Guys, can anyone recommend what mtu size should I use with excitel ?
-
Amazon Deals - ToS - Like us?
Excitel Broadband: 50mbps for Rs. 800, 75mbps for Rs. 970 & 100mbps for Rs. 1145
- Thread starter Rehan Kumar
- Start date
- Replies 184
- Views 38,196
-
- Tags
- excitel broadband
1492 is the PPPoE max
I am on 50 Mbps plan.
But getting 30 Mbps speed on 'speedtest' and just 3.4 mbps on 'fast.com'.
Why is there such a huge difference?
But getting 30 Mbps speed on 'speedtest' and just 3.4 mbps on 'fast.com'.
Why is there such a huge difference?
not sure if you have already done it... but for a proper speed test, connect the cable directly to the pc and log in using pppoe manually and then check.
on my connection... i am getting 50mbps on my pc connected through ethernet. even on phone when kept within 2 meters of an AC capable router. upload speeds however are hovering between 35mbps and 40mbps.
on my connection... i am getting 50mbps on my pc connected through ethernet. even on phone when kept within 2 meters of an AC capable router. upload speeds however are hovering between 35mbps and 40mbps.
Having popular platforms cooperate with an ISP and working together for peering is a bad thing, you're claiming? If direct network connections were such an amazing thing, why do people prefer game servers closer to them? Why are people so pleased with the speed performance of Youtube? Its due to the peering efforts and collaboration that we've undertaken. Since when has having a server closer to the source country been a bad thing, I fail to understand? Since you try to portray peering to be some sort of a devil and direct connections with offshore servers as an angel.
Direct connections with offshore servers works without extra efforts, sure. However, please understand that it is not always possible to do that, due to the different routes used by different upstream providers. Peering with major platforms helps us counter that, atleast temporarily, if not a permanent solution. Instead of seeing that as a positive effort to atleast ensure that customers are able to use such platforms optimally, you have a critical opinion of the same. And obviously, had the peering gone through with Twitch in the first go, you would be rejoicing here. Then it would suddenly turn out not to be such a devil of an entity, right?
Yes, I agree. And we never refused to fix the issue and neither did we ever deny having any issues, either related to Twitch or any other aspect of our services, as well. A newer ISP has to expand its coverage area, improve upon stability, improve upon a ton of other pressing concerns. Do you suggest we should refocus our energies and resources from those areas and direct it towards very specific issues, first? I'm not saying that the Twitch issue isn't important. We will come around to it.
Because all companies are not using the exact same routing strategies? Because they're not one and the same company. Or maybe because Excitel is not as "set-in"/old as the other companies that you're trying to compare us with. This is something which I find surprising. Comparing new companies with old ones isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison, now, is it?
We have established peering with Netflix. This peering using a specific route which is NOT equivalent to the route that is used while testing connection speeds on Fast.com. As far as your comparison between Excitel and other ISPs in this regard is concerned, refer to my previously reply, above.
We have, never, and I repeat, never, refused to accept the problems experienced in relation to our services.
@Excitel very passive-aggressive for a "professional" company.
"Our DNS is Unreliable?. Well, our DNS has lower latency than others"
" Twitch speed is low? Well, they are not peering with us so speeds will suck"
"Fast.com is slow? Well thats because they use different server which totally is not on internet"
"Speeds are low? Well, thats because we are a "new": company"
" Static IP? Can't provide because ipv6 is expensive"
" Connection down? Well, that must be your LCO!"
"Packet loss? Oh thats because the server is far away"
"Our speeds to peering servers are good and we don't have any data caps, so we are the best!"
Every time you have slithered your way and put blame on someone or looked at the positive side of the problem.
"Our DNS is Unreliable?. Well, our DNS has lower latency than others"
" Twitch speed is low? Well, they are not peering with us so speeds will suck"
"Fast.com is slow? Well thats because they use different server which totally is not on internet"
"Speeds are low? Well, thats because we are a "new": company"
" Static IP? Can't provide because ipv6 is expensive"
" Connection down? Well, that must be your LCO!"
"Packet loss? Oh thats because the server is far away"
"Our speeds to peering servers are good and we don't have any data caps, so we are the best!"
Every time you have slithered your way and put blame on someone or looked at the positive side of the problem.
Last edited:
Sorry if it felt that way. I'm just trying to clear the confusion here and trying to be on the same page as that of the tech savvy users that we have here.
Its definitely important for people to know that we're doing everything that we can to improve the quality of our services, and yes, we know there are issues that need to be fixed.
However, I believe that we should have earned enough mutual respect to expect our customers to not question the core motives of a company which goes out of the way to NOT enforce usage limits, FUPs and the other shenanigans used by other companies, amongst the other things that we've achieved. When people are ready to dump everything due to one thing not being fixed, its not very encouraging.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Article
