Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Download and upload speeds for skype

Options
  • 17-08-2009 11:45pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,317 ✭✭✭


    To use skype for both video and ordinary calls...what kind of download/upload speeds would you need?


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭chris2007


    Minimum of 1mb/s


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,612 ✭✭✭Dardania


    the basic 1 m download /128 k upload ADSL that you can get from any Bitstream provider will do the trick. The defining factor is the responsiveness of your connection so you're looking for a low latency connection, with fast pings.

    A good tester: http://myspeed.visualware.com/voip/


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    The speed needs to be stable. Anything from 50k (voice only) to 64k (voice & very poor video) to 120k(voice and typical web video). Same speed both directions.

    Jitter should be low. ping under 100ms is OK


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,011 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Dardania wrote: »
    the basic 1 m download /128 k upload ADSL that you can get from any Bitstream provider will do the trick. The defining factor is the responsiveness of your connection so you're looking for a low latency connection, with fast pings.

    A good tester: http://myspeed.visualware.com/voip/

    I don't know about others but those tests do not indicate anything useful for me here ...... just used it and it told me I had 81.2% packet loss! Jitter near zero.
    I can still carry on VOIP calls ...... with no discernable losses .... what do I believe, my ears or those tests? (rhetorical!)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,612 ✭✭✭Dardania


    I don't know about others but those tests do not indicate anything useful for me here ...... just used it and it told me I had 81.2% packet loss! Jitter near zero.
    I can still carry on VOIP calls ...... with no discernable losses .... what do I believe, my ears or those tests? (rhetorical!)

    I usually found these tests useful, however it depends on what site conditions are like at the testing server / datacentre.

    a more realworld test would be to do a pathping to sip.skype.com

    eg:
    C:\Users\User>pathping sip.skype.com
    

    which for me gives:
    Tracing route to sip.gs.skype.com [212.72.49.145]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
      0  eeepc-s101 [192.168.1.30]
      1  192.168.1.254
      2  bas503.cwt.esat.net [193.95.136.239]
      3  vlan500.sw502.cwt.esat.net [193.95.136.125]
      4  vlan54.sw002.cwt.esat.net [193.95.130.161]
      5  ge2-0.br003.cwt.esat.net [193.95.129.23]
      6  xe-0-1-0-104.dub20.ip4.tinet.net [213.200.67.253]
      7  xe-2-0-0.lon20.ip4.tinet.net [89.149.186.85]
      8  ge-7-1.core2.London1.Level3.net [213.200.77.130]
      9  ae-34-52.ebr2.London1.Level3.net [4.69.139.97]
     10  ae-2-2.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net [4.69.132.134]
     11  ge-11-0.ipcolo1.Amsterdam1.Level3.net [4.69.139.174]
     12  212.72.49.145
    Computing statistics for 300 seconds...
                Source to Here   This Node/Link
    Hop  RTT    Lost/Sent = Pct  Lost/Sent = Pct  Address
      0                                           eeepc-s101 [192.168.1.30]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      1   12ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  192.168.1.254
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      2   42ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  bas503.cwt.esat.net [193.95.136.239]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      3   34ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  vlan500.sw502.cwt.esat.net [193.95.136.125]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      4   34ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  vlan54.sw002.cwt.esat.net [193.95.130.161]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      5   30ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  ge2-0.br003.cwt.esat.net [193.95.129.23]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      6   28ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  xe-0-1-0-104.dub20.ip4.tinet.net [213.200.67.253]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      7   47ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  xe-2-0-0.lon20.ip4.tinet.net [89.149.186.85]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      8   52ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  ge-7-1.core2.London1.Level3.net [213.200.77.130]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      9   43ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  ae-34-52.ebr2.London1.Level3.net [4.69.139.97]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     10   46ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  ae-2-2.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net[4.69.132.134]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     11   50ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  ge-11-0.ipcolo1.Amsterdam1.Level3.net [4.69.139.174]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     12   44ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  212.72.49.145
    Trace complete.
    

    The final RTT (Return Trip Time) of 44ms is indicative of what you can expect with say skype - for me it should be ample in terms of latency. It also looks good from a packet loss perspective that nothing got lost along the way


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,011 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    What's the equivalent to pathping for Linux I wonder .... traceroute?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,612 ✭✭✭Dardania


    What's the equivalent to pathping for Linux I wonder .... traceroute?

    it seems to be a combination of ping & traceroute on windows - have a look here:

    http://www.opensourcetutor.com/2007/07/25/troubleshooting-tools-ping-pathping-httping-and-nmap/

    or another few guys have hacked a script together to emulate:

    http://www.grendelchen.com/weblog/?p=151
    &
    http://www.bitwizard.nl/mtr/


    must try it on my linux nas...


Advertisement