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
|
| | dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: speedtest said by dadkins:Pick an NDT test... local of course, or as close as possible. Here is Cal Berkeley: » ndt-202.net.berkeley.edu:7123/(Scroll down at Berkeley site for more links) Located at Berkeley - CA; 1000 Mbps (Gigabit Ethernet) network connection. These tests will determine: The slowest link in the end-to-end path (Dial-up modem to 10 Gbps Ethernet/OC-192) The Ethernet duplex setting (full or half); If congestion is limiting end-to-end throughput The only REAL way to test the connection is to saturate it with actual data transfers. error: unable to parse results
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·SureWest Internet
·AT&T Yahoo
·Embarq Now Centu..
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
| said by dadkins:Pick an NDT test... local of course, or as close as possible. Here is Cal Berkeley: » ndt-202.net.berkeley.edu:7123/(Scroll down at Berkeley site for more links) Located at Berkeley - CA; 1000 Mbps (Gigabit Ethernet) network connection. These tests will determine: The slowest link in the end-to-end path (Dial-up modem to 10 Gbps Ethernet/OC-192) The Ethernet duplex setting (full or half); If congestion is limiting end-to-end throughput The only REAL way to test the connection is to saturate it with actual data transfers. Thanks for the link. I was spiking upto 20MB/s for download but every test only showed my uplink at ~2Mbps.. | |
|
| | Upload Test servers will not have any problem handling that 1.5Mbps upload! | |
|
| TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Re: Upload No kidding! That's a pretty crappy upload. I would take higher upload speed over higher downloads speed any day.
I all comes down to consumer demand though. Most people are demanding faster and faster downloads and are too dumb to even know about upload speed.
I've lost count of how many times I've had people ask me why transfers where going so slow when they were sending me files. Most of them didn't even know there was such a thing as a seperate upload speed.
ISPs are not helping the matter either, often you have to dig into the fine print or flip through multiple pages until you can find the upload speeds for their service. They don't include upload speeds in their ads either.
I'm sure if an ISP were to give higher upload speeds (say 3mbps or faster) and advertise "upload videos and images to sites such as YouTube and Flickr faster than ever before! Less waiting when sending files to your friends! Blazing fast email attachments!" I'm sure a bunch of people would jump in. | |
|
| | kd6caeP2p Shouldn't Be A Crime
join:2001-08-27
Palmdale, CA Reviews:
 ·Vitelity VOIP
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Upload I agree with you 100% on that! For as long as I can remember, I personally have gone for the tier that gives me the best upload, which usually also will give me the best download. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Give us more upstream already! Even existing commonly used ADSL and cable technologies can do better then what most users get, even on the business side of things.
Cablevision is still the only provider offerings speeds greater than 2Mbps upload not counting docsis 3 trial markets of Comcast, in all of the United States! ADSL equipment can achieve max sync rates if one is close enough to the telco of 1.1Mbps upload, so why don't providers at least offer higher speeds to their customers on upload? Even with existing technology in use today, we can do better! | |
|
| | | TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
1 edit | Re: Upload Yeah I'm stuck on 10Mbps down 1Mbps up, cable. The highest offered here in terms of upload is 5Mbps down 2Mbps up from the same cable provider (Shaw) but it is a business plan and the pricing is just totally ridiculous, we're talking $300 monthly!
I don't know how the hell 1 static IP, double the cap to 200GB, double the upload to 2Mbps and half the download to 5Mbps is worth an extra $240. | |
|
| | | |
| | | |  IgnitePremium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK | Re: Upload said by MalibuMaxx:Docsis 3.0 doesnt have channel bonding for upload yet i believe which is a good reason why the upload hasent increased... I can see giving, even on a 2.0 aspect, of about 3-4 Mbps of upload. Please chime in if im wrong...  There is DOCSIS 3 kit that supports channel bonding on upload, Comcast are using a pre-DOCSIS 3 modem however, and I'm not sure if that one can do bonding.
There are 3 DOCSIS 3 certifications, silver and gold both require upstream bonding, however bronze, the current level both the Cisco 10k and Motorola BSR are certified for, does not.
I'm only aware of one CMTS manufacturer that is certified gold. Arris I think have silver. | |
|
| |  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | said by TheMG:I all comes down to consumer demand though. Most people are demanding faster and faster downloads and are too dumb to even know about upload speed. There is also the fact that there needs to be an specific minimum upload speed to support a designated download speed or your downloads will be throttled due to the inability to send the "I got the download packet" ACKs. For you to get more download packets (ie: data) you must inform the sender of the successful receipt of the prior packets that were supplied by using the upload path to send the ACKs. As you increase the download speed you need to send more ACKs (since you have more incoming packets in progress) and thus you need a higher upload speed to handle the ACKs. There are ways to maintain a high download speed with a lower than optimum upload speed (such as using SACK support) but that needs both sides to agree to it and not all Consumer side TCP/IP stacks are set up automatically take advantage of these capabilities (or to even support the maximum download speed). | |
|
| | | Kiryu
join:2005-07-21
United Kingd | Re: Upload i believe your referring to Window Scaling regarding how many ack's a client sends a server per x amount of data recieved? even with 50Mbps, 1.5Mbps is plenty for just acks. | |
|
| | | | IgnitePremium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK | Re: Upload said by Kiryu:i believe your referring to Window Scaling regarding how many ack's a client sends a server per x amount of data recieved? even with 50Mbps, 1.5Mbps is plenty for just acks. Window scaling compensates for latency by increasing buffer sizes, it does not reduce the number of ACKs required just allows for longer before ACKs have to be received. As standard a Windows box, with windows scaling on or not, must send an ACK for at least every second packet. | |
|
| | I like this cap I wish hughesnet would have something like this daily. | |
|
SipSizzurpFo' ShizzlePremium
join:2005-12-28
Houston, TX
kudos:3 | Really ? So, you have a 50 Mbps connection, and the only way you can tell you have so much bandwidth is with a speed test ? Now the government wants to mandate faster speed tests to be sure that you actually have 50 Mbps ? Would somebody please help me out with a clever and sarcastic comment ? ....
--
I spent most of my money on Women and Beer, and the rest I just wasted ! | |
|
| TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Re: Really ? Ridiculous isn't it? Probably 90% of subscribers to that service will never reach those download speeds on day to day use. There may be the odd web or ftp server out there that can handle it, or a very very well seeded torrent, but that's about it. Then again will 1.5Mbps upload even let you get 50Mbps on a torrent? | |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5
1 edit | Has anyone run these numbers? I'm traveling and can't set up this test, but can someone do a LAN-to-LAN download test at their home/office and figure out what the resulting upload overhead seems to be over the first 60 seconds?
If their uplink is limited to 1.5 Mbps, that very well could be responsible for piss-poor speed tests. | |
|
| | Simple... just subscribe to several daily and weekly video feeds in Miro and update once a week... you'll hit 50mbps easily if you have the capacity. | |
|
| | Why doesn't these cable ops to increase the upload speed? Why do we need a 50mpbs when 10 to 20 is too much already. What we need is upload speed. 1.5mbps just don't do it. That's why people are moving to FIOS. I hate Verizon, but if TWC deploys Docsis 3.0 to NYC and give upload speed at 1 or 1.5mpbs, I am moving. | |
|
|
|
·
