[TriLUG] TWC latency issues
Neil L. Little
nllittle at embarqmail.com
Mon Aug 13 21:15:34 EDT 2007
Yes they want you to call so they can send in their customer engineer
and pitch fiber.
They told us that their "node" was full and were not planning on
building out another.
As it turned out the office building we were moving into was contracted
with CTC.
Ended up with a 5mbps bridged DSL connection (tests out at 6.8mbps) and
a block of 6 static
IPs for much less than we would have spent going with TWC.
Neil Little, WA4AZL
JARS Forever!!
OlsonE at aosa.army.mil wrote:
> I don't think so ...but I've looked at TW Business Class as a viable
> solution to my bandwidth being so pi** poor. I don't mind paying a
> little more, but they better pony up the service.
>
> How is it cost-wise? I've tried to get info off their website, but they
> want you to "call".
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: trilug-bounces at trilug.org [mailto:trilug-bounces at trilug.org] On
> Behalf Of J.C. Jones
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 9:02 AM
> To: Triangle Linux Users Group discussion list
> Subject: Re: [TriLUG] TWC latency issues
>
> Is there a distinction between Time-Warner Business Class and Road
> Runner mentioned in this thread. I am at present in negotiation with
> Time Warner Business class and would like to know if any of this thread
> really relates to that service.
>
> jcj
>
> Thomas wrote:
>
>
>> Near Crossroads, Cary (for High Speed online) Download - 4314 kbps
>> Upload - 121 kbps
>>
>> *TWC package as advertised*
>>
>> Road Runner Turbo ($44.95)
>> Download - upto 8000 kbps
>> Upload - upto 512 kbps
>>
>> Road Runner High Speed online ($34.95)
>> Download - 5000 kbps
>> Upload - 384 kbps
>>
>> Road Runner Lite ($29.95)
>> Download - 1500 kbps
>> Upload - 256 kbps
>>
>> Road Runner Lite 768 ($24.95)
>> Download - 768 kbps
>> Upload - 128 kbps
>>
>>
>> On 8/11/07, Reginald Reed <reginald.reed at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Morrisville on the 8M down/512K up service:
>>>
>>> 7146 kbps down
>>> 484 kbps down
>>>
>>> On 8/10/07, Greg Brown <gwbrown1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> A new record low on the NC Outer Banks:
>>>>
>>>> 2654k down
>>>> 34k up
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that is NOT a typo: 34k up.
>>>>
>>>> On 8/10/07, Neil L. Little <nllittle at embarqmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> NC is currently 16th in the US as far as bandwidth goes
>>>>>
>>>>> 73,
>>>>> Neil Little, WA4AZL
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim Jowers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe the toastnet and other download servers to be gamed
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> (cached).
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> I
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> regularly get 600K download speed (peak starts around 1.5Mb and
>>>>>> then
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> drops
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> after 10 seconds or so. I very often get 10-20 seconds page load
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> latency.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Install the FF plugin to see how long each page takes to load.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've looked very hard for an alternative. I tried BellSouth for a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> few
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> months
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> but saw zero improvements in upload plus they block SMTP port.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> Download
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> was
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> about the same as well. Argh! The next thing I've found (A DSL
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> reseller
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> no
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> doubt) is $115/month. AT&T's contractor, Team Net, laid fiber down
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> my
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> street
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> probably for the Uverse service they are rolling out next year but
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> the
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> only
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> thing they are selling now is a resell of DSL or cable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Case in short, this in supposed to be some special high tech
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> center
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> but
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> the Internet bandwidths and performance are a joke. No fiber to the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> home
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> as
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> one would expect. If NC, RTP, or Raleigh want to be known for being
>>>>>>
>
>
>>>>>> technologically savvy and/or progressive then its time to get off
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> our
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> butts and lay some fiber. Due to the good-ole-boy system normally
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> place
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> to get permits, one probably needs to partner with the cities. My
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> proposal
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> is to lay it down in one or two select areas here to show the
>>>>>> state/city/area has some commitment to operating in a modern
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> networking
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> environment. It's not like we will be breaking any ground here...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> FTTH
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> common elsewhere in the world. I'm tired of being in a technology
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> backwater
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> WRT networking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IMO,
>>>>>> TimJowers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/9/07, OlsonE at aosa.army.mil <OlsonE at aosa.army.mil> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you host a website from your house with Earthlink (port 80). I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>> was
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> told by the RR dudes, I could, and if the port was blocked, use a
>>>>>>> different one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: trilug-bounces at trilug.org [mailto:trilug-bounces at trilug.org]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>> On
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Behalf Of Magnus
>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 1:53 PM
>>>>>>> To: Triangle Linux Users Group discussion list
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [TriLUG] TWC latency issues
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OlsonE at aosa.army.mil wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is their b/w comparable? Currently, I have RR Premium (which
>>>>>>>> isn't
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> so
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>> "premium").
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The offerings are, IIRC, identical. I even have a static IP (with
>>>>>>> surcharge) and no filtered inbound ports. Outbound port 25 is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> filtered,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> forcing me to use Earthlink as a relay, but that has been working
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>> fine
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> the last couple of years for me.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> TriLUG mailing list :
>>>>>>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>>>>>> TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member
>>>>>>> Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> TriLUG mailing list :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member
>>>>>>> Services FAQ :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>> http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> TriLUG mailing list :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member
>>>>> Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> TriLUG mailing list :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>>
>>
>>
>>>> TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member
>>>> Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> TriLUG mailing list :
>>>
> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
>
>>> TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member
>>> Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Visit my weblog at: http://www.wendellgeek.com/weblog/
>
> Webmaster for:
> http://www.raleighchurchofchrist.org
> http://www.wendellgeek.com
> http://www.tuftux.com
> http://www.slowpossum.com
> http://www.dabeak.com
>
>
More information about the TriLUG
mailing list