How bad can it get?

Seriously.

Today
16:55 308 kbps (38.5kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
16:54 281 kbps (35.1kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
15:26 424 kbps (53kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
14:50 421 kbps (52.6kB/s) 313 kbps (39.1kB/s)
14:07 371 kbps (46.4kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
12:40 363 kbps (45.4kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
11:22 568 kbps (71kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
10:56 760 kbps (95kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
10:46 620 kbps (77.5kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
10:32 635 kbps (79.4kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
09:08 2947 kbps (368kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
01:37 2895 kbps (362kB/s) 286 kbps (35.8kB/s)
00:45 3388 kbps (424kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
===========================================
Wed 22nd April 2008
17:05 398 kbps (49.8kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
16:55 485 kbps (60.6kB/s) 315 kbps (39.4kB/s)
15:45 469 kbps (58.6kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
15:30 451 kbps (56.4kB/s) 356 kbps (44.5kB/s)
14:56 678 kbps (84.8kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
14:43 387 kbps (48.4kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
13:54 314 kbps (39.3kB/s) 366 kbps (45.8kB/s)
13:21 300 kbps (37.5kB/s) 373 kbps (46.6kB/s)
13:17 281 kbps (35.1kB/s) 338 kbps (42.3kB/s)
13:12 301 kbps (37.6kB/s) 316 kbps (39.5kB/s)
13:08 275 kbps (34.4kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
13:05 309 kbps (38.6kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)

download stats.

Clara say 'unless it goes below 256k for three days in a row, we can't
get BT to take action'.

Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..


Congested backhaul?

What this implies is that BT regard the minimum acceptable speed for
ADSL max as 256k....

Even at 20:1 contention on an 8Mbps circuit, that's 400Kbps.

Who know what BT's service levels actually are..

I am getting VERY unhappy, but cant seem to find the right person to
fume at..




The Natural Philosopher

"The Natural Philosopher" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
..
>
> Clara say 'unless it goes below 256k for three days in a row, we can't get
> BT to take action'.
>

Well that is better than Tesco they will not do anything unless going below
200k.

But I must say it as not gone low since I complained.

--
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Seriously.
>
>Today
> 16:55 308 kbps (38.5kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 16:54 281 kbps (35.1kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
> 15:26 424 kbps (53kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
> 14:50 421 kbps (52.6kB/s) 313 kbps (39.1kB/s)
> 14:07 371 kbps (46.4kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
> 12:40 363 kbps (45.4kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 11:22 568 kbps (71kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 10:56 760 kbps (95kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
> 10:46 620 kbps (77.5kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
> 10:32 635 kbps (79.4kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 09:08 2947 kbps (368kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 01:37 2895 kbps (362kB/s) 286 kbps (35.8kB/s)
> 00:45 3388 kbps (424kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
>===========================================
>Wed 22nd April 2008
> 17:05 398 kbps (49.8kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 16:55 485 kbps (60.6kB/s) 315 kbps (39.4kB/s)
> 15:45 469 kbps (58.6kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
> 15:30 451 kbps (56.4kB/s) 356 kbps (44.5kB/s)
> 14:56 678 kbps (84.8kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
> 14:43 387 kbps (48.4kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
> 13:54 314 kbps (39.3kB/s) 366 kbps (45.8kB/s)
> 13:21 300 kbps (37.5kB/s) 373 kbps (46.6kB/s)
> 13:17 281 kbps (35.1kB/s) 338 kbps (42.3kB/s)
> 13:12 301 kbps (37.6kB/s) 316 kbps (39.5kB/s)
> 13:08 275 kbps (34.4kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
> 13:05 309 kbps (38.6kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
>
>download stats.
>
>Clara say 'unless it goes below 256k for three days in a row, we can't
>get BT to take action'.
>
>Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..

Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.


>
>
>Congested backhaul?
>
>What this implies is that BT regard the minimum acceptable speed for
>ADSL max as 256k....
>
>Even at 20:1 contention on an 8Mbps circuit, that's 400Kbps.
>
>Who know what BT's service levels actually are..
>
>I am getting VERY unhappy, but cant seem to find the right person to
>fume at..
>
--

Andrew Sayers

Andrew Sayers wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
>
> Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
> priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.

Idnet are the same price as Zen for the popular packages yet offer more included GB and
are equally excellent if not better plus have no fixed contract term requiring only the
usual one month's notice.

Mention me when you join and get £10 off your first month too (email me for details).


> >Congested backhaul?

I can't really see any other explanation. I NEVER get this with Idnet, which regularly
provides 6-7 Mbps when tested.

Graham

Andrew Sayers wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Seriously.
>>
>> Today
>> 16:55 308 kbps (38.5kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 16:54 281 kbps (35.1kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
>> 15:26 424 kbps (53kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
>> 14:50 421 kbps (52.6kB/s) 313 kbps (39.1kB/s)
>> 14:07 371 kbps (46.4kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
>> 12:40 363 kbps (45.4kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 11:22 568 kbps (71kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 10:56 760 kbps (95kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
>> 10:46 620 kbps (77.5kB/s) 379 kbps (47.4kB/s)
>> 10:32 635 kbps (79.4kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 09:08 2947 kbps (368kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 01:37 2895 kbps (362kB/s) 286 kbps (35.8kB/s)
>> 00:45 3388 kbps (424kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
>> ===========================================
>> Wed 22nd April 2008
>> 17:05 398 kbps (49.8kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 16:55 485 kbps (60.6kB/s) 315 kbps (39.4kB/s)
>> 15:45 469 kbps (58.6kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
>> 15:30 451 kbps (56.4kB/s) 356 kbps (44.5kB/s)
>> 14:56 678 kbps (84.8kB/s) 378 kbps (47.3kB/s)
>> 14:43 387 kbps (48.4kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
>> 13:54 314 kbps (39.3kB/s) 366 kbps (45.8kB/s)
>> 13:21 300 kbps (37.5kB/s) 373 kbps (46.6kB/s)
>> 13:17 281 kbps (35.1kB/s) 338 kbps (42.3kB/s)
>> 13:12 301 kbps (37.6kB/s) 316 kbps (39.5kB/s)
>> 13:08 275 kbps (34.4kB/s) 376 kbps (47kB/s)
>> 13:05 309 kbps (38.6kB/s) 377 kbps (47.1kB/s)
>>
>> download stats.
>>
>> Clara say 'unless it goes below 256k for three days in a row, we can't
>> get BT to take action'.
>>
>> Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
>
> Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
> priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.
>

I do not think this is Claras fault. I think they are being honest
insofar as the poor support bloke understands things.


I am going to try speed tests with other people in the village: I
suspect its BT's IPStream service that is shagged.

Since there is no LLU here, that probably means no other ISP will do any
better.

What I need to know is what BT's service limits are, and how far I have
to go in rubbing their noses in the situation.

Eeyore wrote:
>
> Andrew Sayers wrote:
>
>> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
>> Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
>> priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.
>
> Idnet are the same price as Zen for the popular packages yet offer more included GB and
> are equally excellent if not better plus have no fixed contract term requiring only the
> usual one month's notice.
>
> Mention me when you join and get £10 off your first month too (email me for details).
>
>
>>> Congested backhaul?
>
> I can't really see any other explanation. I NEVER get this with Idnet, which regularly
> provides 6-7 Mbps when tested.
>

Ah, but you don't live here either, with respect. Its not a big place
and I think all our data comes in on a little bean can microwave dish,.


> Graham
>

Eeyore wrote:
>
> Andrew Sayers wrote:
>
>> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
>> Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
>> priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.
>
> Idnet are the same price as Zen for the popular packages yet offer more included GB and
> are equally excellent if not better plus have no fixed contract term requiring only the
> usual one month's notice.
>
> Mention me when you join and get £10 off your first month too (email me for details).
>
>
>>> Congested backhaul?
>
> I can't really see any other explanation. I NEVER get this with Idnet, which regularly
> provides 6-7 Mbps when tested.
>
> Graham
>

You are starting to sound like a IDNET fanboi ;o)

To be fair my IDNET account does get slower in the evening, it seems to
go from 5.5 Mb/s at non congested times all the way down to 5.0 Mb/s
during the evening peak.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, The Natural
Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Andrew Sayers wrote:
> > The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >>
> >> download stats.
> >>
> >> Clara say 'unless it goes below 256k for three days in a row, we can't
> >> get BT to take action'.
> >>
> >> Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
> >
> > Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and
> > reasonably
> > priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.
> >
>
> I do not think this is Claras fault. I think they are being honest
> insofar as the poor support bloke understands things.
>
>
> I am going to try speed tests with other people in the village: I
> suspect its BT's IPStream service that is shagged.
>
> Since there is no LLU here, that probably means no other ISP will do any
> better.
>
> What I need to know is what BT's service limits are, and how far I have
> to go in rubbing their noses in the situation.

For over a year I had similar bad speeds to yours (it averaged less
than 500Kbps for most of the day). Over and over I was told by Nildram
(my ISP then) exactly what you've been told by Clara. That it was BTs
fault and/or that my exchange was congested.

I switched to a different ISP, an entanet reseller, that cost me £10
per month less than Nildram and gave me a bigger download allowance. So
even if Nildram had been correct about exchange congestion and download
speeds didn't improve, at least I'd save money.

The last speed test I did with Nildram , about an hour before the
switchover, I got less than 500 Kbps. The switchover went smoothly and
my first speed test with the new ISP, about an hour after switchover
was over 5 Mbps. Since then (almost a year ago) I often get over 6
Mbps, rarely get less than 5 Mbps even at the busiest times (their
'off-peak' rate times) I never get less than 2 Mbps.

I wasn't on LLU with either ISP. So, either the low speeds were
Nildram's fault or suddenly my exchange became uncongested at exactly
the same time as I switched to a different ISP. I know which
explanation I think is more likely.

Anyway, ask yourself: Is it worth trying another (better) ISP? What do
you have to lose?

Kit

Nick wrote:

> Eeyore wrote:
> > Andrew Sayers wrote:
> >> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>> Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
> >> Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
> >> priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.
> >
> > Idnet are the same price as Zen for the popular packages yet offer more included GB and
> > are equally excellent if not better plus have no fixed contract term requiring only the
> > usual one month's notice.
> >
> > Mention me when you join and get £10 off your first month too (email me for details).
> >
> >
> >>> Congested backhaul?
> >
> > I can't really see any other explanation. I NEVER get this with Idnet, which regularly
> > provides 6-7 Mbps when tested.
>
>
> You are starting to sound like a IDNET fanboi ;o)

Who wouldn't be ? I simply can't fault them on any count.


> To be fair my IDNET account does get slower in the evening, it seems to
> go from 5.5 Mb/s at non congested times all the way down to 5.0 Mb/s
> during the evening peak.

Now compare that with the 200-300 kbps some users of the dross ISPs get at that time of day.
It speaks for itself.

Graham

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Eeyore wrote:
> > Andrew Sayers wrote:
> >> The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>> Consistently connected at 3Mbps, no packet loss anywhere..
> >> Ask for a MAC code and try another more helpful ISP? Newnet are good, and reasonably
> >> priced and Zen are excellent if a little pricey.
> >
> > Idnet are the same price as Zen for the popular packages yet offer more included GB and
> > are equally excellent if not better plus have no fixed contract term requiring only the
> > usual one month's notice.
> >
> > Mention me when you join and get £10 off your first month too (email me for details).
> >
> >
> >>> Congested backhaul?
> >
> > I can't really see any other explanation. I NEVER get this with Idnet, which regularly
> > provides 6-7 Mbps when tested.
>
>
> Ah, but you don't live here either, with respect. Its not a big place
> and I think all our data comes in on a little bean can microwave dish,.

Microwave links are perfectly capable of very high data rates. Who lese lives near you that
you can compare performance with ?

Graham