Archive for October, 2009

Lack of Response from MLA

October 20th, 2009

It has been nearly three weeks since I sent letters off to the current Legislative Assembly members for Molonglo.

Unfortunately I have only received 1 response.

I am drafting a second series of letters to the same members which I will send out next week. For any of the current members you still have a week to respond.

The one response I did get is best described as underwhelming at best. I can not even be sure Katy herself saw the letter. I have attached the response below for you all to read.

Response K Gallagher 070909.pdf

Maybe I have been taught a different definition for the term “representitive” but I have hoped that local members would have been more interested in the issues concerning their electorate.

This has inspired me to go a step further – I invite all Canberra residents who have contacted members of the Legislative Assembly, Federal Ministers or senior representivies of Internet service providers to send me a copy of your correspondence. I am going to dedicate a page on the site to all the letters, emails, faxes sent in an attempt to show how widespread the issue is.

If you have support ticket details please send them also.

I encourage everyone to send me information, even if you only raise a ticket 5 minutes before sending me the details.

The address – russell(at)actbroadband.net

Please remember to protect your personal details like address, phone number, ISP username.

My Issue Is Resolved?

October 20th, 2009

Over the weekend I was contacted by Internode via email informing me of the resolution of the support ticket I raised on the 14th of October.

Apparently my issue has been resolved or maybe I needed to respond to some question or issue I wasn’t asked about.

Here is the email Intenode has sent informing me of the resolution. It is obviously a form letter or standard template.

From: Internode [mailto:nobody@mail.internode.com.au] On Behalf Of helpdesk@ticket.internode.com.au
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 1:36 PM
To: russell@actbroadband.net
Subject: [ticket.internode.com.au #2229656] Resolved: Poor Internet Performance

Hi,

This message has been sent to you because we believe the ticket has been

resolved or we have not yet received a response to our earlier correspondence.

If you consider that further work or information is required, just reply to

this email. The information you provide will be added to the ticket and the

ticket re-opened for our staff to attend to.

We strive to provide excellent customer service. If you have any comments or

questions about the handling of this ticket, please feel free to contact

Feedback via our website at http://www.internode.on.net/contact/feedback/,

making note of the ticket number concerned within your message. Your feedback

will be read by senior Internode management, who value your comments.

Regards,

The Internode Team

________________________________________

Internode Technical Support

150 Grenfell St, Adelaide SA 5000

1300 788 233

Phone: (08) 8228-2999

Fax: (08) 8235-6999

Web: www.internode.on.net/support

Unfortunately I can not agree with their assertions that the issue is resolved or I have yet to respond to them concerning the issue. While the issue continues to affect me and other residents of the area I will try and keep this ticket and the others open.

Here is my response to the support email.

Dear Helpdesk at Internode,

Please move this ticket from resolved back to open status. This I ask for three reasons.

1, You have not been able to demonstrate or provide me with details to how the resolution was achieved, nor have you explained why you believe the issue is resolved. I will not allow you to close this ticket until you can provide me with such details.

2, I will demonstrate again that the issue still exists.

Tracing route to [12.129.242.22]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1     2 ms     2 ms     3 ms  ppp59-167-63-146.lns1.cbr1.internode.on.net [59.167.63.146]

2   605 ms   613 ms   594 ms  lns1.cbr1.internode.on.net [203.16.215.192]

3   491 ms   424 ms   398 ms  gi1-0-0-3.cor3.cbr1.internode.on.net [150.101.160.6]

4   682 ms   650 ms   674 ms  pos2-1.bdr1.syd6.internode.on.net [150.101.160.110]

5   693 ms   733 ms   756 ms  pos5-0.bdr1.sjc2.internode.on.net [203.16.213.162]

6   813 ms  1021 ms   846 ms  ge-7-7.r02.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.11.97]

7   601 ms   635 ms   640 ms  ae-2.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.225]

8   668 ms   778 ms   898 ms  192.205.33.177

9   727 ms   723 ms   785 ms  cr1.sffca.ip.att.net [12.122.114.18]

10   751 ms   691 ms   683 ms  cr1.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.3.122]

11   784 ms   859 ms   879 ms  gar4.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.128.169]

12   566 ms   542 ms   492 ms  12.122.255.70

^C

C:\Documents and Settings\user>date

The current date is: Mon 10/19/2009

Enter the new date: (mm-dd-yy)

C:\Documents and Settings\user>time

The current time is: 21:27:06.64

Enter the new time:

http://www.speedtest.net/result/596386603.png

Until my latency is stable and in line with ADSL services is neighboring suburbs (ie under 100ms to Internode POP) I will argue the issue remains.

3, I have not received an earlier correspondence from you other than acknowledging the congestion fault on my service still exists. I have not received an email or SMS concerning the status of the ongoing issue since August 8th, over 5 weeks ago. I raised another ticket as I had assumed Internode believed the issue solved which is to the contrary.

Please keep this ticket open. I will be in contact in the next week to inquire to its status and Internodes progress.

Thanks

Russell

I expect to hear from Internode again shortly. If you have an outstanding support ticket with your ISP please check it is still open, if it is not ask them to open it again.

Internode Support Response

October 14th, 2009

At around 4:00pm Tuesday 13th October Internode Support replied to the ticket I raised on Monday the 12th.

The response was as expected and has not differed from any previous tickets raised about the issue.

The response provided by Internode is as follows.

From: Internode [mailto:nobody@mail.internode.com.au] On Behalf Of
helpdesk@ticket.internode.com.au
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 4:06 PM
To: russell@actbroadband.net
Subject: [ticket.internode.com.au #2229656] Poor Internet Performance

Hi Russell,

Thank you for your support request with Internode.

We sent an e-mail to your Internode e-mail address on Friday August 8th,
advising you that your service is part of a congestion fault which has been
reported to and confirmed by our wholesale provider.

We are actively seeking updates and pushing for a resolution, however at
this point, there are no updates.

We also have sent an sms message to the mobile number listed on your account
to advise you of updates, have you received this? If not, can you please
confirm your mobile number?

If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please reply to
this email or contact our Helpdesk by phone on 1300 788 233.

Kind regards,

Carmen
Customer Support Officer

___________________________________
Internode Technical Support Team
Phone: 1300 788 233 for all support
Fax: 08 8235 6911
Web: http://www.internode.on.net

I want to let Internode and others in Gungahlin know that I will not stop raising support tickets around this issue. Even though the response does take measures to remind me that updates will be provided each month it does not mean I will wait quietly.

I understand that this tactic can be frustrating for the Internode Service Desk but it is not as frustrating as the real issue of poor ADSL performance. I know I run the risk of becoming a serial pest but if everyone becomes apathetic about the issue, ISPs and Wholesale Providers will focus on another “squeaky wheel.”

I also want to highlight that Internode is still referring to the congestion issue as a “Fault.” I assume that the Wholesale Provider has used the term “fault” as part of its current report everything – do nothing strategy.

This goes against the General Manager of Telstra Country Wide, ACT – Chris Taylor who has publicly announced that “This is not a fault.” I have included the full quote below.

“The [congestion]issue will be around cost. This is not a fault. It is actually a case of, there are more users than the infrastructure or transmission will allow.”

Chris Taylor – ABC Radio 666 interview 30th September 2009.

There it is, from the horses mouth no less. Gungahlin is not worth spending the money on to provide adequate service.

As the ADSL infrastructure (CMUX) was installed less than 5 years ago, and in many cases only within the last 2 years it would appear that Gungahlin has NEVER been an area Telstra Country Wide has deemed worthy of investment.

Might I remind you Chris Taylor, you own and manage the infrastructure causing the congestion issue. Your assertion that the public Internet is to blame is just not correct. To quote your own words:

“That’s a standard thing with the public Internet.”

Chris Taylor – ABC Radio 666 interview 30th September 2009.

The reality is different to your statement in my particular case. If the congestion I experience is due to the public Internet everyone would be affected.

People in Hackett using the same ISP are routed to the same Point of Presence (POP) as I am and therefore access the public Internet from the same point as I do.

Why are they not affected?

They are not, the question was rhetorical. The issue is occurring between the residence and the POP. The only difference between Hackett and Palmerston when accessing the Internet is the Telstra managed “last mile” infrastructure.

I can prove the congestion occurs between my house and the Internode Point of Presence in the ACT. This is prior to being “on the Internet.” The congestion occurs on the infrastructure Telstra Country Wide owns and resells for a fee.

I can demonstrate over three months where this has occurred. I have published reports at http://www.actbroadband.net/the-reports/ that show the congestion exists before traffic arrives at Internode infrastructure which is prior to hitting the public Internet.

Users like myself pay for the privilege to use this infrastructure. Regardless of wholesale or direct sales the issue is still Telstra’s responsibility to address.

I urge you to find the money, you must have had a number of opportunities to request budget to address this issue in the last 9 months. Please do not let another opportunity go by without addressing our concerns.

Another Dismal Night

October 13th, 2009

Last night the 12th October 2009 was another dismal night for Broadband performance in Gungahlin. It was so bad I registered another support call with Internode.

ticket.internode.com.au #2229656

I would like to register another complaint concerning the poor internet performance experienced on my connection.

I have 2 existing tickets raised about this issue:
#1910774
#2080837

Here is some information supporting the latest performance issues.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/589839173.png
http://www.speedtest.net/result/589826993.png

This was 100 pings sent to lns1.cbr1.internode.on.net the first hop at the
Internode POP in the ACT.

Ping statistics for 203.16.215.192:
Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 88, Lost = 12 (12% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 483ms, Maximum = 1074ms, Average = 678ms

C:>date
The current date is: Mon 10/12/2009
Enter the new date: (mm-dd-yy)

C:>time
The current time is: 23:06:11.57
Enter the new time:

Tracing route to [12.129.242.22]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1     3 ms     5 ms     4 ms  ppp59-167-63-XXX.lns1.cbr1.internode.on.net[59.167.63.XXX]
2   653 ms   712 ms   704 ms  lns1.cbr1.internode.on.net [203.16.215.192]
3   636 ms   701 ms     *     gi1-0-0-3.cor3.cbr1.internode.on.net[150.101.160.6]
4   650 ms   595 ms   688 ms  pos2-1.bdr1.syd6.internode.on.net[150.101.160.110]
5   868 ms   754 ms   663 ms  pos5-0.bdr1.sjc2.internode.on.net[203.16.213.162]
6   675 ms   720 ms   774 ms  ge-7-7.r02.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net[129.250.11.97]
7   867 ms   794 ms   724 ms  ae-2.r20.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net[129.250.3.225]
8   713 ms   645 ms   724 ms  192.205.33.177
9   779 ms   840 ms   865 ms  cr1.sffca.ip.att.net [12.122.114.18]
10   705 ms   693 ms   695 ms  cr1.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.3.122]
11  ^C

I have documented the history around this issue at
http://www.actbroadband.net as well as @ACT_Broadband on twitter.

Please escalate this issue “again” as it has existed for over 8 months with
no improvement.


Ticket created by the Internode Contact Form
http://www.internode.on.net/contact/online/
No virus found in this incoming message.

The latency across the Wholesale provider’s infrastructure averaged over 670 milliseconds and packet loss was over 10% for the evening.

As well as these poor results the download and upload speeds experienced was 0.1 Megabit per second. Thats is virtually dial up speeds (56 Kilobit per second) or about 12 kilobytes per second written to disk.

Just to put this in perspective – at these speeds it would take 1 mintue and 25 seconds to download 1 Megabyte of data.

To download the same amount of data to fill a 1.44MB floppy (remember those) it would take 2 minutes and 3 seconds approximately.

If you are sceptical of my claims here are two speed tests done nearly 20 mins apart. They are in the support ticket I sent to Internode last night and were also posted on twitter.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/589839173.png
http://www.speedtest.net/result/589826993.png

Report for September Released

October 2nd, 2009

I have completed the report for September 2009 and uploaded it to the the Reports page.

The report is in PDF format so please make sure you have the appropriate reader.

The report can be viewed directly from the following link – September 09 Report

Feel free to visit the Reports page and view the latest statistics.

Comments Enabled

October 1st, 2009

Due to overwhelming requests I have enabled comments on all my blog entries.

I had chosen not to allow comments because I was concerned I may not have time to moderate the site. I have a young family and a demanding job, all of which demand a lot of my time.

I have received numerous emails and tweets of support which have given me new energy to continue my campaign for a better result for Gungahlin. If you have suggestions, words of support or criticisms please comment away.