nathani: Well, "Fenster" would be German for window
dasblinkenlichtenundcomputerboxor
any of you able to get to deftly.net?
nope
it just hangs loading
i can mtr it
it's a web page i assume?
ya
i can see traffic coming in, so something I did busted it
like nginx isn't spawning workers
s/64/640/
deftly.net works for me (granted it's 20 minutes later)
sorressean: There is a meter at graphs.arpnetworks.com
s/no any/know any/
:P
yeah, turns out if you chown the chroot dir, it gets pissy :D
Aw that's a bummer. According to https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/safebrowsing/malware/ there is a non-zero number of infected ARP-hosted (AS 25795) customers.
enzu is big hah
hah, it's nothing compared to enzu.  they may all be on one vps even
it sems tehy should scan more often
http://irclogger.arpnetworks.com/irclogger_log/arpnetworks?date=2010-09-12,Sun&raw=on
2010!!!!!!!!
6 years
Is that a lot or a little?
I'd say medium.
nathani: https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfxu1mzh7dtm61s/2016-12-22%2017.30.52.jpg?dl=0 this arrived in the mail today
Dropbox photo: "https://www.dropbox.com/s/kfxu1mzh7dtm61s/2016-12-22%2017.30.52.jpg?dl=0"
"Fibe" they can't even spell fibre right in the letterhead
Or it's supposed to be their marketing name/trademark, which may actually be worse and more annoying.
brycec: Fibe is the marketing term
brycec: in some areas 'Fibe' isn't even FTTH, maybe just FTTN and then copper to home
FTTN is better than nothing, but...
"Fibe" just looks like a bad misspelling, dammit.
indeed
I don't understand why (well I do but...) they hype all this crap so much
I don't care about any of their equipment except the pieces that have to plug into mine
we are the minority :P
they can translate it to semaphore flags or IPoAC as long as my end still plugs into my equipment
mkb: Whatever they can do to indicate their new service is better than their previous offerings, and if it uses "buzzwords" all the better.
"better"
And while "fibre" isn't exactly a buzzword, it has a lot of positive feelings for it
s/is better/is "superior"/
at&t's selling u-verse around here and it's the same damn thing
<brycec> mkb: Whatever they can do to indicate their new service is "superior" than their previous offerings, and if it uses "buzzwords" all the better.
6mbps adsl 2
but this is new and fiberized
but right now, Bell.ca's 1G/100M FTTH plan is about the same I'm paying for Rogers' 250/20 cable internet plan
But still 6mbps? That's sub-broadband
yes
really
two blocks from the CO
So on the one hand, you have to sell your soul to Bell. On the other hand, you already sold your soul to Rogers.
I think what's really going on is sbc^Wat&t is competing with bellsouth^Wat&t
they sell the same thing but the money goes to a different business unit
now I'm on hold with Bell for credit validation
..fun
Rogers certainly has better hold music
done, installation is on the 31st
so happy new year to me
staticsafe: cool
staticsafe: you would really enjoy the 1000meg down 100meg up as I am
nathani: also the lower latency :D
staticsafe: 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=1.97 ms
nathani: i can't wait till next friday
did you get a good deal?
nathani: not particularly, I didn't want to sign a contract, so just $129/month for 3 months, with the rental fees waived
only internet
that seems expensive to me
welcome to Canada
how much is it to get a basic 50 megabit or something service
I'm currently paying ~$140/month for 250/20 cable internets
http://www.bell.ca/Bell_Internet/Internet_access $80 for 50mbit plan
i got offrered some deal at 59.95/mo
for 50 megabit fibre
for 2 years
yeah I can get it cheaper if I bundle and contract
on their web ste that is.  hmm, only 10 megabit upload
ahh right
the 150/50 seems like sweet spot
oh
hangon, 250gb...
yep..
150/50 unlimited or 1tb would be fine
going much higher than that you're unlikely to really take advantage of imo
like sending files over skype to friends or such arne't really likely to speed up
and downloads that will go faster are big things that yuo're not usually waiting on etc
I like the 100mbit upload
for doing offsite backups
ahh
(its not just just me using the connection as well, there are 3 other folks)
i have two connections that can do 30 megabit upload
so if i wanted to do offsite backup i'd just use the second connection
i don't find 30 megabit upload congests in normal usage for me though
1 megabit is really hard not to congest, 10 megabit is easy to congest, ime..
linux is finally adding bufferbloat fixes for wireless
so hopefully that'll get passed through to routers etc sometime
:o
as with 1000/100 your next bottleneck could be wireless :)
yep
also uh something is fucked on Rogers' network again - https://smokeping.staticsafe.ca/?target=staticsafe.modem
wow
i opened a ticket on Monday looks like the issue is still ongoing
is it bad to everywhere?
yep
I'm lagging as I type this
is it docsis 3?
yep
is the "ftth" still cable?
no
ahh cool
people keep calling "fast" internet fibre here
https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31118482-Yes-you-CAN-bypass-the-HomeHub-3000 for some details
well it's more like the single cable company in this country
they're offering gigabit on cable
Rogers is doing that in some areas now
RFoG usually
DOCIS 3.1 rollout as well
this seems to be docsis 3.1
by the news article
there's been backlash here over gigabit plans
i mean the regulator wants no-one to advertise gigabit
because people are unlikely to get a full gigabit
indeed
like the 100 megabit plans etc will be overprovisioned
and gigabit ehternet can't show gigabit on speedtest.net or such
i think it's silly myself.
it's better to just sell gigabit that does 970 megabit
most people are going to be bottlenecked with older wireless anyways
yeah
i can only do like 300 megabit within my room
over wireless
gigabit wireless is a pipedream for most at the moment
my MBP is neg. to 600 Mbps ac sitting right under the AP
how many megabit can you pull through it?
i can't really test internet speeds with the packet loss atm
my tablet surprised me with how fast it went with 433 megabit wireless ac
oh i mean with iperf or such
lan speeds
do you have a command I can run?
yeah
iperf -s -i 1 on server
iperf -c <server ip>  on client
iperf isn't in macOS though, I just checked
it'll be on the macports thing
or compile from source
client sends to server, so tests upload
the server reports, as that's more accurate
yeah hold on, I'm installing homebrew so I can get iperf
I dont like that Bell Fibe still does PPPoE
so you lose some MTU and the IP changes frequently
it's hardware accelerated these days
oh
you should be thankful that you have an IP :)
no v6 though
can you get a static ip?
mercutio: https://paste.ee/p/w5HMC
not sure
they should be able to run 1500 mtu with pppoe
yeah that's slow
they should support 9000 mtu in this day and age
that's upload
try the other way around
as it'd still congest your 100 megabit uplaod :)
1508 mtu is fine
i really wanted 9000 mtu on the internet before
but it doesn't seem to be happening.  :)
mercutio: https://paste.ee/p/MrTtZ other way around
that's looking a lot better :)
you can probably improve thje speed by experimenting with random locations
if you look at the -s -i 1
it will show you per second readouts
you can also set 0.5 on some vrsions
if you do -t 60 or such it'll do it for 60 seconds
but it means that youc an leave it running as you move around and watch your speeds vary
https://paste.ee/p/DUV9t plugged it into ethernet via the Thunderbolt->Ethernet adapter :D
i found spinning around in my chair made a huge diff :)
well that's more like it :)
good to see that the Intel NUC's NIC can hold its own
00:19.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation Ethernet Connection I218-V (rev 04)
i mean it should
I wanna paste my iperf result on 9000 mtu gigabit link
but I dont think I saved it, so I would have to redo the test
i got 20 gigabit+ on lan
https://paste.ee/p/I6hYB
ethernet or infiniband?
infiniband :)
my test is with no switches
just direct ethernet from PC to NAS
 981 Mbits/sec
probably get more if I tweak some settings
disabling tcp_timestamps can reduce overhead slightly
more noticable at 1500 mtu than 9000 though
10.5 Gbits/sec
:-)
to and from nic on the same box
how you get 20 gbit between hosts is beyond me
maybe becuase less context switches?
i found samba was faster across computers than from windows to linux on same host though
mercutio: did you test NFS ?
yeh
1.3gb/sec
for cached files
actualy that was a while ago
it may be faster now
i think it was before my cpu upgrade :)