Internet Service Providers forum

General discussion

Oversubscribing: Can anyone back me up on my theory?

by theguyfromec / April 10, 2007 4:26 AM PDT

I am the local tech for an cable ISP, they have been having major QoS and speed issues for the past few months. I keep telling them they need more bandwidth to support their users and they keep saying we added a little bit here and there and it doesn't help. The problem is; they don't add on enough. Here is my report and hopefully some of you out there can back me up on this one. (Keep in mind they sell 7.0/1.0 Mbps packages)

Modems: 1857 Active Modems (** & ********)
Our Pipe: 35Mbps Line
-----------------------------------------------------
35,000,000 bpsbits per second (default)
35,000 Kbpskilo bits per second
35 Mbpsmega bits per second
4,375,000 Bpsbytes per second
4,272.5 KBpskilobytes per second
4.2 MBpsmegabytes per second
21.6 T1T1s
3.3 e1010Mbps ethernet
0.3 e100100Mbps Ethernet
-----------------------------------------------------
Equals: 19Kbps per Customer Guarantee

This in return will yield these kinds of results in traffic:
Port 1 (Internal) on NETENFORCER_******* (**.***.***.**)

I had a graph here but I cannot post the pics. It showed us at 89% capacity throughout the whole day, then dropping off at 1:00AM.






Data for Sensor Port 1 (Internal) on NETENFORCER_******(**.***.***.*)
Group: NETENFORCER_*******
Host: **.***.***.*
State: OK
Current: 47,501 kbit/second
Interval: 10 s




When ******** is brought on to our network and the pipe is raised we will then have this:

Modems: 2244 Active Modems (** & *******)
Our Pipe: 45Mbps Line
-----------------------------------------------------------
45,000,000 bpsbits per second (default)
45,000 Kbpskilo bits per second
45 Mbpsmega bits per second
5,625,000 Bpsbytes per second
5,493.2 KBpskilobytes per second
5.4 MBpsmegabytes per second
27.8 T1T1s
4.3 e1010Mbps ethernet
0.4 e100100Mbps Ethernet
-----------------------------------------------------------
Equals: 20Kbps per Customer Guarantee


Conclusion:
This in return will make no difference, whatsoever, to our bandwidth usage and/or our quality of service. Keep in mind this is what it will be like BEFORE they raise the packages in *** **** to 7.0Mbps. Once *** **** is on our network with these new packages, we will have the most un-reliable network out of any ISP. The quality of service is already deplorable and no one can even use VoIP, play online games, or anything else within these types of categories. Business will suffer HUGE amounts of packet loss and connection errors as they already are experiencing some of these issues. We can keep addressing these small issues but it will never fix the real problem. No matter what we change in the NetEnforcer, the CMTS, the switches, or whatever piece of equipment, we will continue to have these problems until we have the bandwidth we need for the customers. In my opinion, we at least need a 100Kbps per customer guarantee. This will involve a second full 45Mbps DS3 and some new equipment. However if this not done before hand, there will be a huge amount of unsatisfied customers and if it comes out to how I think it will; there will be a substantial amount of disconnects. Customers will be getting 1/8 of what they are paying for. This is just my opinion but I do have many IT professionals whom agree completely with my hypothesis.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Oversubscribing: Can anyone back me up on my theory?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Oversubscribing: Can anyone back me up on my theory?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Sorry no, that's not how it works.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 10, 2007 4:29 AM PDT

While more bandwidth could be clamored for, the majority of machine just sit then without some human at the keyboard. What you are likely seeing is P2P traffic.

Remove that from your totals and then what do you get.

Bob

Collapse -
NetEnforcer
by theguyfromec / April 10, 2007 4:31 AM PDT

We have P2P traffic clamped down at our NetEnforcer already. So what we are seeing is traffic without P2P.

Collapse -
Forget clamps. Remove it from the totals.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 10, 2007 4:51 AM PDT
In reply to: NetEnforcer

It could be video/youtube/VOIP as well.

Get a better measurement of what's using it. It's the only way to make the case.

Bob

Collapse -
With all do respect...
by theguyfromec / April 10, 2007 5:11 AM PDT

I am not concerned with what people are using or how much of it they are using. When you pay for your broadband internet you are entitled to the amount of bandwidth that they advertise unless certain stipulations apply in the agreement. What I am trying to prove is that they are oversubscribed on the line that they have. I have the documentation, I have the protocol usage, we block out the P2P, and we are left with the results I have. What I am looking for is an industry professional who has experience with ISP network management who can compare the numbers we have with their system. So far I have it verified by one man from a almost same size ISP in Colorado, but I need more than one person to prove my point. I can sit here and compare who uses what and change configs until I am blue in the face, but it's not going to help the situation.

Collapse -
Sorry.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 10, 2007 5:18 AM PDT
In reply to: With all do respect...

Your approach isn't going to cure it.

I had hoped to help you make a convincing report. But there are some that think that the bandwidth should be figured at 5 megabit per user downstream, etc for up and that appears what you've done.

Sorry about that. I thought we were going to make a case, but I see your direction and can only wish you well.

Bob

Collapse -
Not at all...
by theguyfromec / April 10, 2007 5:26 AM PDT
In reply to: Sorry.

That is not my POV at all. I do not believe each user should have 5Mb. The theory that everyone isn't on the internet at the same time which allows for a smaller line to be used with more people works great, if however, you have a big enough pipe to support those users that you have with these huge 7.0Mbps packages. I am looking for any advice and appreciate yours greatly! All I am saying is that instead of having this deplorable 20Kb guarantee per customer, they need way more! More people than they thought are on the internet at one time and it is causing enormous amounts of packet loss and huge ping times along with slower speeds. They can't seem to figure out why. It would only take 6 of our users downloading a full capacity to bog our line completely down. Please do go on with your advice and posts, I have every piece of information if you would like more info. Thank you for your help.

Collapse -
...up top 5Mbps
by sophaksun / April 15, 2007 11:29 AM PDT

I was told "of speeds of up to 5Mbps. I guess that is why they can do what they do. "Up to" is what my Cable ISP falls back on. Then they try to sell me 8Mbps for 10 bucks more when the I can't even get the 5. Ain't that something!

Collapse -
Who you with? Here, 1megabit up and
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / April 15, 2007 11:38 AM PDT
In reply to: ...up top 5Mbps

I think I've seen 3 or 4 megabit down. Seems nice. To hit 5 megabit the content has to be on a very nearby and not too busy server. And I've seen it happen.

Bob

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

Does BMW or Volvo do it best?

Pint-size luxury and funky style

Shopping for a new car this weekend? See how the BMW X2 stacks up against the Volvo XC40 in our side-by-side comparison.