Posts Tagged ‘ADSL’

Chris Taylor Reschedules June Meeting

May 29th, 2010

As I sat down to prepare for the Gungahlin Community Council (GCC) meeting I discovered Chris Taylor, Manager for Telstra Countrywide had rescheduled and will now meet with us on the 14th July.  He had originally agreed to attend the June meeting to discuss the recent newspaper articles which have been critical of Telstra’s current service. The announcement made by Alan Kerlin via the GCC Facebook page was slipped in on Monday the 24th of May.

He has accepted the invitation to the July the 14th meeting…if something else does not come up like it did for June.

If you were planing to come then you will have to wait another month to voice your dissatisfaction. I am disappointed it has been postponed, I was looking forward to meeting the man face to face to discuss the issues.

I hope this is only a one off situation but I am a bit skeptical. There are a number of planned upgrades for Crace Exchange listed on the Telstra Wholesale website and there could be more going on soon. I hope his appearance is not being timed with these upgrades to give the impression he is some sort of White Knight to our problems.

The last two documents on the Telstra Wholesale website (DSLAM Software Upgrade Planand DSLAM Backhaul Upgrade Plan) indicate some upgrades are being performed at some level but may not actually bring any change to the end user.

The Backhaul upgrade plan lists 13 entries related to Crace Exchange. The devices are listed as follows :

Exchange   DSLAM ID                  Date Complete

CRCF            QCRCFE4026S2

CRCF            QCRCFE4026S4

CRCF            QCRCFE4026S5

CRCF            QCRCFE4047S2    21-May-10

CRCF            QCRCFE4047S3    19-May-10

CRCF            QCRCFE4062M

CRCF            QCRCFE4064M

CRCF            QCRCFE4065M

CRCF            QCRCFE4072M

CRCF            QCRCFE7S2            28-May-10

CRCF            QCRCFE7S3            24-May-10

CRCF            QCRCFE7S7            26-May-10

CRCF            QCRCFE7S8

It is my opinion that the term backhaul used in for these upgrades are between the DSLAMs in Crace exchange and core network connections upstream. The reason I think this is the case is due to the device IDs not lining up with RIM/CMUX naming convention used in other Telstra Wholesale documents. Also the upgrade is for 13 devices which does not seem to align with the 75 RIM/CMUX in the area.

The Telstra documentation refers to DSLAM id, but users connected to RIM/CMUX devices don’t terminate ADSL on an exchange based DSLAM. ADSL is terminated on the RIM/CMUX itself and goes to the exchange on a shared backhaul connection. Some of the items listed have the same ID except for the last number in the sequence, this could mean each entry refers to the same device but different network interfaces or devices in the same location. I am only guessing of course but it is common for ISPs to use naming conventions based on location.

RIM/CMUX users can experience congestion on the RIM/CMUX itself as well as the backhaul between the RIM/CMUX and the exchange. It would appear neither of these parts of the infrastructure are being addressed. If they were there would be 75 entries in the document and Telstra vans everywhere.

If anyone can show their connectivity has been better over the past week then I would be interested to hear. I expect that no one really noticed any change at all.

I am still looking for more performance statistics and experiences from people affected. I am starting to gather quite a lot of information which adds weight to our argument that the service here is bad and it affects hundreds of people.

Is It Do or Die for Gungahlin?

April 28th, 2010

I have been holding off making posts until I have the submission sorted out but too many things have occurred in the past few weeks. Today the Liberals announced that they would drop the NBN if elected in the up coming Federal election. I will spend some time over the next few days to see if they have come up with some alternate policy. To would appear that our issues here in Gungahlin, Dunlop and North Lyneham might continue if a Liberal government get in. It may come down to do or die now.

The announcement by Tony Abbott today might mean the continuation of our poor service and lack of choice for some time. An article on the Daily Telegraph website quotes Mr Abbott saying

“But if you want to cut spending, look at the NBN. Not proceeding with it could save billions of dollars.”

The full article can be read on the Daily Telegraph Website here

In response to this announcement Kate Lundy posted the following Media Release about what effects this decision may make to Gungahlin and to jobs. This Media Release also links to the next important event that occurred last Friday 23rd April, Kate Lundy’s office released the second video interview on the Broadband issue in Gungahlin.

The video provides the views of Kate Lundy, myself and others of the current issues in the area as well as providing some history of the issue. The video in full  can be seen here.

Two articles were published in news papers over the past few weeks, one article in the Gungahlin News and one in the Chronicle.

The Chronicle article headed “Business hit by slow net speeds in the north” takes the issues I have raised about the cost of setting up communications  in Gungahlin for office space and the flow on effect it has on local business. The article can be seen here in full.

The article published in the Gungahlin News has been the most surprising of all the coverage in recent times. The article was read by Christopher J Taylor – General Manager of Telstra Wholesale ACT and he was “bemused by the inaccuracies…” Alan Kerlin of the GCC jumped on the opportunity and invited him to the June Gungahlin Community Council meeting to discuss the situation.

The GCC website has posted the article and the general public has responded with comments. The GCC post with the news article can be read here.

I would encourage you to contact Alan Kerlin and the GCC if you wish to attend and meet the man responsible for the performance of Telstra Wholesale services in the ACT. If you are out of town on the 9th of June then feel free to leave comments or contact me and I will attempt to pass your message onto him during the meeting.

The Campaign Continues

January 27th, 2010

It has now been 11 months since Telstra was notified of congestion issues affecting 20,000+ potential users connected to 70+ RIM/CMUX devices in the Gungahlin area, Watson and other north Canberra suburbs. Over that 11 months nothing has happened to increase the level of service and nothing has happened to provide users with a restoration time frame.

Since August 2009 I have written letters to my ISP through support tickets and to Senior representatives at Internode. I have written two letters to all the Legislative Assembly Members for Molonglo with some good and some average responses.

I have also contributed to National Broadband Forum with one of my submissions included for discussion. I have met with Federal Senator Kate Lundy and received two letters from Senator Conroy’s office, the last being five days ago. I have represented the issue on ABC radio 666 Canberra and received heaps of letters of support and interest from the general public.

2009 was a big year.

With the beginning of a new year comes a change in tac for me and this campaign. The break has given me a chance to review what has occurred and what needs to come. During this time I have come to some conclusions and made some decisions about what I can achieve and what is “flogging a dead horse” named Telstra.

In early January 2010 I decided to investigate the possibility of using TransACT as a service provider. I realised I had spent over $1000.00 dollars on an ADSL service that was unable to deliver any value for 11 months. This was wasted money and I am unwilling to continue to spend it on a worthless service.  I don’t mind spending that sort of money if the service will work but ADSL in Palmerston doesn’t work.

I have just installed TransACT skydata and have not regretted the decision. I am sorry I have to cancel my account with Internode, they have been a big supporter and very good to deal with. It is wrong that one company has to loose customers and revenue because of the poor service provided by their wholesale provider.

For me the cost of Skydata is similar to the ADSL1 uncapped if compared directly and cheaper if you take line rental into consideration. I was paying $89.95 a month for ADSL1 uncapped (up to 8mb/s) with 25 Gigabytes download. Now I pay TransACT $55 dollars + $35 with an ISP for 20 Gigabytes (total) download. Once I cancel my Telstra landline and use TransACT I will not have to pay the $30 Telstra line rental so it works out cheaper. I understand if this is above many household budgets, which is why I am not going to stop pushing for a better result for all Gungahlin.

I can now download stuff at 10:00pm at night with no congestion (and 30 millisecond latency not 600 ms) and my VPN into work also stays connected. I strongly suggest people look into the technology and leave Telstra behind. The only issue people will have with the technology is that you need line of site to Oak Hill (behind Forde) and that will preclude many in the area.

The decision to use a different provider does not mean I will stop the campaign. I will not forget everyone who has contacted me just because I managed to find a better way. What I will be concentrating on is TransACT and the Fibre to the Home roll out in Gungahlin. The new suburbs like Harrison, Crace and Franklin will be getting FTTH as announced in late 2009. These fibre runs have to go past Nicholls, Palmerston and Amaroo to get to the new suburbs as they will be run from Forde.

My sights are firmly on TransACT to roll out FTTH for all suburbs in Gungahlin. I believe this is the best answer to the current problem as it is actually a possibility. Telstra are not going to change their mind and spend the money the closer the NBN gets. Telstra have not upgraded any existing RIM/CMUX in Gungahlin in 11 months and continue to deploy pair gain systems within a kilometer or two of an existing exchange.

This is one reason why I changed providers. I would rather spend money with a company who is willing to invest in the area. I will not continue to give dollars to Telstra who have done nothing but the bare minimim for 15 years.

TransACT have a non disclosure agreement with the NBN Co, they are running Fibre in the area and have the facilities in Forde to host the required services. There is a business case to increase the “sale” value of the TransACT assets to the NBN when the time comes to integrate. A roll out in Brownfields (existing) suburbs will increase the total number of users under FTTH and increase the value to the NBN. Finally the Territory government is still a major shareholder in TransACT and could use this relationship to address constituent’s issues in this area by working with TransACT.

I have come to the belief that Telstra will not fix any of the current ADSL issues where RIM/CMUX are involved. The fact Telstra will not give a resolution date even after 11 months indicates they are happy to ignore the area. Even if they announced upgrades tomorrow I estimate it would take over a year to upgrade all 70 odd RIM/CMUXs. With the NBN on its way it would appear that Telstra has decided that no advantage would be gained from upgrading facilities. If $50,000 was required to improve services through each RIM then the cost for 70 RIMs would be $3.5 million. With the NBN about to replace the copper network within the next 2-5 years Telstra would not get enough return on the investment. It doesn’t make commercial sense once I put myself in the shoes of an accountant.

Enough Telstra shareholders have told me “their money” shouldn’t be used to fix my problem. Last time I checked Palmerston, Nicholls, Amaroo and other areas were installed when Telstra was government owned and used my tax money to pay for these deployments. It is a pity Telstra decided not to do it properly in the first place, now they are a private company no one seems to have any influence over them to address the short comings in a service every Australian paid for, not just Telstra’s precious shareholders.

Anyway, the campaign will continue. I will try and influence an improvement in broadband services through new opportunities and channels. I will continue to push Politicians to fix the current service and try to accelerate a FTTH rollout in our area. I will push the  NBN to acknowledge Gungahlin as a disadvantage area for priority FTTH deployment and lobby TransACT to roll out services to existing suburbs.

I know this is a long post but it has been a while. As always feel free to contact me by email or leave a comment.

Stephen Conroy Response

December 8th, 2009

Katy Gallagher has forwarded on to me the response she received from the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Senator Stephen Conroy.

In her response to my earlier letter Katy had informed me she had forwarded the matter to Senator Conroy on my behalf. I thank Katy for sending me the response.

The letter is as I had anticipated any response from the minister, part form letter and part sales pitch on the NBN. In the letter Senator Conroy does have a few interesting things to say. He speaks of not having the ability to deal with an issue concerning Broadband which may interfere with day to day operations of a public company.

While I concede the point Governments can’t directly influence public companies it is difficult to understand how little governance actually exists when it comes to these matters. It would appear that Internode, the ACT Legislative Assembly and the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy have no influence on the problem….so who does?

Where would we stand if this was a matter for the Minister for Health? If a medical procedure at Calvary Hospital cost the same as in the hospital at Woden but Calvary gave you only half the treatment, would you have a case? I guarantee there would be all sorts of governance, reviews and backlash over that.

Here in Gungahlin Telstra can put in the lowest cost solution and charge higher rates to consumers. Here we get a substandard service on technology which limits competition. In Gungahlin we get to pay for poor decisions made by Telstra when they were a fully Government owned institution and used tax payers money build a network. We have little to no recourse if Telstra refuse to upgrade Gungahlin due to cost.

Now I have to watch TransACT roll out Fibre past my suburb to a Greenfield site with very little hope of seeing anything equivalent within the next 5 years. Maybe it is time to change focus, maybe it is time to appeal to TransACT to do “brownfield” roll outs in Gungahlin.

To see the response from Senator Conroy check the link out below.

Stephen Conroy Response.pdf

Second Round of Letters to ACT Legislative Assembly

November 20th, 2009

At around 4:45pm on Thursday 19th November I sent a second round of letters to the ACT Legislative Assembly Members for Molonglo. These letters were sent in an attempt rally more local support behind the issue prior to me going federal with the campaign.

My strategy at this point is to get all the local members passing the issue up to federal members at the same time as I write to the federal members. It is an attempt to present the issue as it really is…a community wide issue.

As Jon Stanhope’s office and Katy Gallagher did respond and forward Gungahlin’s concerns already, I did not send them a letter. They have done something and should get some credit for action where others have done very little.

I have attached all the letters below, they are all very similar except for the personalised third paragraph.

I have to admit the language in these letters is far more direct and challenging than the first letter sent in September. I will call members out who continue to show no interest in local matters. As I explain in my letter this is about the constituents and local business and there are a hell of a lot of us affected.

Senators Stephen Conroy, Garry Humphries, Kate Lundy are next as well as Bob McMullan.

2nd Letter MLA – Simon Corbell.pdf

2nd Letter MLA – Shane Rattenbury.pdf

2nd Letter MLA – Jeremy Hanson.pdf

2nd Letter MLA – Caroline Le Couteur.pdf

2nd Letter MLA – Andrew Barr.pdf

2nd Letter MLA – Zed Seselja.pdf

Why Do I Use Speedtest.net?

November 18th, 2009

A few people have remarked on how much I rely on tests like www.speedtest.net.

There are many reasons why I like using speed tests, for one it helps quantify the issues being experienced in Gungahlin in a repeatable and standardised way. It is hard for many users to describe how poor the user experience actually is in Gungahlin. In many cases the users’ concerns are dismissed because they can not be articulated in a context that has meaning.

I have to admit that I used the speed test site to determine point in time upload and download speeds only. After doing the test I tweeted earlier tonight I had a look around the site a bit more and found a nugget of gold.

Speed Comparison 18Nov09

The scary thing is the actual results in the image above. If you wanted independant verification of your speeds against the average for the country then it is right there. Unfortunately Internode has changed IP address schemes in Canberra and the online databases have not managed to update yet. This means the IP address for my connection is still registered as being in Queensland and not in the ACT. That will update in time.

Doing these speed tests adds to a global database of informaiton gathered by others using the service. By doing a test your results are contributing to a resource others will gain benefit from.

How much more does one need to say about Gungahlin Broadband after looking at the graph? Not much, not much at all.

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.