User comments on ISPs
  >> AAISP


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | [4] | 5 | 6 | 7 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User jimbof
(member) Fri 28-Oct-22 18:49:16
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: E300] [link to this post]
 
What's the current thinking on these AAISP BQM graphs? My new connection is performing great, but the BQM would subjectively seem a fair bit "hairier" than on Zen. Admittedly I've done a few speedtests in the past few days, but I notice it getting spikey even when everyone in the house is asleep, which I assume must be due to activity elsewhere.
My Broadband Ping
Standard User E300
(committed) Sat 29-Oct-22 08:39:00
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: jimbof] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by jimbof:
What's the current thinking on these AAISP BQM graphs? My new connection is performing great, but the BQM would subjectively seem a fair bit "hairier" than on Zen. Admittedly I've done a few speedtests in the past few days, but I notice it getting spikey even when everyone in the house is asleep, which I assume must be due to activity elsewhere.
My Broadband Ping


They used to look a lot worse but the routing was changed to TBB and the charts improved quite a bit. The charts are not indicative of the whole service, as whilst before the routing change they did look pretty poor, monitoring from f8lure did not show the same thing for me and was quite flat.

When I was on Zen backhaul the charts were flat as a pancake (never seen BQMs so clean), even when using the connection and maxing it out, and I suspect Zen have some direct connection to the testers or prioritise the packets as it was suspiciously too good. It should be noted that when I maxed out on Zen I could never get speeds as high as I do on AAISP, even though the BQMs looked like the ideal connection!

Standard User jimbof
(member) Sat 29-Oct-22 11:28:06
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: E300] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by E300:
They used to look a lot worse but the routing was changed to TBB and the charts improved quite a bit. The charts are not indicative of the whole service, as whilst before the routing change they did look pretty poor, monitoring from f8lure did not show the same thing for me and was quite flat.

When I was on Zen backhaul the charts were flat as a pancake (never seen BQMs so clean), even when using the connection and maxing it out, and I suspect Zen have some direct connection to the testers or prioritise the packets as it was suspiciously too good. It should be noted that when I maxed out on Zen I could never get speeds as high as I do on AAISP, even though the BQMs looked like the ideal connection!

Good shout on setting up f8lure - I did have it running previous but hadn't got round to updating my DNS. I'll be interested to see what it looks like.

I had the same experience with Zen. On their backhaul pings were very fast, ping graph undeasibly clean (only the occasional spike during a speed test), but throughput comparatively poor for me - often struggling to get to half line rate on many test sites.


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User choppersrock
(member) Sat 29-Oct-22 19:32:09
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: jimbof] [link to this post]
 
Zen 900 on btw....

https://www.team-rebellion.net/Ned/index.htm

ZEN 900 + Opnsense with IPV6 - ex ECI cab,
Standard User jimbof
(member) Sat 29-Oct-22 20:25:04
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: choppersrock] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by choppersrock:
Zen 900 on btw....

https://www.team-rebellion.net/Ned/index.htm

That's similar to what my line was like on BTW and Zen GEA (the Zen GEA just grew a bit fatter average/max latency "head"). Performance on at least some of the gateways for BTW was very good, too.

Shame I couldn't seem to guarantee that kind of connection, due to them dropping you off at Manchester sometimes on a whim, or deciding to migrate your line when you're not looking...!

Hope it stays good for you.
Standard User choppersrock
(member) Sat 29-Oct-22 20:33:49
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: jimbof] [link to this post]
 
Yes Manchester has been a problem but I manage that if required re routing back to London. Ipv6 has been playing up for sometime but I put that down to opnsense having issues with dhcpv6. Once I implemented my static ipv6 from zen it's been 100% fine. Hopefully won't see gea but who knows..
Longterm I'm off to youfibre symmetrical 1gb/1gb (no pppoe either)

ZEN 900 + Opnsense with IPV6 - ex ECI cab,
Standard User jimbof
(member) Sat 29-Oct-22 21:10:37
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: choppersrock] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by choppersrock:
Longterm I'm off to youfibre symmetrical 1gb/1gb (no pppoe either)

Lovely jumbly. I'd love to be on a PPPoE-less service as my router baulks slightly under the extra weight of PPPoE at gigabit speeds. Not much chance of that around here (at least not with static IP etc).
Standard User jimbof
(member) Sun 30-Oct-22 11:04:13
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: E300] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by E300:
They used to look a lot worse but the routing was changed to TBB and the charts improved quite a bit. The charts are not indicative of the whole service, as whilst before the routing change they did look pretty poor, monitoring from f8lure did not show the same thing for me and was quite flat.

For good measure I stuck a spare BQM on the witless gateway I'm on, then I can see the difference. I've always found it interesting there is quite a bit higher static latency through the BTW network than Zen's own, something I observed when with Zen and switching between BTW and GEA. I guess Zen probably go something much more like point-to-point between exchanges and their network than BT do, with more hops that we don't get to see.

In reply to a post by E300:
When I was on Zen backhaul the charts were flat as a pancake (never seen BQMs so clean), even when using the connection and maxing it out, and I suspect Zen have some direct connection to the testers or prioritise the packets as it was suspiciously too good. It should be noted that when I maxed out on Zen I could never get speeds as high as I do on AAISP, even though the BQMs looked like the ideal connection!

I think looking back on it that there is a lot in that. I did point some BQMs at the Zen gateways and they looked terrible, whereas the AAISP gateways look like my BQM but with a much lower latency floor. Though of course a difference could be that the Zen gateways are doing all the routing in hardware but responding to pings is a CPU task.

Someone did share a BQM from Cuckoo (TTB white label) and that did look very similar to Zen.

Anyway, given the performance is so much better on AAISP for me it's largely academic.
Standard User jimbof
(member) Thu 08-Dec-22 07:36:34
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: jimbof] [link to this post]
 
Did anyone else notice the AAISP BQMs appear to have cleaned up from 2pm yesterday onwards? They lost their characteristic spiking.
Home connection
I also run a monitor on the LNS I'm connected to, which looks the same (albeit a lot better base latency). So it's not just me:
AAISP LNS

I see @E300's charts have also cleaned up since about the same time.
Wonder what if anything has got better?
Standard User Pheasant
(knowledge is power) Thu 08-Dec-22 08:05:31
Print Post

Re: BQM graphs


[re: jimbof] [link to this post]
 
TBB were apparently waiting on a faster port at LONAP to go live. See recent post from @seb here

Not sure of the routing to AAISP for BQM but that may have something to do with it.
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | [4] | 5 | 6 | 7 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to