Joel Wiramu Pauling wrote:
>>I have no idea, and someone from Orcon can offer an answer to that.
>>However, as stated, Orcon cannot rate limit traffic on FastIP Direct as
>>the traffic never hits their network.
>
>
> I think the problem is I get conflicting information everytime I try and
> resolve this. Telecom say one thing, that discounts what Orcon tell
> me... I go back to orcon, and get told conflicting information again.

I can once again reassure you that Telecom are the ONLY ONES who can
influence rate-limiting on the DSL service you are currently using.

Without knowing how you are determining the throttling, and not having
visibility into Telecom's network, there is no way to say for sure what
is happening. What I would SUSPECT based on memories of when I was a
network operator, is that Telecom are migrating customers off 192k to
128k upstream as they said they would.

Although that doesn't in it's entirety explain the 160kbps upstream you
are seeing, but nonetheless you are getting more than 128k anyway, so be
happy.

>>No. The ISP receives a proxied RADIUS authentication request from
>>Telecom. The PPPoA authentication happens at the Telecom access device.
>> The ISP does NOT have the opportunity to inject rate limiting.
>
>
> Ahh this makes sense from my meagre understanding, this is how the
> fullrate jetstream plans work... But as I said because of the various
> information I have received, I had come to the conclusion that the
> particular jetstream + plan I was on had somehow fallen into a different
> auth category. Especially because at one point, Orcon forgot to re-add
> the jetstream service on my account for a month and I was still
> connecting... albeit with a different IP.

The 2Mbps, 1Mbps, and 256k plans that are NOT UBS are subject to the
same network that fullrate Jetstream runs on, unless an ISP is
particularly financially suicidal and wants to transport the bits
themselves.

>>All you have proven is that you are not being ratelimited by the DSLAM,
>>which is one of many places that traffic can be controlled.
>
> That was my understanding yes, so where is it happening?

Beyond the DSLAM. It's possibly happening at the RAN, IF TNZ has done
what I suspect they may have. I don't know whether they have done, though.

>>So it's simple: Hurry up and make the change, or you will shortly have
>>no service.
>
> I can't do that without incurring significant cost! (for a student with
> unstable income) One of the reasons I was so cagy about changing is
> because this flat was in flux. A week ago we got a date when people are
> moving out, and it is the end of next month. Which makes the options all
> the more untenable.

I don't understand how you incur cost by migrating to a UBS plan. I
must have missed that part.

The other option is to setup an Xtra account which in theory will cost
you no more presuming you have cancelled your Orcon account.

>>I would be highly surprised if TNZ had agreed to this. Furthermore,
>>Orcon will have no choice to not offer the auth when (not if) Telecom
>>turns off their ability to do so as per the commercial arrangements TNZ
>>and Orcon have.
>>
>>If you haven't moved, given the opportunites given to you by TNZ and
>>Orcon, you are shooting yourself in the foot.
>
> No as already explained, none of them have been remotely tenable for
> various reasons, not least being that I end up with service disruptions,
> have to change over various services to live with a dynamic ip, get
> increased cost for decreased upstream speed(not that I have been getting
> the 64kbits I moved to this plan for in the first place for last few
> months as it turns out)

It seems to be you have unreasonably high expectations of a service for
residential users.

>>In my experience with UBS (which is admittedly minor, as I've only
>>bothered to churn one connection), it was more a fact of a few hours
>>downtime from the time my PPP session was dropped, to the time I
>>corrected my username to authenticate as a UBS user.
>>
>>This was with Orcon.
>>
>>It was, to my surprise, reasonably painless.
>
> I have been told that there is a backlog, 14 days does not guarantee the
> the churn will happen on time.
>
> Ok i'm not the greatest customer ever, but I do think that I'm fairly
> reasonable, currently the optimal solution is for an extension of the
> grace by a month. Everyone walks away happy (sans the upstream throttle
> issue).
>
> Given the ammount of hassles I have had (and given) I don't see why I
> need to get jiped more when there is a tenable solution... i.e extend
> the grace for a month.
>
> As I said as of this week, I have been told by telecom that this can
> happen. The last orcon staffer gave me the not so concrete asnwer of...
> "well if telecom have said they won't disconnect the port at the
> exchange on the 28th... then..."
>
> I spose all I want at the moment, is a little better reassurance i'm not
> going to get cut off next week. And for some closure on the upstream
> issue.
>
>
> All very messy, partly my fault for sure... but a large chunk not.

I'm not going to touch this. I really only wanted to interject in this
thread to discuss the rate limiting issue.

aj.

-- 
This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list. 
see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ, 
and various documents. 
To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org 
with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the message