16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
 |
| 16. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 12:28 |
Mr. Tact |
|
|
And the stupid thing is, what kind of difference does it make for a business? So your "important" email gets there half a second later, oh noes!
Actually, I work where this effects our business. We provide an educational product where connections are essentially terminal interfaces to a mainframe. Latency is all that matters. If the roundtrip time from the customer to us and back is over 250ms it causes "issues". The amount of traffic for each user is low, but the latency needs to be low also. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 15. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 10:44 |
Grounded |
|
|
terrorist attack
they are hitting americans where it counts to cause depression: level 19 Rogue twinks in the BG's
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 14. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 09:40 |
Tigger |
|
|
Then if it's about video then wtf does it have to do with WoW? It's not like WoW is streaming videos for 15 bucks a month.
Its really about any service that requires high-bandwidth low-latency connections (all modern multiplayer games, most streaming video services)
ISPs are pissed because providers of these services are pushing these types of connections over their networks and not paying for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
Tigger
Vic Fontaine for President |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 13. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 08:50 |
kanniballl |
|
|
Their official stance is that they DO NOT SUPPORT playing games over their service.
Playing Devil's Advocate...
That's actually not a bad stance from a customer support standpoint, it's not the same as saying they don't allow games or anything.
It means they don't support it, i.e. they don't want to deal with every Joe Schmoe out there that can't get their multiplayer working. Maybe it's their NAT, maybe it's a personal firewall, maybe Joe doesn't have the game installed correctly, etc. There are too many variables for too many games and too many dumb Joes.
It's kind of like at one point Verizon DSL didn't support NATs... they didn't have a problem with the customers using them (unlike Comcast) but if there was a problem they wouldn't help you too much until you disconnected the NAT and hooked up a PC directly to the modem.
Unfortuantely, in this case it sucks. Hopefully they can resolve it as I doubt games are the only things suffering.
"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you."
-Fry, Futurmama
This comment was edited on Aug 10, 08:54. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But then you get to the end and a gorilla starts throwing barrels at you."
-Fry, Futurama |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 12. |
No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 08:19 |
Brian |
|
|
FYI, this is not a NYC only problem. Here in socal I'm having a hell of a time with packet loss over my TW Cable. Traceroute and node-polling show that its absolutely the Time Warner hops that are dropping the packets. I see between 5%-15% packet loss (TTL 140) per TW hop. I contacted TW support and get this: Their official stance is that they DO NOT SUPPORT playing games over their service. Yes, they advertise video games in their ads, and even on their web-site, but no... apparently they don't support games. Don't take my word for it. Ask 'em yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 11. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 07:52 |
Cage |
|
|
Which carrier?
You know, so I can avoid them.
AT&T? It sounds like something they would do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 10. |
No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 06:03 |
aesir05 |
|
|
I think blue was sleepy when he posted this news
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 9. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 02:16 |
Cutter |
|
|
Yeah, I feel this even in Toronto where a lot of my stuff gets routed through NY and I see the dropped packets on the traceroutes. Safe to say it's a lot of northeastern North America hurting from this.
"Well that sounds like fun times, Peter. Tell me...where does James Woods fit into the "fun times"."
- James Woods, Family Guy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Peter, breakfast for dinner is anarchy!" - Lois |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 8. |
the rats! |
Aug 10, 2007, 02:12 |
Kxmode |
|
|
come on we all know the deal! there's some rats in TW/RR's network room having a party on their wiring.
-----
Ah ha! I caught you red handed Green cheating on Blue!
http://www.myspace.com/kxmode
"Salmon Dance remix" posted (Chemical Brothers) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 7. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 10, 2007, 00:40 |
The Half Elf |
|
|
Then if it's about video then wtf does it have to do with WoW? It's not like WoW is streaming videos for 15 bucks a month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 6. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 9, 2007, 23:28 |
LG Orange Drink |
|
|
Creston with all due respect, this isn't about gaming...it's about video. Yeah we get the shaft, but the 800 lb. gorilla they want to slow/charge more for/traffic shape is video. I think it's name is Google. I work at a carrier so I see the value of prioritizing packets and charging for it. Of course this is an all business (small) carrier, not a mono/duopoly that serves residences.
Net Neutrality is too simplistic. There's nothing wrong with a customer and carrier willing to pay for priority. There is something wrong with a carrier lowering priority on packets until ransom is paid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 4. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 9, 2007, 23:09 |
Creston |
|
|
While this was *probably* an accident
Please. This is happening exactly as intended, because they need test data for packet prioritizing. Businesses are drooling over the prospect, and ISPs are jizzing all over themselves to try to provide it.
This was absolutely, 100% intended.
And the stupid thing is, what kind of difference does it make for a business? So your "important" email gets there half a second later, oh noes!
The only data for which latency is important, gaming, gets the fucking shaft. Unless we get Net Neutrality, this will become the wave of the future. 
Creston
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 3. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 9, 2007, 22:17 |
Overon |
|
|
Uh oh wow players and counterstrike players means that shit is going to get fixed fast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2. |
Re: No subject |
Aug 9, 2007, 21:43 |
m00t |
|
|
This is the sort of issue you should expect to become very common if we don't have a sensible and comprehensive network neutrality law passed.
Carriers will lower the priority on high-volume users unless they pay up.
While this was *probably* an accident, it really underscores the power that they have in affecting your experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 1. |
No subject |
Aug 9, 2007, 21:22 |
KilrathiAce |
|
|
This problem doesnt affect only WoW, it affects all games. For me since month ago RR added 1 specific data router and about 1/3 of internet is routed through it. All the connections that have this router in their trace are affected. 2-4 second data loss every 20-30seconds at steady intervals.
Details of this problem are described here:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18710281
Its been a month since I been unable to play 1/3 of gaming servers out there. I tried many ways to contact RR and get this fixed but so far no go. At least they listened to the WoW community more so maybe this will finally be fixed.
This comment was edited on Aug 9, 21:27. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"On 2646.215 I myself attacked & destroyed TCS Tiger's Claw in my Jalthi heavy fighter" Bakhtosh Redclaw Nar Kiranka |
|
|
|
|
| |
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
