So using Bharti = bad experience. Using Tata = good experience. How is that the sites' fault? Am I missing something? The way I see it is that you are saying that there are two roads to go to, say Building X. One road is longer and full of potholes, and the other is more direct and smooth. Both will take you there, but one road = bad experience, the other = good. I am with you till there. But how is this the building's fault? Perhaps my example is too simplistic. But basic facts - if the same site works horribly on Airtel / Bharti, and works awesome on Spectranet / Tata, how are you concluding that it's the website's fault? The way I see it is that Airtel / Bharti is doing something wrong (i.e. mismanaging their network and/or skimping on money by buying cheaper (but crappier) routes).
-
Amazon Deals - ToS - Like us?
What in god's name is Airtel doing with video streaming?
- Thread starter vebk
- Start date
- Replies 52
- Views 8,619
mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
So using Bharti = bad experience. Using Tata = good experience. How is that the sites' fault? Am I missing something? The way I see it is that you are saying that there are two roads to go to, say Building X. One road is longer and full of potholes, and the other is more direct and smooth. Both will take you there, but one road = bad experience, the other = good. I am with you till there. But how is this the building's fault? Perhaps my example is too simplistic. But basic facts - if the same site works horribly on Airtel / Bharti, and works awesome on Spectranet / Tata, how are you concluding that it's the website's fault? The way I see it is that Airtel / Bharti is doing something wrong (i.e. mismanaging their network and/or skimping on money by buying cheaper (but crappier) routes).
Your example is too simplistic. I've not said it's the site's fault, I've said it's problems with the site's connectivity, but blame can be placed in three ways:
1. With the site: As video streaming sites, they're the ones responsible for distributing their content. The only problem is that since the content they're distributing is not strictly legal, no CDN will help them, so to counter the situation they'd need to set up their own and put servers in data-centers all around the globe (so long as the networks they get placed on don't mind the content.
2. With the International carrier: For not having sufficient connectivity to every corner of the globe.
3. With the ISP: for not buying more routes and diversifying it's sources of bandwidth, even if Airtel does own shares in a number of cables touching Indian shores.
I'm not saying Bharti *aren't* doing things wrong (in fact, I think I said that they are). They aren't "skimping" on buying cheaper routes if for no other reason than because they part-own the cables. Their network is not, however, as pervasive as Tata's - it's geographic (physical) reach is not was widespread as Tata's and this contributes to the situation in that to get from say Moscow to Delhi, the connection has to go over more networks to get there. Those networks only interconnect with each other at certain rates, so you have to rely on those interconnecting links not being congested.
On the other hand, if Tata's network reaches all the way in to Moscow, then there's no interconnection required because the bandwidth between Moscow and Delhi is owned entirely by Tata and not in use by any other ISPs in Europe.
To simplify this even further: if I buy a dedicated line to Singapore, I'll get awesome speeds & pings to Singapore. But my pings and speeds to the USA might suck because of all the competition I was mentioning in my previous post - the only way to combat this is to buy a dedicated line all the way to the USA, terminate there and peer as much as I can in order to ensure I have decent connectivity for my customers here.
Your example is too simplistic. I've not said it's the site's fault, I've said it's problems with the site's connectivity, but blame can be placed in three ways:
1. With the site: As video streaming sites, they're the ones responsible for distributing their content. The only problem is that since the content they're distributing is not strictly legal, no CDN will help them, so to counter the situation they'd need to set up their own and put servers in data-centers all around the globe (so long as the networks they get placed on don't mind the content.
2. With the International carrier: For not having sufficient connectivity to every corner of the globe.
3. With the ISP: for not buying more routes and diversifying it's sources of bandwidth, even if Airtel does own shares in a number of cables touching Indian shores.
I'm not saying Bharti *aren't* doing things wrong (in fact, I think I said that they are). They aren't "skimping" on buying cheaper routes if for no other reason than because they part-own the cables. Their network is not, however, as pervasive as Tata's - it's geographic (physical) reach is not was widespread as Tata's and this contributes to the situation in that to get from say Moscow to Delhi, the connection has to go over more networks to get there. Those networks only interconnect with each other at certain rates, so you have to rely on those interconnecting links not being congested.
On the other hand, if Tata's network reaches all the way in to Moscow, then there's no interconnection required because the bandwidth between Moscow and Delhi is owned entirely by Tata and not in use by any other ISPs in Europe.
To simplify this even further: if I buy a dedicated line to Singapore, I'll get awesome speeds & pings to Singapore. But my pings and speeds to the USA might suck because of all the competition I was mentioning in my previous post - the only way to combat this is to buy a dedicated line all the way to the USA, terminate there and peer as much as I can in order to ensure I have decent connectivity for my customers here.
from the tracert it looks like they are using reliance flagtel for connecting to servers in netherlands
Code:
Tracing route to www.visitholland.com [94.228.132.139] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1 5 47 ms 47 ms 46 ms 203.101.95.225 6 51 ms 49 ms 49 ms 115.248.226.22 7 52 ms 50 ms * 115.255.239.54 8 115 ms 104 ms 104 ms 62.216.147.73 9 251 ms 251 ms 250 ms 85.95.25.5 10 225 ms * 225 ms 85.95.26.202 11 244 ms 245 ms 245 ms 85.95.25.22 12 214 ms 218 ms 308 ms bd1-10g5-netholding-rc03.prolocation.net [94.228.128.46] 13 235 ms 212 ms 212 ms rc03-netholding-bd1-10g5.prolocation.net [94.228.128.45] 14 212 ms 212 ms 212 ms rc01-8g-rc03-10g-12.prolocation.net [94.228.128.90] 15 213 ms 213 ms 213 ms 94.228.132.139mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
from the tracert it looks like they are using reliance flagtel for connecting to servers in netherlands
Not necessarily. The route taken will depend on the AS Number of the network where the website is hosted.
Code:
Tracing route to www.visitholland.com [94.228.132.139] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1 5 47 ms 47 ms 46 ms 203.101.95.225 6 51 ms 49 ms 49 ms 115.248.226.22 7 52 ms 50 ms * 115.255.239.54 8 115 ms 104 ms 104 ms 62.216.147.73 9 251 ms 251 ms 250 ms 85.95.25.5 10 225 ms * 225 ms 85.95.26.202 11 244 ms 245 ms 245 ms 85.95.25.22 12 214 ms 218 ms 308 ms bd1-10g5-netholding-rc03.prolocation.net [94.228.128.46] 13 235 ms 212 ms 212 ms rc03-netholding-bd1-10g5.prolocation.net [94.228.128.45] 14 212 ms 212 ms 212 ms rc01-8g-rc03-10g-12.prolocation.net [94.228.128.90] 15 213 ms 213 ms 213 ms 94.228.132.139Not necessarily. The route taken will depend on the AS Number of the network where the website is hosted.
Wow... things are now even. Now they have blocked several video sites purportedly "as per court orders." On top of that the sites that do work are behaving strangely as before. In fact worse. There was a particular site where I was able to view streaming videos at around 150-200 KB/s which worked well for very good SD quality videos. Now when I try to start a video it 'revs' up till 30-50 KB/s and then starts decreasing dramatically to finally even out at speeds < 1 KB/s !!! This seems like throttling to me, more than connectivity issues.This is why I declined paying only 300/- more to double my speed to 8Mbps. If they can't even give me above 50 KB/s on streaming videos, then what's the point of 1024KB/s? I never thought that bandwidth / connectivity would ever be a larger problem than FUP with Airtel. Airtel is truly going down the drain.
Your example is too simplistic. I've not said it's the site's fault, I've said it's problems with the site's connectivity, but blame can be placed in three ways:
1. With the site: As video streaming sites, they're the ones responsible for distributing their content. The only problem is that since the content they're distributing is not strictly legal, no CDN will help them, so to counter the situation they'd need to set up their own and put servers in data-centers all around the globe (so long as the networks they get placed on don't mind the content.
2. With the International carrier: For not having sufficient connectivity to every corner of the globe.
3. With the ISP: for not buying more routes and diversifying it's sources of bandwidth, even if Airtel does own shares in a number of cables touching Indian shores.
I'm not saying Bharti *aren't* doing things wrong (in fact, I think I said that they are). They aren't "skimping" on buying cheaper routes if for no other reason than because they part-own the cables. Their network is not, however, as pervasive as Tata's - it's geographic (physical) reach is not was widespread as Tata's and this contributes to the situation in that to get from say Moscow to Delhi, the connection has to go over more networks to get there. Those networks only interconnect with each other at certain rates, so you have to rely on those interconnecting links not being congested.
On the other hand, if Tata's network reaches all the way in to Moscow, then there's no interconnection required because the bandwidth between Moscow and Delhi is owned entirely by Tata and not in use by any other ISPs in Europe.
To simplify this even further: if I buy a dedicated line to Singapore, I'll get awesome speeds & pings to Singapore. But my pings and speeds to the USA might suck because of all the competition I was mentioning in my previous post - the only way to combat this is to buy a dedicated line all the way to the USA, terminate there and peer as much as I can in order to ensure I have decent connectivity for my customers here.
Awesome explanation. But the average joe wouldn't understand all this. All he wants is to watch videos without buffering. And if airtel can't provide this, he would naturally be unhappy
1. With the site: As video streaming sites, they're the ones responsible for distributing their content. The only problem is that since the content they're distributing is not strictly legal, no CDN will help them, so to counter the situation they'd need to set up their own and put servers in data-centers all around the globe (so long as the networks they get placed on don't mind the content.
2. With the International carrier: For not having sufficient connectivity to every corner of the globe.
3. With the ISP: for not buying more routes and diversifying it's sources of bandwidth, even if Airtel does own shares in a number of cables touching Indian shores.
I'm not saying Bharti *aren't* doing things wrong (in fact, I think I said that they are). They aren't "skimping" on buying cheaper routes if for no other reason than because they part-own the cables. Their network is not, however, as pervasive as Tata's - it's geographic (physical) reach is not was widespread as Tata's and this contributes to the situation in that to get from say Moscow to Delhi, the connection has to go over more networks to get there. Those networks only interconnect with each other at certain rates, so you have to rely on those interconnecting links not being congested.
On the other hand, if Tata's network reaches all the way in to Moscow, then there's no interconnection required because the bandwidth between Moscow and Delhi is owned entirely by Tata and not in use by any other ISPs in Europe.
To simplify this even further: if I buy a dedicated line to Singapore, I'll get awesome speeds & pings to Singapore. But my pings and speeds to the USA might suck because of all the competition I was mentioning in my previous post - the only way to combat this is to buy a dedicated line all the way to the USA, terminate there and peer as much as I can in order to ensure I have decent connectivity for my customers here.
Awesome explanation. But the average joe wouldn't understand all this. All he wants is to watch videos without buffering. And if airtel can't provide this, he would naturally be unhappy
@vebk airtel wants me to tell them your contact number 
Twitter / Airtel_Presence: @broadbandforum Hi! Kindly
Twitter / Airtel_Presence: @broadbandforum Hi! Kindly
@vebk .. I think they have unblocked the video sites.. isn't it?And which video streaming site u think they r throttling? If they r throttling then shouldn't all the video sites be effected?I am facing issue with Vimeo .. The site is working but the videos just don't play at all .. either HD or SD ..
mgcarley
Founder, Hayai Broadband
Awesome explanation. But the average joe wouldn't understand all this. All he wants is to watch videos without buffering. And if airtel can't provide this, he would naturally be unhappy
Unfortunately this is true, however, most "average joes" only care about the biggies like Youtube and, well... mostly Youtube. They could give half a toss about all the other ones. Of course, I'm painting with a very broad brush here, but that's the basic jist.
@vebk airtel wants me to tell them your contact number
LOL. You could just say "Everyone on Airtel is having this same problem. It is not specific to any one customer."
player.vimeo.com is blocked. i assume this is used for the video content on vimeo that's why the site itself works but videos (embedded as well) does not. freaking bunch of idiots.
We've got it bad with them, they even did an upstream block on some sites, so even ISPs using Bharti wholesale couldn't get around it (well...)
Unfortunately this is true, however, most "average joes" only care about the biggies like Youtube and, well... mostly Youtube. They could give half a toss about all the other ones. Of course, I'm painting with a very broad brush here, but that's the basic jist.
@vebk airtel wants me to tell them your contact number
LOL. You could just say "Everyone on Airtel is having this same problem. It is not specific to any one customer."
player.vimeo.com is blocked. i assume this is used for the video content on vimeo that's why the site itself works but videos (embedded as well) does not. freaking bunch of idiots.
We've got it bad with them, they even did an upstream block on some sites, so even ISPs using Bharti wholesale couldn't get around it (well...)
