Tt&t ( Maxnet)

[wpcoe]

After reviewing Monty's opening post about 20 hops to Singapore showing on tracert, I tried it:

c:\>tracert -d www.thaivisa.com

Tracing route to thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 81 ms 82 ms 86 ms 203.174.84.82

Trace complete.

Surely, that's not correct -- one hop from my computer to thaivisa.com?

Even a tracert to my personal web site (hosted in the USA) displays as a single hop. It's not even showing the hop through my router. What's up with that? Has tracert changed in Vista? I don't see any applicable command line switches from "tracert /?"

[Upcountry]

i have to use the tedious method of copying a URL, close my browser (Opera) restart the browser and the site loads. if i click within this site on another link nothing happens except "request queued...". to get to this link i have to copy it, close the browser... see above.

I use Firefox, and my solution is to hit the refresh button as many times as it takes. With Opera, I've found that trickier to do, so I can understand why you'd just copy the URL and use a new window.

Just a few minutes ago I had to hit the refresh button many times to get a new page of this thread to load. I noticed that media.thaivisa.com was being called at one point. en.wikipedia.org loaded quickly at the same time, so it's possible that something (an ad, whatever) being called by the page is loading slowly. Either that or too many visitors are causing database access to time out. Something like that.

Sometimes, when MaxNet grinds to a halt, I've found it's worth changing to the following DNS settings instead of using the automatically assigned ones.

203.130.159.20 dnscache1.ji-net.com

203.130.159.21 dnscache2.ji-net.com

I use one DNS IP from CAT, and one from a US-based ISP I use. Pretty much any DNS IP can be called to get domain names.

BTW, I'm having some of the same speed problems you guys are complaining about, and I still have Hinet right now. So the problem may not be TT&T perse. Still I'm sure that September 1 would be a good day to turn off the computer and do something else because all the new Maxnet customers, including me, will be bombarding the system and wondering what TT&T means by 2.5mbs!

[wpcoe]

Still I'm sure that September 1 would be a good day to turn off the computer and do something else because all the new Maxnet customers, including me, will be bombarding the system and wondering what TT&T means by 2.5mbs!

I was wondering about that when I read that on the other thread. I used to have the B1000/month MaxNet 1024/512 ADSL account and they automatically "upgraded" me to 2048/512 last month. I wonder if I'm going to be bumped up to 2560/512? Or if you got some other promo?

[Upcountry]

All I know is that, despite what they told me on the phone, the TT&T clerk in the office wrote "2.5M" on the price sheet next to 1024/512.

I have a question for you and other Maxnet users. On another thread, a TV member pointed me to this URL:

http://www.maxnet.co.th/product_Indy.php

Sadly, if I saw this one before, I was overwhelmed by all the Thai script and no English button, so I missed this line:

** ผู้เริ่มต้นเข้าสู่ Broadband Internet World (Best for Thai Surf) โดยมีข้อจำกัดการใช้งาน วงจรสำหรับ VoIP/P2P (Bit Torrent) ต่างประเทศมีขนาดจำกัด (limited bandwidth for international VoIP/P2P)

What, to Maxnet users, does "limited bandwidth for international VoIP/P2P" mean?

Can you use Skype voice (including Skype Out)?

Can you run and get decent performance with bittorrent and other P2P apps?

With Hinet, Skype/Out works fine. P2P is not great, but I never blamed that on restrictions per se, just figured it was my bandwidth, etc.

Feedback urgently requested!

[monty]

** ผู้เริ่มต้นเข้าสู่ Broadband Internet World (Best for Thai Surf) โดยมีข้อจำกัดการใช้งาน วงจรสำหรับ VoIP/P2P (Bit Torrent) ต่างประเทศมีขนาดจำกัด (limited bandwidth for international VoIP/P2P)

What, to Maxnet users, does "limited bandwidth for international VoIP/P2P" mean?

Can you use Skype voice (including Skype Out)?

Can you run and get decent performance with bittorrent and other P2P apps?

With Hinet, Skype/Out works fine. P2P is not great, but I never blamed that on restrictions per se, just figured it was my bandwidth, etc.

Feedback urgently requested!

What this means is that the international bandwidth is so heavily shared on the Indy Maxnet package, that they actually advise you to best only surf websites located inside Thailand, and that they will not guarantee VOIP and P2P traffic.

It might work, but when the system will get loaded heavily, they will block P2P/voip (or severely throttle down the speed) to free up some bandwidth for more important stuff such as surfing and e-mails!

Don't forget with Hinet you had the substantial advantage that CAT actually owned all the international bandwidth! All the other ISP's had to buy bandwidth from CAT!

Personally I don't even bother anymore with these Indy or home packages. The grief is just to much when everything grinds to a halt, or doesn't work altogether. I'm on the more expensive packages (Premier) and can't really complain about anything!

[Phil Conners]

I have TT&T MaxNet 2048/512 (the basic home package for B1000/mo) in Jomtien and just got this from the Speakeasy test to San Francisco (and similar to Los Angeles):

Last Result:

Download Speed: 1751 kbps (218.9 KB/sec transfer rate)

Upload Speed: 157 kbps (19.6 KB/sec transfer rate)

Pinging thaivisa.com gave me:

Pinging thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82] with 32 bytes of data

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=81ms TTL=51

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=51

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=81ms TTL=51

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=81ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 203.174.84.82:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 80ms, Maximum = 81ms, Average = 80ms

Granted this is at 2:50am, but I've been online most of the previous afternoon and evening, and had equally fast downloads.

I was out of the country for a week, to return on the 20th, so maybe I simply missed the slowdowns referred to above?

Wow!

This is now - also Maxnet from East Pattaya:

Speakeasy SF:

Download Speed: 603 kbps (75.4 KB/sec transfer rate)

Upload Speed: 258 kbps (32.3 KB/sec transfer rate)

I think this must be using cached data as I find any site I go to takes forever to load.

I also use SSH a lot and find it takes several seconds from typing a character until it actually is echoed on the terminal.

Pinging thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=262ms TTL=43

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=259ms TTL=44

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=271ms TTL=44

Reply from 203.174.84.82: bytes=32 time=297ms TTL=44

Ping statistics for 203.174.84.82:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 259ms, Maximum = 297ms, Average = 272ms

Traceroutes still come up with that weird private IP address at hop 4 and 100% packet loss at hop 5. I'm convinced that's not right and probably a major cause of the slow internet access we have these days.

Tracing route to thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.2.1

2 30 ms 27 ms 31 ms 58.147.0.20

3 27 ms 37 ms 27 ms 10.122.20.254

4 34 ms 31 ms 29 ms 192.168.10.13

5 * * * Request timed out.

6 32 ms 31 ms 50 ms 58.147.0.50

7 32 ms 31 ms 33 ms 58.147.0.46

8 253 ms 263 ms 265 ms 61.19.10.1

9 287 ms 261 ms 249 ms 202.47.253.134

10 260 ms 271 ms 267 ms 202.47.252.230

11 273 ms 273 ms 261 ms pc1-an-ats-int02.starhub.net.sg [203.118.3.149]

12 296 ms 259 ms 260 ms 203.117.6.210

13 267 ms 265 ms 259 ms thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

[Naam]

I'm on the more expensive packages (Premier) and can't really complain about anything!

which was (in my case) worse than Indy but at a quadruple price

[wpcoe]

I'd still like to see an "old-fashioned" tracert result like I had previous to Vista. In Vista, I get that stupid single-hop report to the destination, which seems to defeat the purpose of running tracert.

Is something screwed up with my Vista installation? Do other users get a multi-hop report when they run tracert from a command prompt in Vista? Or, is there some new utility in Vista to use instead of tracert?

[monty]

I'm running vista (home premium) and my tracert works just as it has worked before in XP!

Traceroutes still come up with that weird private IP address at hop 4 and 100% packet loss at hop 5. I'm convinced that's not right and probably a major cause of the slow internet access we have these days.

Hop 5 is not creating the problem, it's probably an internal router set to be invisible and respond to ping requests. Actually, this is the way the router at hop 4 should be set that way as well.

When you look at the ping times, you see the first slowdown happens in hop 8. If you do a whois, you'll see that this a CAT IIG router. Routers withing Thailand should ping at 50 msec or less, pings of over 200 msec show that that router is probably so overloaded it can't even send back a ping request immediately.

It seems Maxnet just trialled their own gateway for a short while, and experienced too many teething problems with it, so they're back to routing through the CAT IIG

[wpcoe]

I'm running vista (home premium) and my tracert works just as it has worked before in XP!

Dang. Not what I wanted to hear.

I just tried it again. I'm using Vista Business:

c:\>tracert www.thaivisa.com

Tracing route to thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 77 ms 75 ms 75 ms thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

Trace complete.

[wpcoe]

Tracing route to thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.2.1

2 30 ms 27 ms 31 ms 58.147.0.20

3 27 ms 37 ms 27 ms 10.122.20.254

4 34 ms 31 ms 29 ms 192.168.10.13

5 * * * Request timed out.

6 32 ms 31 ms 50 ms 58.147.0.50

7 32 ms 31 ms 33 ms 58.147.0.46

8 253 ms 263 ms 265 ms 61.19.10.1

9 287 ms 261 ms 249 ms 202.47.253.134

10 260 ms 271 ms 267 ms 202.47.252.230

11 273 ms 273 ms 261 ms pc1-an-ats-int02.starhub.net.sg [203.118.3.149]

12 296 ms 259 ms 260 ms 203.117.6.210

13 267 ms 265 ms 259 ms thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

I found the cuplrit preventing me to view all the tracert hops to destination: ZoneAlarm on Vista. I finally stumbled on the appropriate search words on Google and found another user with the identical problem. The only solution is to UNINSTALL ZoneAlarm and reboot. It is not adequate to simply exit ZoneAlarm and stop its processes and services. Even Safe Booting is not enough. Only a total uninstall will alleviate the problem. I will pursue with the ZoneAlarm folks.

Now that I can view a tracert, I notice a significant difference from Phill Conner's and Monty's MaxNet results -- only 42ms:

c:\>tracert thaivisa.com

Tracing route to thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1

2 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 58.147.0.20

3 20 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10.122.20.254

4 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 192.168.10.9

5 * * * Request timed out.

6 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 58.147.0.51

7 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 58.147.0.46

8 34 ms 12 ms 11 ms 61.19.10.1

9 57 ms 12 ms 12 ms 202.47.253.148

10 41 ms 41 ms 41 ms 202.47.252.242

11 42 ms 41 ms 40 ms pc2-an-ats-int02.starhub.net.sg [203.118.3.213]

12 43 ms 43 ms 42 ms 203.117.6.210

13 43 ms 42 ms 42 ms thaivisa.com [203.174.84.82]

Trace complete.

No matter what site I tracert, it always times out at hop #5. Any ideas what/where that is?

Just what are the 10.xxx.xx.xxx IP addresses? The WhoIs doesn't really shed any light. Whatever/wherever it is it doesn't seem to be adding much of a time lag.

And, what is the 192.168.xxx.xx IP address? I thought those were reserved for local use within a private network?