Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 11:30:05 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Fri, August 24, 2012 7:47 am, Camaleón wrote: (...) Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s Regards and thanks, Holly cow! That numbers are not good at all. It has been a few days since their last contact. In the interim I have watched the speed factor improve. I'm now getting a download speed of 93.51 Mb/s. Ah, that number looks more normal. - Ensure you are selecting a server that is close to your location (whether in doubt, let the app to automatically select the best for you). The server is getting selected by the app and it's in the city I am living in. Okay. - Run the test at regular intervals, on different hours. I've been doing that and feeding the figures back to them. They have their own server for speed testing and there has been some disparity in the figures. That has been fed back to them also. I prefer to use a different speed test other than the one my provider suggests, just to have something to compare with (and also because I don't trust them too much...). - Restart the modem-router, sometime they're simply clogged. Yes, I have done that on a number of occasions. I'm quite satisfied that there is no bottleneck at this end. Everything is a minimum of 100 Mb capable. Fine. - What kind of connection technology (cable, ftth, vdsl...) is your ISP providning you? What's the up/down speed you have paid for? Cable and an upper limit of 100 Mb/s. They advertise 2 Mb/s upload, which is less than half the international average. As somebody that would be classified as a typical home-based end user, that doesn't concern me however. Ah, then the upload speed rate you got was very good. One question... cable operators also promote/promise a 100% of the contracted speed? You know that for ADSL the norm is a guarantee the 10% of the hired speed (for fiber is usually the 100%) but as I never workes with cable I can't tell :-? - Is your local network using a gigabit infrastructure? This means ethernet cabling has to be at least Cat 5e or Cat6, and also the modem- router as well any other additional device you may have (e.g., ONT for fiber links). No fibre, although a national roll-out for that service has begun (along with compromised routers, no doubt). Gigabit infrastructure is what it is advertised at present. I mean in your premises, at your home (your computer's network card, your switch, cabling...) it has to be all Gigabit. For ADSL using ethernet is fine but when you are reaching higher speeds is better to use Gigabit to avoid bottlenecks at your side. - Forget wireless devices if you want to get the best numbers for your high speed connection. Yes, I'm aware of that one. Still a lover of wires. Good :-) - Look at the modem-router for the real speed it is synced. They supply the router - a tailored Netgear CG3100. I can't find any reference to sync. Mmm, that looks like a router not the modem. This value uses to be available at the modem but to be sincere, I don't know how the cable modems can be accessed (should they can), you will have to look at the manual. As a side note, remember that a cable connections are shared between many people, not just you (that's why I prefer fiber or ADSL :-P), so unless your provider does a good job in load balancing and has good equipment at their exchange, you can experience these sudden speed drop downs from time to time. If they maintain a reasonable download rate, I'll hold off on the media campaign. They have been advised. Regards and thanks, Well put! :-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k1ac67$s0t$4...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:29:52 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps I get: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s Regards and thanks, Holly cow! That numbers are not good at all. - Ensure you are selecting a server that is close to your location (whether in doubt, let the app to automatically select the best for you). - Run the test at regular intervals, on different hours. - Restart the modem-router, sometime they're simply clogged. - What kind of connection technology (cable, ftth, vdsl...) is your ISP providning you? What's the up/down speed you have paid for? - Is your local network using a gigabit infrastructure? This means ethernet cabling has to be at least Cat 5e or Cat6, and also the modem- router as well any other additional device you may have (e.g., ONT for fiber links). - Forget wireless devices if you want to get the best numbers for your high speed connection. - Look at the modem-router for the real speed it is synced. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k1846i$k87$8...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Vi, 24 aug 12, 14:47:46, Camaleón wrote: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s [...] - Forget wireless devices if you want to get the best numbers for your high speed connection. Good point, I get about 24+ Mbit/s (2.7 MB/s) over a 54 Mbit/s (Wireless G) connection. Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Fri, August 24, 2012 7:47 am, Camaleón wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:29:52 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps I get: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s Regards and thanks, Holly cow! That numbers are not good at all. It has been a few days since their last contact. In the interim I have watched the speed factor improve. I'm now getting a download speed of 93.51 Mb/s. - Ensure you are selecting a server that is close to your location (whether in doubt, let the app to automatically select the best for you). The server is getting selected by the app and it's in the city I am living in. - Run the test at regular intervals, on different hours. I've been doing that and feeding the figures back to them. They have their own server for speed testing and there has been some disparity in the figures. That has been fed back to them also. - Restart the modem-router, sometime they're simply clogged. Yes, I have done that on a number of occasions. I'm quite satisfied that there is no bottleneck at this end. Everything is a minimum of 100 Mb capable. - What kind of connection technology (cable, ftth, vdsl...) is your ISP providning you? What's the up/down speed you have paid for? Cable and an upper limit of 100 Mb/s. They advertise 2 Mb/s upload, which is less than half the international average. As somebody that would be classified as a typical home-based end user, that doesn't concern me however. - Is your local network using a gigabit infrastructure? This means ethernet cabling has to be at least Cat 5e or Cat6, and also the modem- router as well any other additional device you may have (e.g., ONT for fiber links). No fibre, although a national roll-out for that service has begun (along with compromised routers, no doubt). Gigabit infrastructure is what it is advertised at present. - Forget wireless devices if you want to get the best numbers for your high speed connection. Yes, I'm aware of that one. Still a lover of wires. - Look at the modem-router for the real speed it is synced. They supply the router - a tailored Netgear CG3100. I can't find any reference to sync. If they maintain a reasonable download rate, I'll hold off on the media campaign. They have been advised. Regards and thanks, Weaver. -- The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the TV watcher to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US . . . -- Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a39336ffccf73f1f29e475f677bad9df.squir...@fruiteater.riseup.net
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Mi, 22 aug 12, 13:29:52, Weaver wrote: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s Ok, still far away from the advertised 100 Mb/s, but not that bad. Did you do the test with the recommended server or did you try also other ones? Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Mi, 22 aug 12, 13:29:52, Weaver wrote: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s Ok, still far away from the advertised 100 Mb/s, but not that bad. Did you do the test with the recommended server or did you try also other ones? I tried two and the cross-comparison was fairly even. I've also noticed, since I've been making some noise, that the speed has picked up a little and remained reasonably constant for over a day now, so the situation is not as much out of their control as they would make out. Regards, Weaver -- I invite you to name a society that created a secret prison system, outside the rule of law, where torture takes place, that sooner or later didn't turn the abuse against it's own citizens. -- Naomi Wolf - October 11, 2007 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/38e5c033ec935c915de085feef261dcc.squir...@fulvetta.riseup.net
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
I have a little off-this-thread questions. Once I used the wget to download one file from debian repository, on another terminal I with to use the wget to get another file at the same time from the same repository. I was discouraged to do that, and was also told that, two wget downloading would deduce the downloading speed, I should have waited one finished before download another one. It's happened two years ago, but I still remembered that suggestions. Even later in my life I still download two or more at the same time. Here my question is that, is it true that open two wget will affect the downloading speed? better one by one, just suspect it. Thanks, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5035d5e3.7030...@gmail.com
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
lina wrote: Once I used the wget to download one file from debian repository, on another terminal I with to use the wget to get another file at the same time from the same repository. And if you needed both files then that seems fine to me. I was discouraged to do that, and was also told that, two wget downloading would deduce the downloading speed, I should have waited one finished before download another one. *Should* is too strong. It doesn't hurt anything to download two files at the same time. Or three. A hundred is probably too many though. But really there isn't any difference in the overall result. It's happened two years ago, but I still remembered that suggestions. Even later in my life I still download two or more at the same time. Sure. I often have multiple things happening at the same time. It is why I use a multitasking operating system. Here my question is that, is it true that open two wget will affect the downloading speed? better one by one, just suspect it. Let's assume you have a 1.0 Mbit/s download connection. Because it makes the math easier. And assume you need a 1.0 Mbyte file. With no other overhead it will take aproximately 10 seconds to download. Now let's assume that you download two of those files at the same time. You still only have 1.0Mbit/s download speed. But now you are downloading 2.0Mbytes of data in total. Obviously the total download will take aproximately 20 seconds to download. If you ran them sequentually then the first one would finish in 10 seconds and then the second one would start and it would finish 10 seconds later. So it would take 20 seconds in total for both to download both of those files. If you ran them both at the same time then neither would be able to get the full 1.0Mbit/s download speed. It should balance out between them and each would get about 0.5Mbit/s download speed. Which would double the amount of time each would take. Each would take about 20 seconds to download those files but both are running at the same time. So once again it would take 20 seconds in total for both to download those files. No difference! Now if you needed *one* of those files first then you would download it first and not start any of the others until you had what you needed first. You would prioritize. You would get the high priority items first. Because then in 10 seconds you would have something you needed first. You would hold off the lower priority items that could wait to get the ones that you wanted soonest. Hopefully all of that makes sense and enables you to do whatever makes the most sense at that moment in time. If the bottleneck in speed is your local network connection to the Internet then you would whatever you wanted to make your task easiest. Now here is a twist. This is a obtuse thing but useful to know about. If the bottleneck is competition with other people then the situation is different. Let's say you are working at a small business or school or coffee shop along with nine other people for ten total people downloading things. There is still a 1.0Mbit/s download capacity. But now ten people are using it. So you are only getting 0.1Mbit/s download speed. Getting that 1.0Mbyte file now takes 100 seconds instead of 10 seconds. Because nine others, all ten of you in total, are all downloading all at the same time and the system is sharing the bandwidth across all of you. So now it takes 100 seconds. Now here is the twist. If you can split that file up into nine parts and then start nine downloads in parallel you will get the total 1Mbyte file downloaded in 50 seconds. That is now twice as fast as the 100 second case! The system doesn't know about users. The system knows about download connections. If you have nine downloads going at once but your nine other coworkers each have one that is 18 total downloads going at once. The system will share the bandwidth across all 18 of those. But 9 of those are yours and 9 belong to the rest of your coworkers. So you are getting half of the available bandwidth and starving your coworkers out of their fair share. Better if you split the file into 27 parts and ran 27 downloads in parallel then you would have 27 and your coworkers would have 9 and you would have 27/(27+9)=3/4 of the bandwidth and they would have 9/(27+9)=1/4 of the bandwidth. You would be able to download a 10Mbyte file in 13.3 seconds. The system divides bandwidth up between the connections so if you have more connections then you get more bandwidth. You could keep going with this but at some point the overhead prevents further progress. This is what some file download manager programs do. This is part of what makes bittorrent so effective. Meanwhile your coworkers might be a little bit upset that you were starving them out. In response they might start doing the same thing and running a parallel download manager. This becomes an arms race with all sides trying to get more
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Thursday 23,August,2012 03:34 PM, Bob Proulx wrote: lina wrote: Once I used the wget to download one file from debian repository, on another terminal I with to use the wget to get another file at the same time from the same repository. And if you needed both files then that seems fine to me. I was discouraged to do that, and was also told that, two wget downloading would deduce the downloading speed, I should have waited one finished before download another one. *Should* is too strong. It doesn't hurt anything to download two files at the same time. Or three. A hundred is probably too many though. But really there isn't any difference in the overall results It's happened two years ago, but I still remembered that suggestions. Even later in my life I still download two or more at the same time. Sure. I often have multiple things happening at the same time. It is why I use a multitasking operating system. Here my question is that, is it true that open two wget will affect the downloading speed? better one by one, just suspect it. Let's assume you have a 1.0 Mbit/s download connection. Because it makes the math easier. And assume you need a 1.0 Mbyte file. With no other overhead it will take aproximately 10 seconds to download. Now let's assume that you download two of those files at the same time. You still only have 1.0Mbit/s download speed. But now you are downloading 2.0Mbytes of data in total. Obviously the total download will take aproximately 20 seconds to download. If you ran them sequentually then the first one would finish in 10 seconds and then the second one would start and it would finish 10 seconds later. So it would take 20 seconds in total for both to download both of those files. If you ran them both at the same time then neither would be able to get the full 1.0Mbit/s download speed. It should balance out between them and each would get about 0.5Mbit/s download speed. Which would double the amount of time each would take. Each would take about 20 seconds to download those files but both are running at the same time. So once again it would take 20 seconds in total for both to download those files. No difference! Now if you needed *one* of those files first then you would download it first and not start any of the others until you had what you needed first. You would prioritize. You would get the high priority items first. Because then in 10 seconds you would have something you needed first. You would hold off the lower priority items that could wait to get the ones that you wanted soonest. Hopefully all of that makes sense and enables you to do whatever makes the most sense at that moment in time. If the bottleneck in speed is your local network connection to the Internet then you would whatever you wanted to make your task easiest. Now here is a twist. This is a obtuse thing but useful to know about. If the bottleneck is competition with other people then the situation is different. Let's say you are working at a small business or school or coffee shop along with nine other people for ten total people downloading things. There is still a 1.0Mbit/s download capacity. But now ten people are using it. So you are only getting 0.1Mbit/s download speed. Getting that 1.0Mbyte file now takes 100 seconds instead of 10 seconds. Because nine others, all ten of you in total, are all downloading all at the same time and the system is sharing the bandwidth across all of you. So now it takes 100 seconds. Now here is the twist. If you can split that file up into nine parts and then start nine downloads in parallel you will get the total 1Mbyte file downloaded in 50 seconds. That is now twice as fast as the 100 second case! The system doesn't know about users. The system knows about download connections. If you have nine downloads going at once but your nine other coworkers each have one that is 18 total downloads going at once. The system will share the bandwidth across all 18 of those. But 9 of those are yours and 9 belong to the rest of your coworkers. So you are getting half of the available bandwidth and starving your coworkers out of their fair share. Better if you split the file into 27 parts and ran 27 downloads in parallel then you would have 27 and your coworkers would have 9 and you would have 27/(27+9)=3/4 of the bandwidth and they would have 9/(27+9)=1/4 of the bandwidth. You would be able to download a 10Mbyte file in 13.3 seconds. The system divides bandwidth up between the connections so if you have more connections then you get more bandwidth. You could keep going with this but at some point the overhead prevents further progress. This is what some file download manager programs do. This is part of what makes bittorrent so effective. Meanwhile your coworkers might be a little bit upset that you were starving them out. In response they
RE: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Hi, Here my question is that, is it true that open two wget will affect the downloading speed? better one by one, just suspect it. Let's assume you have a 1.0 Mbit/s download connection. Because it makes the math easier. And assume you need a 1.0 Mbyte file. With no other overhead it will take aproximately 10 seconds to download. Now let's assume that you download two of those files at the same time. You still only have 1.0Mbit/s download speed. But now you are downloading 2.0Mbytes of data in total. Obviously the total download will take aproximately 20 seconds to download. If you ran them sequentually then the first one would finish in 10 seconds and then the second one would start and it would finish 10 seconds later. So it would take 20 seconds in total for both to download both of those files. If you ran them both at the same time then neither would be able to get the full 1.0Mbit/s download speed. It should balance out between them and each would get about 0.5Mbit/s download speed. Which would double the amount of time each would take. Each would take about 20 seconds to download those files but both are running at the same time. So once again it would take 20 seconds in total for both to download those files. No difference! One other thing to keep in mind. Usualy when downloading a file with a chatty protocol, one that needs to confirm downloading a block to the server before the next block is sent, the actual filetransfer wil not fill the full bandwith, in those cases a second download will fill up that available bandwith. I see that a lot when I transfer files via my VPN connection from my Windows PC from/to the Windows server. With a WAN optimized file protocol that is filling the available bandwith starting a second download at the same time will not help. Bonno Bloksma -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/89d1798a7351d040b4e74e0a043c69d70f006...@hglexch-01.tio.nl
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Am Mittwoch, 22. August 2012 schrieb Weaver: On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, And so do we all... Rick, careful when quoting... Yes, I understand this, Rick, but even with Cameleon's suggestion of downloading a larger file from Oracle's servers, at a quiet time of night, a 64 MB download (Mysql's community edition, X86_64) still takes one minute and seven seconds. Weaver, you don't have to center your attention on the time it takes but the download speed (KiB/MiB per second). As I said, using Oracle servers I can get up to 10 MiB/s which is the best number I have ever got. I understand also, that many can't get these speeds, but when you are paying for 100MB/s and not even getting ADSL1 speeds, the ethic bothers me. That's a common feeling from users with high speed links, but there is not much we can do, simply put: todays Internet is not prepared for providing that speeds but in counted sites/hosts :-( Anyway, remember that you are paying for 100 Mbps that is around 12 MiB/s. If you are referring to the download I mention, it's not even 1 MB/s. I've worked for myself, predominantly, since the age of 17 and no client would ever be able to say that they got short-changed by me. It's unethical business, pure and simple. This goes against the grain. (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps I get: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s For comparision DSL 18000 + 1 MBit Upload speed: M-Net in Germany, Nuremberg Ping: 28 ms Download: 12,32 Mbps Upload: 1,06 Mbps Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201208231109.50960.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Am Mittwoch, 22. August 2012 schrieb Weaver: On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, And so do we all... Rick, careful when quoting... Yes, I understand this, Rick, but even with Cameleon's suggestion of downloading a larger file from Oracle's servers, at a quiet time of night, a 64 MB download (Mysql's community edition, X86_64) still takes one minute and seven seconds. Weaver, you don't have to center your attention on the time it takes but the download speed (KiB/MiB per second). As I said, using Oracle servers I can get up to 10 MiB/s which is the best number I have ever got. I understand also, that many can't get these speeds, but when you are paying for 100MB/s and not even getting ADSL1 speeds, the ethic bothers me. That's a common feeling from users with high speed links, but there is not much we can do, simply put: todays Internet is not prepared for providing that speeds but in counted sites/hosts :-( Anyway, remember that you are paying for 100 Mbps that is around 12 MiB/s. If you are referring to the download I mention, it's not even 1 MB/s. I've worked for myself, predominantly, since the age of 17 and no client would ever be able to say that they got short-changed by me. It's unethical business, pure and simple. This goes against the grain. (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps I get: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s For comparision DSL 18000 + 1 MBit Upload speed: M-Net in Germany, Nuremberg Ping: 28 ms Download: 12,32 Mbps Upload: 1,06 Mbps There are meny points of comparison. I'm paying 83.5878 Euros. As long as things like videos didn't have to stop and buffer two or three time while I was watching them, I could be quite happy. If I was getting an ADSL1 service and that's all I was paying for, I would be quite happy. But that is not the situationyet. It's the deal they are about to be hit with. If that's all the product they are prepared to deliver, that's all they will get paid for. Regards, Weaver. -- I invite you to name a society that created a secret prison system, outside the rule of law, where torture takes place, that sooner or later didn't turn the abuse against it's own citizens. -- Naomi Wolf - October 11, 2007 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/b2e69283258b1350e6f07f08502e7afa.squir...@fulvetta.riseup.net
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Am Donnerstag, 23. August 2012 schrieb Weaver: Am Mittwoch, 22. August 2012 schrieb Weaver: On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: […] I understand also, that many can't get these speeds, but when you are paying for 100MB/s and not even getting ADSL1 speeds, the ethic bothers me. That's a common feeling from users with high speed links, but there is not much we can do, simply put: todays Internet is not prepared for providing that speeds but in counted sites/hosts :-( Anyway, remember that you are paying for 100 Mbps that is around 12 MiB/s. If you are referring to the download I mention, it's not even 1 MB/s. I've worked for myself, predominantly, since the age of 17 and no client would ever be able to say that they got short-changed by me. It's unethical business, pure and simple. This goes against the grain. (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps I get: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s For comparision DSL 18000 + 1 MBit Upload speed: M-Net in Germany, Nuremberg Ping: 28 ms Download: 12,32 Mbps Upload: 1,06 Mbps There are meny points of comparison. I'm paying 83.5878 Euros. I am paying not even half of this ;). Its about 35 Euro. For 80 Euros I would expect something more than this as well. As long as things like videos didn't have to stop and buffer two or three time while I was watching them, I could be quite happy. If I was getting an ADSL1 service and that's all I was paying for, I would be quite happy. Yes, of course. Didn´t want to imply otherwise. Actually I think the figures I get are quite close to what I pay for. Download could be a bit faster maybe, but its a better relation than 27 to 100 Mbps. But then the server have to deliver the bandwidth as well as each hop in between. This becomes more difficult the higher the bandwidth is. As you are for sure not the only one streaming videos from the net ;). -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201208231220.42740.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, And so do we all... The problem here is not the network bandwidth, it's that some parts of the update process have to download a lot of small files (a few KiB each). Each file involves a negotiation process that needs several round-trips and one or more file-directory lookups on the part of both the server and the client. The round- trips may be on the order of hundreds of milliseconds, so the time to retrieve a 4 KiB file can be on the order of a half second or more. That translates to 8KiB/s for that particular file. Sad, but it's a fact of life on a global-scale packet switched network. Look at the reported speed when downloading a large package. Here you have the opportunity to take full advantage of a big pipe and large windows on each end to fill the pipe. Your limiting rate here is more likely to be the ability of the server to get your file off its disk at the same time as it's getting other files for other clients off the same disk. For example, I find that getting security updates is much slower (factor of 4 or 5, often) than getting new packages from one of the big mirrors. The security.debian.org server seems to be a bottleneck. There's a design trade-off here -- between getting security stuff posted and available quickly (in favor of a single server or at most a small number of servers), and getting it out at high bandwidth (in favor of mirroring it to lots of servers with the attendant polling delays) the Debian folks have opted to get security stuff available quickly but at a lower bandwidth, and regular package updates available with some delay but at higher bandwidth. Hope this helps to understand what you're seeing. Yes, I understand this, Rick, but even with Cameleon's suggestion of downloading a larger file from Oracle's servers, at a quiet time of night, a 64 MB download (Mysql's community edition, X86_64) still takes one minute and seven seconds. I understand also, that many can't get these speeds, but when you are paying for 100MB/s and not even getting ADSL1 speeds, the ethic bothers me. I've worked for myself, predominantly, since the age of 17 and no client would ever be able to say that they got short-changed by me. It's unethical business, pure and simple. This goes against the grain. There was another post from somebody, also, that I deleted accidentally before replying and, yes, I understand the difference between 'bits' and 'bytes', etc. A byte is 8 bits so you are never going to get a Kilobit. I'm just a little lazy with upper and lowercase sometimes, that's all. Regards, Weaver -- I invite you to name a society that created a secret prison system, outside the rule of law, where torture takes place, that sooner or later didn't turn the abuse against it's own citizens. -- Naomi Wolf - October 11, 2007 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8f6f19d00a2776ffa1b75e2ec2ba370e.squir...@fruiteater.riseup.net
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, And so do we all... Rick, careful when quoting... Yes, I understand this, Rick, but even with Cameleon's suggestion of downloading a larger file from Oracle's servers, at a quiet time of night, a 64 MB download (Mysql's community edition, X86_64) still takes one minute and seven seconds. Weaver, you don't have to center your attention on the time it takes but the download speed (KiB/MiB per second). As I said, using Oracle servers I can get up to 10 MiB/s which is the best number I have ever got. I understand also, that many can't get these speeds, but when you are paying for 100MB/s and not even getting ADSL1 speeds, the ethic bothers me. That's a common feeling from users with high speed links, but there is not much we can do, simply put: todays Internet is not prepared for providing that speeds but in counted sites/hosts :-( Anyway, remember that you are paying for 100 Mbps that is around 12 MiB/s. I've worked for myself, predominantly, since the age of 17 and no client would ever be able to say that they got short-changed by me. It's unethical business, pure and simple. This goes against the grain. (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k12qfo$6m0$5...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 04:39:46 -0700, Weaver wrote: On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, And so do we all... Rick, careful when quoting... Yes, I understand this, Rick, but even with Cameleon's suggestion of downloading a larger file from Oracle's servers, at a quiet time of night, a 64 MB download (Mysql's community edition, X86_64) still takes one minute and seven seconds. Weaver, you don't have to center your attention on the time it takes but the download speed (KiB/MiB per second). As I said, using Oracle servers I can get up to 10 MiB/s which is the best number I have ever got. I understand also, that many can't get these speeds, but when you are paying for 100MB/s and not even getting ADSL1 speeds, the ethic bothers me. That's a common feeling from users with high speed links, but there is not much we can do, simply put: todays Internet is not prepared for providing that speeds but in counted sites/hosts :-( Anyway, remember that you are paying for 100 Mbps that is around 12 MiB/s. If you are referring to the download I mention, it's not even 1 MB/s. I've worked for myself, predominantly, since the age of 17 and no client would ever be able to say that they got short-changed by me. It's unethical business, pure and simple. This goes against the grain. (...) Can you please provide the results of this speed test? http://www.speedtest.net/ I get: Ping: 3 ms Download: 86.09 Mbps Upload: 9.96 Mbps I get: Ping: 69 ms Download: 27.71 Mb/s Upload: 2.28 Mb/s Regards and thanks, Weaver -- I invite you to name a society that created a secret prison system, outside the rule of law, where torture takes place, that sooner or later didn't turn the abuse against it's own citizens. -- Naomi Wolf - October 11, 2007 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/29343cfb7afd889e38f001ee92c975d1.squir...@fulvetta.riseup.net
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: Just to clarify on this situation: I have a cable connection that is rated at 100MB/s at full capacity. I specifically asked what the lowest speed would be, that I could expect to experience, when I took it on from an ADSL2+ connection that I tracked at 8 BYTES/s at one stage, and they said 100Kb/s (really!). We also have a fast link at the office (FTTH) rated at 100/10 Mbits and while the overall usual browsing is noticeabily faster, true is that when you are downloading a big file from a host the speed can vary a lot from one server to another. For instance, using the fiber link to go out, I can get a suitanable rate of 8 Mbits when downloading VirtualBox (~80 MiB) from Oracle servers while that speed slow downs as soon as I get a different file from a different host. Meaning: link speed matters but also does the capability of the server where you get the files because most of them limit the speed to avoid being collapsed :-) I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, That's very litte even for a plain ADSL2+ line but the problem can be located at the server side not the client (you/your ISP network). Try with a different mirror to compare speeds or use Oracle servers -which are really fast- to get a random file, that will provide you with a more real sense about you line capabilities. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k103se$agf$4...@ger.gmane.org
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Aug 21, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:37:43 -0700, Weaver wrote: I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, And so do we all... The problem here is not the network bandwidth, it's that some parts of the update process have to download a lot of small files (a few KiB each). Each file involves a negotiation process that needs several round-trips and one or more file-directory lookups on the part of both the server and the client. The round- trips may be on the order of hundreds of milliseconds, so the time to retrieve a 4 KiB file can be on the order of a half second or more. That translates to 8KiB/s for that particular file. Sad, but it's a fact of life on a global-scale packet switched network. Look at the reported speed when downloading a large package. Here you have the opportunity to take full advantage of a big pipe and large windows on each end to fill the pipe. Your limiting rate here is more likely to be the ability of the server to get your file off its disk at the same time as it's getting other files for other clients off the same disk. For example, I find that getting security updates is much slower (factor of 4 or 5, often) than getting new packages from one of the big mirrors. The security.debian.org server seems to be a bottleneck. There's a design trade-off here -- between getting security stuff posted and available quickly (in favor of a single server or at most a small number of servers), and getting it out at high bandwidth (in favor of mirroring it to lots of servers with the attendant polling delays) the Debian folks have opted to get security stuff available quickly but at a lower bandwidth, and regular package updates available with some delay but at higher bandwidth. Hope this helps to understand what you're seeing. Rick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/7ab3d910-6448-4533-b9fd-a66cc57cb...@pobox.com
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:52:59 -0700, Weaver wrote: What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? Well, there are online tests that you can run to measure your (up/down) link speed: http://www.speedtest.net/ http://www.ookla.com/demo-custom.php I want to log and then print out, so I can then forward the information with an ultimatum. He, he... welcome to the club and good luck with your documented complaint. At least here in Spain, ISPs do what they want and users are only a PITA that pays a monthy bill but has little rights :-P I can't fail in a contract if they have, repeatedly, first. It's been going on for a year and I'm sick of being ripped off and having my intelligence insulted by entities that haven't out-grown their acne, that know no more of the situation than quoting their prepared lines from help-desk school at me. You can also find more useful about your connection quality and other technical measures from your DSL router itself. Depending on the model you'll can find a precise activity log that will tell you the speed your line is synced with the central telephone exchange and also when DSL status is going down/up or about PPPoE errors. Just to clarify on this situation: I have a cable connection that is rated at 100MB/s at full capacity. I specifically asked what the lowest speed would be, that I could expect to experience, when I took it on from an ADSL2+ connection that I tracked at 8 BYTES/s at one stage, and they said 100Kb/s (really!). I regularly log 40-47Kb/s on updates.. Cheers, Weaver. -- I invite you to name a society that created a secret prison system, outside the rule of law, where torture takes place, that sooner or later didn't turn the abuse against it's own citizens. -- Naomi Wolf - October 11, 2007 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/a88090c059fd9a37991da71a3876d176.squir...@fruiteater.riseup.net
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Camaleón wrote: On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:52:59 -0700, Weaver wrote: What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? Well, there are online tests that you can run to measure your (up/down) link speed: http://www.speedtest.net/ http://www.ookla.com/demo-custom.php I want to log and then print out, so I can then forward the information with an ultimatum. He, he... welcome to the club and good luck with your documented complaint. At least here in Spain, ISPs do what they want and users are only a PITA that pays a monthy bill but has little rights :-P Here in Mexico my only right is to pay the bill and take what they give me, like it ot not. Hugo I can't fail in a contract if they have, repeatedly, first. It's been going on for a year and I'm sick of being ripped off and having my intelligence insulted by entities that haven't out-grown their acne, that know no more of the situation than quoting their prepared lines from help-desk school at me. You can also find more useful about your connection quality and other technical measures from your DSL router itself. Depending on the model you'll can find a precise activity log that will tell you the speed your line is synced with the central telephone exchange and also when DSL status is going down/up or about PPPoE errors. O.K., thanks one and all. That should give me enough to work on for a while. Regards and thanks, Weaver. -- I invite you to name a society that created a secret prison system, outside the rule of law, where torture takes place, that sooner or later didn't turn the abuse against it's own citizens. -- Naomi Wolf - October 11, 2007 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/832cbe6ad47f9d5fc1194edbe04958da.squir...@fruiteater.riseup.net
RE: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Hi Weaver, What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? I want to log and then print out, so I can then forward the information with an ultimatum. I can't fail in a contract if they have, repeatedly, first. It's been going on for a year and I'm sick of being ripped off and having my intelligence insulted by entities that haven't out-grown their acne, that know no more of the situation than quoting their prepared lines from help-desk school at me. Thanks for any time and trouble you may care to take. I use munin to keep track of a lot of hardware related issues on my Linux machine, including ethX traffic info. If you want to track the router stats and your router supports SNMP then you might also have a look at mrtg. Both tools make graphs for daily, weekly, monthly and yearly data. Yours sincerely, Bonno Bloksma senior systemadministrator tio university of applied sciences julianalaan 9 / 7553 ab hengelo t +31 (0)74-255 06 10 / f +31 (0)74-255 06 11 The Netherlands b.blok...@tio.nl / www.tio.nl Follow us at Twitter / Facebook / Hyves / YouTube
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On 08/15/2012 06:52 AM, Weaver wrote: What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? To achieve this, you will have to load continuously your connection in order to get the max reached. - If you do this (load test) on your gateway, your poor LAN users wont even be able to use the link. - If you wait for your users to benchload the link, that means you dont have QoS, then you'll have very bad end-result and very bad user feeling, because a minority will eat the bandwidth up. And at night, when no one is in the office, all computers off, you wont log anything... - If you ever test from one location (say one dedicated server to your gateway), you also will have to assume the server is not bandwidth overloaded, and has guaranteed bandwidth. If you cant assume that, your ISP will say it's not me, your server is not bandwidth garanteed. So, to me there is not real solution, but just complain in time when you need the bandwith and dont get it. -- RMA. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/502b3f5a.1050...@rktmb.org
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 09:19:06AM +0300, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote: On 08/15/2012 06:52 AM, Weaver wrote: What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? To achieve this, you will have to load continuously your connection in order to get the max reached. I'm not entirely sure this is true. If your router has a statistics page (or a telnet interface providing such information), it's possible to use a package such as munin to log[1] the sync rate of your line periodically. This can be graphed for evidential purposes. The sync rate of the line should be sufficient information in most cases. If you're synchronised at, say 8Mb down and 1Mb up, then that should be close to what you can achieve. You can expect a little below that due to overheads, but if you're experiencing significantly worse throughput than that, then there's a problem somewhere in the network. I probably ought to point out, though, that most ISPs advertise their broadband as up to X meg, and you may find that anything between 56kpbs and that figure are legally acceptable (any slower and it's not broadband). [1] I'll leave it up to the reader to work out how to screen scrape their router's statistics page. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:52:59 -0700, Weaver wrote: What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? Well, there are online tests that you can run to measure your (up/down) link speed: http://www.speedtest.net/ http://www.ookla.com/demo-custom.php I want to log and then print out, so I can then forward the information with an ultimatum. He, he... welcome to the club and good luck with your documented complaint. At least here in Spain, ISPs do what they want and users are only a PITA that pays a monthy bill but has little rights :-P I can't fail in a contract if they have, repeatedly, first. It's been going on for a year and I'm sick of being ripped off and having my intelligence insulted by entities that haven't out-grown their acne, that know no more of the situation than quoting their prepared lines from help-desk school at me. You can also find more useful about your connection quality and other technical measures from your DSL router itself. Depending on the model you'll can find a precise activity log that will tell you the speed your line is synced with the central telephone exchange and also when DSL status is going down/up or about PPPoE errors. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k0gd0l$anh$6...@dough.gmane.org
Re: Logging ISP Download Speed.
Camaleón wrote: On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 20:52:59 -0700, Weaver wrote: What's the best programme to employ with regard to logging traffic speed from my ISP? Well, there are online tests that you can run to measure your (up/down) link speed: http://www.speedtest.net/ http://www.ookla.com/demo-custom.php I want to log and then print out, so I can then forward the information with an ultimatum. He, he... welcome to the club and good luck with your documented complaint. At least here in Spain, ISPs do what they want and users are only a PITA that pays a monthy bill but has little rights :-P Here in Mexico my only right is to pay the bill and take what they give me, like it ot not. Hugo I can't fail in a contract if they have, repeatedly, first. It's been going on for a year and I'm sick of being ripped off and having my intelligence insulted by entities that haven't out-grown their acne, that know no more of the situation than quoting their prepared lines from help-desk school at me. You can also find more useful about your connection quality and other technical measures from your DSL router itself. Depending on the model you'll can find a precise activity log that will tell you the speed your line is synced with the central telephone exchange and also when DSL status is going down/up or about PPPoE errors. Greetings, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k0h7ae$ova$1...@ger.gmane.org
