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

IBB / RTE / Seem to be QoS'd at 512k on a 1Mb Breeze connection - Anyone else?

2»

Comments

  • #32
    nadir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭nadir


    yeah, mine is totally dying atm....

    15 up 10 down
    wtf ????
    it was perfect just a few days ago.
    PING google.com (216.239.37.99) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=827 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=849 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=1553 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=760 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=5 ttl=243 time=888 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=6 ttl=243 time=1477 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=7 ttl=243 time=1562 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=8 ttl=243 time=929 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=9 ttl=243 time=616 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=10 ttl=243 time=813 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=11 ttl=243 time=1223 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=12 ttl=243 time=1746 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=13 ttl=243 time=419 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=15 ttl=243 time=314 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=16 ttl=243 time=545 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=18 ttl=243 time=255 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=19 ttl=243 time=754 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=21 ttl=243 time=88.6 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=22 ttl=243 time=371 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=23 ttl=243 time=358 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=24 ttl=243 time=550 ms

    and thats with an mtu of 1000
    ffs

    who is this jeff person who gives bandwidth
    giveth to meh


  • #33
    optiplexgx270
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭optiplexgx270


    Mutant_Fruit wrote:
    The sign you've been limited is that when you max out your connection your pings to to 2000-3000ms. Like this :mad::

    Ping statistics for 82.195.144.58:
    Packets: Sent = 21, Received = 21, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 1868ms, Maximum = 2559ms, Average = 2090ms
    Control-Break

    Time to ring tech support again me thinks.


    anyone get this sorted out yet? :mad:

    im on the phone to eircom re something else then IBB here goes my night :(


  • #34
    optiplexgx270
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭optiplexgx270


    out of interest why 256K wernt we all getting along on 1Mb connections all day long....


  • #35
    magicPockets
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7 ✭magicPockets


    well, I spoke to a technician about an hour or so ago, he took some samples of me downloading between 20 and 30kbytes/sec and advised that he needed to escalate the problem. I asked him if there is any issue with the IBB network, he replied "no the network is just fine"....err....yeah right....

    ...waiting for a call back....still waiting.... :(


  • #36
    optiplexgx270
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭optiplexgx270




  • Advertisement
  • #37
    nadir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭nadir


    optiplexgx270 wrote:
    out of interest why 256K wernt we all getting along on 1Mb connections all day long....

    1 Mb was working fine for us here, dont know whats going on.


  • #38
    Skud
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,821 ✭✭✭Skud


    my dl speed has now gone down to 37 - 38 kb/sec not 4 hours after it was sorta improved. I might have been qos'd because i was downloading heavily but still i think i was being qos'd already. This really is annoying spent most of day trying to fix it. Still not. theres a prob with the network. My pings are spiky but playable games wise even pinging is grand except one or two fluctuations. Someone got old titans email? I want to send him a mail.

    QoS at its best....


    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=21ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=28ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=16ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=21ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=32ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=19ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=20ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=19ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=23ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=17ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=22ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=25ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=18ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=19ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=21ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=19ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=16ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=25ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=29ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=23ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=22ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=22ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=26ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=20ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=20ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=18ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=24ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=18ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=22ms TTL=55
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=64 time=23ms TTL=55

    Ping statistics for 82.195.144.58:
    Packets: Sent = 30, Received = 30, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 16ms, Maximum = 32ms, Average = 21ms


  • #39
    nadir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭nadir


    mine is totally screwed, its completely unusable for gaming, and downloads are crawling.


  • #40
    CyberGhost
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭CyberGhost


    nadir wrote:
    yeah, mine is totally dying atm....

    15 up 10 down
    wtf ????
    it was perfect just a few days ago.
    PING google.com (216.239.37.99) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=827 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=849 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=1553 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=760 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=5 ttl=243 time=888 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=6 ttl=243 time=1477 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=7 ttl=243 time=1562 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=8 ttl=243 time=929 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=9 ttl=243 time=616 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=10 ttl=243 time=813 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=11 ttl=243 time=1223 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=12 ttl=243 time=1746 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=13 ttl=243 time=419 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=15 ttl=243 time=314 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=16 ttl=243 time=545 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=18 ttl=243 time=255 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=19 ttl=243 time=754 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=21 ttl=243 time=88.6 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=22 ttl=243 time=371 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=23 ttl=243 time=358 ms
64 bytes from 216.239.37.99: icmp_seq=24 ttl=243 time=550 ms

    and thats with an mtu of 1000
    ffs

    who is this jeff person who gives bandwidth
    giveth to meh

    does lowering mtu(or making it optimal) help lower pings?


  • #41
    nadir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭nadir


    CyberGhost wrote:
    does lowering mtu(or making it optimal) help lower pings?

    yes,
    but obviously isnt good for leeching,
    its good for gaming.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    optiplexgx270
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭optiplexgx270


    I am currently "maxing" my connection @ an incrediable 15-20kbs and FFS heres my ping to boards.ie

    Pinging www.boards.ie [82.195.144.58] with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=1536ms TTL=58
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=1874ms TTL=58
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=1635ms TTL=58
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=1352ms TTL=58

    Ping statistics for 82.195.144.58:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 1352ms, Maximum = 1874ms, Average = 1599ms

    When i called tech support earlier low and behold just as i got talking to someone it shot up to 120kbs but once off the call it fell back to 24kbs

    Im Fuin MAD at this stage :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

    Oh and fyi

    Tracing route to www.boards.ie [82.195.144.58]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 * 1713 ms 560 ms 3rock-vl-vlan-5.irishbroadband.ie [62.231.33.17]

    2 391 ms 128 ms 208 ms rte-et-2-7.irishbroadband.ie [62.231.32.182]
    3 596 ms 1234 ms 735 ms ix-et-1-1.irishbroadband.ie [195.26.12.61]
    4 1503 ms 1306 ms 1308 ms 62.231.52.157
    5 977 ms 1482 ms 1309 ms suez-inex.hosting365.ie [193.242.111.23]
    6 1831 ms 2145 ms 1168 ms 82.195.128.4
    7 1279 ms 1234 ms 1593 ms pie.boards.ie [82.195.144.58]

    Trace complete.


  • #43
    CyberGhost
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭CyberGhost


    nadir wrote:
    yes,
    but obviously isnt good for leeching,
    its good for gaming.

    Cool, Thanks for info!


  • #44
    jesus_thats_gre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,441 ✭✭✭✭jesus_thats_gre


    Mine is perfect again. Got a new laptop so am downloading a load of stuff and am getting 120KB/sec no bother.. Phew thats over with..


  • #45
    Turner
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 3,935 Mod ✭✭✭✭Turner


    On the churchfield mast here in Cork.

    Downloads here are maxed at 119kb/sec Uploads 117kb/sec. Ive been averaging about 2-6 gig per day (mostly uploads)

    Pings are grand


    C:\>ping cs.irelandcs.com -t

    Pinging cs.irelandcs.com [85.159.20.24] with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=55
    Reply from 85.159.20.24: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=55

    Packets: Sent = 16, Received = 16, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 39ms, Average = 28ms
    Control-C
    ^C
    C:\>


  • #46
    optiplexgx270
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭optiplexgx270


    Your QOS days will come Cheif--- just you wait :evil grin:


  • #47
    nadir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭nadir


    ours is still dodgy, 50 each way.

    btw CyberGhost ... is that ... Spriggan in your sig ??


  • #48
    lad12
    Registered Users Posts: 488 ✭✭lad12


    Anyone recommend getting this?


  • #49
    Skud
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,821 ✭✭✭Skud


    how could we atm? Usually it is fine for me. I think with a lot of things its poor atm, mainly the 2 meg updgrade. Depends what you are looking for, if it is downloads then yes. If gaming I wouldnt recommend wireless for it. More ppl would be able to give better feedback.


  • #50
    CyberGhost
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,554 ✭✭✭CyberGhost


    nadir wrote:
    ours is still dodgy, 50 each way.

    btw CyberGhost ... is that ... Spriggan in your sig ??

    nope, Motoko Kusanagi, Ghost in the Shell


  • #51
    nadir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭nadir


    ah yes of course, hehe, I was thinking it was Spriggan, hehe
    SPRIGGAN !!! hehe

    oh btw bw still crap ::: 50 up 20 down atm


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    optiplexgx270
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,506 ✭✭✭optiplexgx270


    mine seems ok today all of a sudden and they are coming out tomorrow to align the mast getting 1Mb down and >1Mb upload so i think ill cancel them coming out and just say it seems fine for now.

    pings when idle to www.boards.ie

    are 10-20 with the odd timeout and

    when flat out @ 120K down 10k up

    Pinging www.boards.ie [82.195.144.58] with 32 bytes of data:

    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=76ms TTL=58
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=58
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=58
    Reply from 82.195.144.58: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=58

    Ping statistics for 82.195.144.58:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 42ms, Maximum = 203ms, Average = 125ms

    does that sound about right?


  • #53
    enigma_b17
    Registered Users Posts: 80 ✭✭enigma_b17


    Have been downloading at <30k/s for over a month now, its an absolute disgrace

    [edit] i can see why they make you sign a contract before theyll hook u up lol.


Advertisement