True Adsl Limitations

[Insight]

Using True from home all day yesterday I noticed the below problems. The first one is severe enough to have me looking for another SP.

1. The "Net Nanny" style proxy server - it simply can't handle the amount of traffic being put through it. Doesn't matter if you try and use an alternative proxy stated in your browser settings; the one used by True appears to have some packet-sniffing technology behind it that will redirect any HTTP traffic, regardless of what port it originates from.

As a result, when trying to browse any website, the browser will sit there for years, "connecting" to the web server but not displaying anything. However POP3, SMTP and all other traffic run fine at respectable speeds while this is happening. As the majority of internet activity is web browsing for most users, this is one huge limitation.

2. Limiting BitTorrent - using similar packet-sniffing technology to the above, BitTorrent transfers on any port have now been severly restricted. Clamping down on such file transfer/sharing tools like this, combined with the above, removes the purpose of having a high-speed line almost completely.

It's all getting a bit frustrating...

[marquess]

I had been having some problems lately with the True 59 server, I was unable to connect to a server on any website that required it. Fortunately they have now given me a new password and as such I appear to have gotten round the problem. When making my complaints, one woman at True said that they were upgrading their servers, so as to make P2P easier. I don't know how much truth there is in this, by it is supposed to be done by the end of the month. I agree with the orginal poster, in that if downloading is restricted there is really little point of having a high speed connexion.

[Firefoxx]

If you want to use an alternate proxy, use one that has a port other than 80. True's proxy method is to redirect all port 80 traffic to its proxy (thus, no need to put in any configuration on the client). So if you use a port 80 proxy, it's still going through True. An alternative is to get a more expensive package, AFAIK the more expensive the package, the less restrictive the rules. I can get into nearly all "smut" sites without using a proxy. There are also ways fool the proxy.

I don't completely agree with "no p2p=no need for broadband". Broadband has other uses:

1. No dialup costs, no use of a dedicated line.

2. Quick (remember your old 56k's connection song?) connections.

3. Low pings (ie for games and telephony)

4. Speed in other protocols (messaging, nntp, ftp, socks, VPN, etc.etc)

[The Coder]

3. Low pings (ie for games and telephony)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I find TRUE's ping is so poor that internet gaming is often unplayable. Ping ranges day to day between 300-900ms to game servers in the USA. Packet loss also varies and can be very high. I have noticed people who connect up from Japan and Europe get much more playable ping and no packet loss at all.

Think about a 400ms ping. It means you are not shooting at someone, but rather must predict where they might be 0.4 seconds in the future and shoot at that spot. Likewise, other players have a 0.4 second window to see you and kill you before you even know they are there.

I also have noticed speed bumps on ftp and POP3 downloads that I believe are due to TRUE. And like the OP said, when http grinds to a halt which happens annoyingly often, other things still work at normal speed, even https.

[Insight]

If you want to use an alternate proxy, use one that has a port other than 80.  True's proxy method is to redirect all port 80 traffic to its proxy (thus, no need to put in any configuration on the client).  So if you use a port 80 proxy, it's still going through True.  An alternative is to get a more expensive package, AFAIK the more expensive the package, the less restrictive the rules.  I can get into nearly all "smut" sites without using a proxy.  There are also ways fool the proxy.

I don't completely agree with "no p2p=no need for broadband".  Broadband has other uses:

1. No dialup costs, no use of a dedicated line.

2. Quick (remember your old 56k's connection song?) connections.

3. Low pings (ie for games and telephony)

4. Speed in other protocols (messaging, nntp, ftp, socks, VPN, etc.etc)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tried using an alternative port but no joy, which lead me on to believe they must use packet sniffing. If you know of a tried and tested way to get around this, please PM me - would be much appreciated.

There's another reason the proxy issue is turning into a massive bind for me - I use Frontpage Server Extensions over HTTP to control the files of a web server remotely. These fall on their arse when running through a proxy, meaning that if the web server isn't on the same LAN as me, I have to find other means of modifying a web servers' content.

I will admit that using the VPN into the office using True is just like sitting at my desk however.

[autonomous_unit]

Tried using an alternative port but no joy, which lead me on to believe they must use packet sniffing. If you know of a tried and tested way to get around this, please PM me - would be much appreciated.

There's another reason the proxy issue is turning into a massive bind for me - I use Frontpage Server Extensions over HTTP to control the files of a web server remotely. These fall on their arse when running through a proxy, meaning that if the web server isn't on the same LAN as me, I have to find other means of modifying a web servers' content.

Can Frontpage use HTTPS connections? The True proxy should leave HTTPS connections alone because SSL will not work with a man-in-the-middle. Also, maybe there is such thing as an HTTPS proxy to use SSL from client to proxy for regular non-HTTPS web requests?

The other solution, also needing remote support, is to use a VPN of some to connect your client to the proxy network, so that all the traffic is encrypted and True cannot interfere. I do something like this by doing simple port-forwarding to a proxy via SSH... a habit I started to get some compression over GPRS but it usually works nicely over True ADSL too.

But things definitely seem to be changing rapidly with True right now, so it is anybody's guess as to how it will end up in a month or two.

[AsiaWolfie]

but if you have a TOT line, what ADSL alternatives do you have to replace TRUE ?

[Insight]

Can Frontpage use HTTPS connections?  The True proxy should leave HTTPS connections alone because SSL will not work with a man-in-the-middle. Also, maybe there is such thing as an HTTPS proxy to use SSL from client to proxy for regular non-HTTPS web requests?

It can, will try it in the future. Cheers for the advice.

The other solution, also needing remote support, is to use a VPN of some to connect your client to the proxy network, so that all the traffic is encrypted and True cannot interfere. I do something like this by doing simple port-forwarding to a proxy via SSH... a habit I started to get some compression over GPRS but it usually works nicely over True ADSL too.

But things definitely seem to be changing rapidly with True right now, so it is anybody's guess as to how it will end up in a month or two.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Was thinking of doing something similar; setting up a proxy in the office, then rediverting all my web traffic through that. Will then inherit all the problems with our office ISP (Pacific Internet), but that's nothing on a scale compared to True recently.

When you say "changing rapidly", anything else I may of missed? I know that Singapore ISP's also had a similar proxy configurations to restrict access, but from what I heard they ended up scrapping them owing to traffic problems- That's a densely populated island, not an entire country...

[Firefoxx]

Sorry, I was actually thinking about local servers when I was mentioning low pings (ie playing Counterstrike on a local server). I doubt that you'll be able to get anything much lower than 300ms, from any ISP here. That's why most people play on Japanese/Korean servers if there are no local servers.

As for proxies, the comment I mentioned earlier is what I always did before, and it always worked before (and port 80 did not work). Perhaps True has changed their setup.

Again, you might consider changing your package to the "SME" package. I can't say for certain, but I think it's not nearly as bad as the home package, and it's not all that expensive (compared to what True used to charge for ADSL a couple of years ago before the "real" unlimited packages... around 20k/month for 512k..). Should wait for someone who's using the SME package to confirm this and give pricing.

[Insight]

Agreed on the ping times outside the country, but latency isn't that much of an issue though really.

One thing I have noticed with my True service is packets seem to arrive in bursts. A total guess here, but it's almost as if the way they share the 512kbs+ amongst x connected clients is by some time sharing method - giving each connected client complete access to the full bandwidth for x milliseconds before moving on to the next one. Don't suppose anybody could clarify...

[monty]

Ping times of less then 300ms to the US are simply impossible due to the distance!

The US of A is pretty much on the opposite part of the globe from Thailand

To me it seems that these multi megabit packages are just a marketing hype. Thailand simply does not have the international bandwidth available to give each broadband user his full speed...

I'm using Ji-net's 256/128 adsl package, which is not lightning fast but at least they can give the speed what they claim (and sell to you!)

My ping times to US servers are consistently between 300 and 400ms, to slow for gaming but hardly noticable when using VOIP.

Huge improvement over the IPSTAR system I was using before though

[autonomous_unit]

...

When you say "changing rapidly", anything else I may of missed? I know that Singapore ISP's also had a similar proxy configurations to restrict access, but from what I heard they ended up scrapping them owing to traffic problems- That's a densely populated island, not an entire country...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I mean that every day seems to bring a new and different performance change. For example, the sudden "bittorrent traffic shaping" complaints. For plain old ssh connectivity to the US and basic traceroute/ping stats, I have seen drastic fluctuations from day to day. Somebody is clearly monkeying within the True network and not always for the better!

Yesterday I was getting consistent 4-5 second pings to the US (Los Angeles) all day and now I am getting 240 ms again.

...

To me it seems that these multi megabit packages are just a marketing hype. Thailand simply does not have the international bandwidth available to give each broadband user his full speed...

I'm using Ji-net's 256/128 adsl package, which is not lightning fast but at least they can give the speed what they claim (and sell to you!)

My ping times to US servers are consistently between 300 and 400ms, to slow for gaming but hardly noticable when using VOIP.

Huge improvement over the IPSTAR system I was using before though 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would mostly agree. What is silly is that they don't offer more symmetric services. I'd much rather have 512/512 or 768/768 than some imaginary number of downstream megabits that cost more just to get the 512 upstream. I _have_ seen full 512 Kb/s upstream to the US on a regular basis. I have to switch to the "true2m" login to get VOIP to work well enough.

[The Coder]

One thing I have noticed with my True service is packets seem to arrive in bursts. A total guess here, but it's almost as if the way they share the 512kbs+ amongst x connected clients is by some time sharing method - giving each connected client complete access to the full bandwidth for x milliseconds before moving on to the next one. Don't suppose anybody could clarify...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sums up EXACTLY my observations I notice at times too. When that algorithm kicks in, I notice it because gaming is impossible. Bunch of stuff happens, then frozen for a time, bunch of stuff happens, then frozen for a time, so on and so forth.

But I do contend ping to the USA can and dare I say should be better. For starters, they should have a direct link to the US, eliminating all the unnecessary intermediate hops through other countries.

[melus]

To me it seems that these multi megabit packages are just a marketing hype. Thailand simply does not have the international bandwidth available to give each broadband user his full speed...

Solution:

I'd much rather have 512/512 or 768/768 than some imaginary number of downstream megabits that cost more just to get the 512 upstream.

When they first started this broadband marketing campaign offering megabit connections, True (then Asianet) had a booth set up at Fortune IT Mall with a computer connected at 768/768. The speed was very stable and fast. I had the 2.5Mbps/512Kbps package already, but it wasn't nearly as fast as theirs. I asked them why they couldn't just offer the 768/768 speed. Their answer, "Ohh, no, this is the business package." Welcome to Thailand.

[Firefoxx]

Actually, the uneven download and upload speeds are typical all over the world. It's "asymmetric" digital subscriber line (ADSL), vs "symmetric" digital subscriber line (SDSL). The reasoning behind this (and True's not to blame, nearly every ISP in the world does this) is that the typical consumer will download a whole lot more than upload. There's really no real "networking" reason behind this, other than that that's the way ADSL (and cable) were made, asymmetrically.

Now why do corporate connections have symmetric speeds? That's because they're expected to upload a lot, usually by having some kind of server (mail, VPN, web, etc. etc.) at their office. Thus, most will require more upload bandwidth than the average Joe downloading porn.

As to the stability of the connection, that's really up to how True sets it up. It's not related to whether it's symmetric or not, a normal consumer ADSL connection can be lighting fast... it just depends on the ISP and how the ISP configures their network.

Of course, with your "consumer" connection, you're sharing a block of bandwidth (say 2.5mbit/s) with 49 other people (all at 2.5mbit/sec) because of a 50:1 contention ratio. So, unless no one else is using the bandwidth, you're not going to get great speeds (consider that if just 5 people, 10% of the total, were using bittorrent to download at 512kbit/s, 1/5th of the max speed, 24/7, the bandwidth would be all used up).

With an expensive corporate connection, the contention ratio would be around 10:1 (or for a dedicated line, 1:1, really expensive) and since many corporations don't use a lot of bandwidth (they don't do P2P), there is bandwidth to spare.