Performance in German Vodafone 3G network
in [Linux Networking]
|
Prev: Extended deadline (15 July 2010): CACS Singapore [EI Compendex,ISTP,IEEE Xplore]
Next: ARP cache size increase: how to find if this is necessary?
From: Marc Haber on 29 May 2010 10:51 Günther Schwarz <strap(a)gmx.de> wrote: >I tried the office: no way, but that is all steel and concrete. Right now >I'm sitting outside an Italian bar right in the middle of a big >metropolian area. Throughput is in the kb range. OK for nntp, but not for >much else. What kind of Hardware? Are you sure that you're connected via UMTS? How is the latency to a pingable host on the Internet? GrüÃe Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
From: Günther Schwarz on 29 May 2010 12:37 Marc Haber wrote: > Günther Schwarz <strap(a)gmx.de> wrote: >>I tried the office: no way, but that is all steel and concrete. Right >>now I'm sitting outside an Italian bar right in the middle of a big >>metropolian area. Throughput is in the kb range. OK for nntp, but not >>for much else. > > What kind of Hardware? SAMSUNG SGH-Z630 connected via USB or Bluetooth to a Thinkpad X300. I have some USB stick from ZTE (?) also but do not know how to set this up with Debian. > Are you sure that you're connected via UMTS? How can I tell? The phone manages the connection to the network. It's display shows the symbol for HSDPA and almost maximal signal strength. > How is the latency to a pingable host on the Internet? Today it works better with 100-300 kb/s for a ssh copy from a reliable host with good bandwith. Results for a ping: $ ping www.heise.de PING www.heise.de (193.99.144.85) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=1 ttl=245 time=447 ms 64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=2 ttl=245 time=383 ms 64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=3 ttl=245 time=400 ms ^C64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=4 ttl=245 time=395 ms --- www.heise.de ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3012ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 383.639/406.789/447.562/24.315 ms Just for comparison the results for my landline connection (access to the router via WLAN): Ping times are reduced by a factor of ten and speed is in the range where HSDPA claims to be (though still less than what I pay my telco for). Günther
From: Marc Haber on 30 May 2010 04:25 Günther Schwarz <strap(a)gmx.de> wrote: >Marc Haber wrote: >> Günther Schwarz <strap(a)gmx.de> wrote: >>>I tried the office: no way, but that is all steel and concrete. Right >>>now I'm sitting outside an Italian bar right in the middle of a big >>>metropolian area. Throughput is in the kb range. OK for nntp, but not >>>for much else. >> >> What kind of Hardware? > >SAMSUNG SGH-Z630 connected via USB or Bluetooth to a Thinkpad X300. I >have some USB stick from ZTE (?) also but do not know how to set this up >with Debian. Bluetooth is too slow for UMTS speeds. Try UMTS or a directly connected device. Sorry, I canno comment on the ZTE device. >> Are you sure that you're connected via UMTS? > >How can I tell? The phone manages the connection to the network. It's >display shows the symbol for HSDPA and almost maximal signal strength. That sounds good. >> How is the latency to a pingable host on the Internet? > >Today it works better with 100-300 kb/s for a ssh copy from a reliable >host with good bandwith. Results for a ping: > >$ ping www.heise.de >PING www.heise.de (193.99.144.85) 56(84) bytes of data. >64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=1 ttl=245 time=447 ms >64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=2 ttl=245 time=383 ms >64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=3 ttl=245 time=400 ms >^C64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=4 ttl=245 time=395 >ms That's a typical EDGE latency. HSDPA should be in the 100 ms range. >Ping times are reduced by a factor of ten and speed is in the range where >HSDPA claims to be (though still less than what I pay my telco for). It's a common misconception that you pay your telco for 16 Mbit just because the product you bought contains the string 16000. Read the fine print and get acquainted with DSL physics, which generally ignores marketing.. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
From: Günther Schwarz on 30 May 2010 16:58 Marc Haber wrote: > Günther Schwarz <strap(a)gmx.de> wrote: >>Today it works better with 100-300 kb/s for a ssh copy from a reliable >>host with good bandwith. Results for a ping: >> >>$ ping www.heise.de >>PING www.heise.de (193.99.144.85) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from >>www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=1 ttl=245 time=447 ms 64 bytes >>from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=2 ttl=245 time=383 ms 64 >>bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=3 ttl=245 time=400 ms >>^C64 bytes from www.heise.de (193.99.144.85): icmp_seq=4 ttl=245 >>time=395 ms > > That's a typical EDGE latency. HSDPA should be in the 100 ms range. Performance is indeed comparable to another SIM-card on a location where no UMTS is available. So is Samsung to blame for the invention of cheating electronics? ;-) >>Ping times are reduced by a factor of ten and speed is in the range >>where HSDPA claims to be (though still less than what I pay my telco >>for). > > It's a common misconception that you pay your telco for 16 Mbit just > because the product you bought contains the string 16000. Read the fine > print and get acquainted with DSL physics, which generally ignores > marketing.. That is true an well said. But I still do not get what the router appliance tells me about the setup of the line. This gets OT. As far as networking is concerned appliances take over for the sake of convenience, but less control is the price one has to pay for that. Günther
From: Lew Pitcher on 30 May 2010 18:41
Warning: Lew Pitcher, who posts to this newsgroup, is a domain thief. Read the full story at http://www.lewpitcher.ca |