Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => Broadband Hardware => Topic started by: snadge on December 25, 2021, 03:12:32 PM
-
hi everyone, Merry Xmas
So you know how I have been having trouble with BTs wifi-X - well it's been well over 31 days since opting out and it is still there - same as many others on the BT forums, however, this post is regarding something else...
I ran 4-speed testers AS the BT speed tester was testing at the same time, and I got the exact 910+ speeds results, when speedsters were giving around 200Mbps each, if this were true the BT speed tester should have thrown up a poor result surely.. so I believe BT have their system report the correct speed regardless.. to falsely keep customers in the 'hold', I will be leaving BT soon as my contract is up, OR, i will get out by other means (as I have proof of something I wasn't informed of when signing up, and this shared wifi issue which won't let you opt-out)
TBB keeps saying my metrics are extremely poor (E) congestion and i can feel it in my browser...
I should have been more careful instead of greedy - as BT was known to be poor always, i thought they picked up?, but obviously have not!!! - my connection was more responsive and better under VDSL and Plusnet at 60Mbps - luckily i have a way out... so may switch back and wait a few more years until they can do it decently...congestion already on new poles! and they expect me to put up with 24 months of it getting WORSE as more and more people sign up to FTTP in my area.... see how it pans out over the next month or so, but..i could be doing something I ain't mentioning on here, to get another provider and stop my BT DD and deal with them by letter!
oh, and to those who are totally dedicated, please don't waste your time with T&Cs and CCJs lol - i know exactly what I'm doing as I've done it before with Sky!
have a nice xmas and new year
-
I think that each and every throughput speed-tester provides results that have "been modified" in one way or another. Which is why I do not bother to look at such results.
As an xDSL service user, I only pay attention to the synchronisation speed of the link.
-
I think that each and every throughput speed-tester provides results that have "been modified" in one way or another. ...
Indeed, without knowing exactly how the BT tester is working it's impossible to say if what you saw is correct or not.
-
That's why I love using pfSense, I use same method they do the rate command to report NAT traffic to each client and SNMP to monitor traffic to each interface. I can see EXACTLY how much traffic is being passed and where.
-
As far as I understand, the BT Speed tester is on-net, if you're a BT customer testing against it, you never touch the actual internet.
-
Merry Christmas
I ran 4-speed testers AS the BT speed tester was testing at the same time, and I got the exact 910+ speeds results, when speedsters were giving around 200Mbps each, if this were true the BT speed tester should have thrown up a poor result surely..
The BT speed test measures something different to the other speedtests you would have used.
TBB keeps saying my metrics are extremely poor (E) congestion and i can feel it in my browser...
Which TBB test is this?
BT was known to be poor always, i thought they picked up?
BT is much better then they were years ago and are now quite reliable in my experience.
I suggest if at all possible you measure your speeds directly at the ONT if possible (wit/without a router) with a default/untweaked OS and no VPN etc..
-
...congestion already on new poles! and they expect me to put up with 24 months of it getting WORSE as more and more people sign up to FTTP in my area
I'd say there is almost ZERO chance of congestion on the PON, what are the odds of out of 30 people there has:
a) Been enough take up AND of the faster speeds for them to be able to congest the PON.
b) They're using it so aggressively you can feel it.
The odds of everyone signing up on your PON are slim, the odds of them all getting Gigabit is probably slimmer than winning the lottery.
Ofcom reports fewer than 25% of people who can get FTTP have actually done so. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-59683884
I'd certainly be very very surprised if even in the unlikely event a PON IS congested, you'd be able to tell just loading web pages.
The BT speed test measures something different to the other speedtests you would have used.
Its possible that its measuring actual line throughput, so any other load you put on it at the same time could potentially be taken into account.
-
...
Its possible that its measuring actual line throughput, so any other load you put on it at the same time could potentially be taken into account.
This is exactly what I was thinking.
I've been with BT for many years on FTTC and the only complaint I have is that they are not the cheapest. However, given that I'm connected to a Market A exchange I don't get a great choice of cheap deals anyway.
:)
-
We need "speedtesters" to see how well the link is performing. There's no point be on say a 100Mbps if throughput is restricted to much slower speeds. Its not that they have been modified, but more to do with how the result is being measured and also if it makes allowances for overheads, the points in the network where the speedtest is run and even such things as the type of test ( eg flash, httpx1, httpx6) can make a difference in the reported speed. It's not that there is particularly anything sinister about the testers as long as we understand what it is supposed to be measuring.
I use various speedtesters depending upon what I am checking or looking for. I feel like I'm going over old stuff here and back to basics - I perhaps need to redo an updated version of something on the main website.. but I doubt it will get done, so briefly...
I like the TBB speedtester because it is one of the few testers that will allow you to test both single and multiple streams. A lot of web based speedtesters such as Ookla use multiple streams and as such may fail to disclose the fact there may be congestion somewhere/anywhere between your home and the remote server. Any of the testers which use multiple streams may fail to show up any problems despite surfing may seem laggy.
I also like to test using a download file and NetmeterEvo. NetmeterEvo is very good at showing the actual throughput to your PC inc overheads, so you have to ensure that there isnt anything else open on your network that could be using your bandwidth.
Finally it must be mentioned that unlike other speedtesters, if you are on a BTw connection then the BTw speedtest is performed at the RAS. It's therefore really important to realise the results cannot be directly compared with speedtests run on a remote server and it is entirely possible that your line could well be capable of recording 900Mpbs but you are getting slower speeds from website based tests. The most common cause is ISP congestion but there could be various other points on the wider internet which is slowing your throughput.
It wont be any sort of deliberate manipulation and fake results. It is highly possible that you are getting 900Mbps on the Openreach/BTw part of the network but it does indicate that something is wrong somewhere from the ISP network and the wider internet. :(
-
Why was my post deleted? OP is conspiracy nonsense:
so I believe BT have their system report the correct speed regardless.. to falsely keep customers in the 'hold'
-
I deleted it because it added nothing to the discussion and was rather offensive.
-
A favour called in from an Openreach guy informs zero OLT ports with significant congestion.
I would suggest the issue is ONT or BT Hub. As was suggested before going straight into the ONT will prove this out.
I vaguely remember some asinine QoS on the BT Hub. That may be misfiring.
-
I would suggest the issue is OLT or BT Hub. As was suggested before going straight into the OLT will prove this out.
Hmm . . . Either I have read things incorrectly or the two references to "OLT" in the above sentence should really be to "ONT"? :-\
-
As a direct connection to an OLT is not possible for a user to accomplish, I conclude it is the latter. :) :)
-
Not exactly impossible ;)
Wasn't what I meant though and have duly corrected.
-
Wasn't what I meant though and have duly corrected.
Thank you. :)