How so? I didn't notice any difference from when our server was taken offline (because I didn't have a 10G pipe).
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 2:42 PM <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > If you host a speedtest server, most of this goes away. > > *From:* Ken Hohhof > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 5, 2019 6:07 PM > *To:* 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Priority on Speedtest.net > > > Sounds like an IT guy justifying his paycheck. Why do you need me? I > call our ISP every morning and bitch about the speed. Right after the > rooster crows to make the sun come up. Without me and the rooster, the > Internet would be slow and the sun wouldn’t rise. > > > > Either that or an IT guy who spends all day with people bitching at him, > so his only joy is bitching at you. > > > > I am somehow reminded of yesterday on WGN radio they were talking about > auto responders and people who don’t realize they are arguing with an auto > responder, and how people will call WGN to bitch about something and the > auto responder would thank them for liking WGN and offer to send them an > autographed photo. > > > > > > *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On Behalf Of *Nate Burke > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 5, 2019 10:02 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Priority on Speedtest.net > > > > It is tempting. This is also the IT Guy who told me "I can definitely > tell how much faster my LAN is since I've changed from Cat5e to Cat6 > cables." > > On 11/5/2019 9:47 AM, Craig Schmaderer wrote: > > Nate, you should route his call into a special phone tree that he can not > escape out of. lol > > > > *From:* AF mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com *On Behalf Of *Nate Burke > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 5, 2019 9:43 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group mailto:af@af.afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Priority on Speedtest.net > > > > I think it would be a good tool to have in the toolbox, but maybe > selectively applied. > > We have one business customer (Broadband), every morning the "IT guy" will > run a speedtest, and call in if it's not the 40mb he expects. He don't > bother to look at any of his other network traffic, any downloads that are > going on, if there are actually any problems. He only cares what speedtest > shows, and if his screen doesn't show 40mb, then he's calling. Every time, > !EVERY TIME!, it's because his network traffic is using the rest of the > connection, which we explain to him EVERY TIME, but this has been his > operating procedure for the last 3 years. "Hey guys, speeds are slow this > morning, you need to check it and fix it." > > On 11/5/2019 9:30 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > If you sell by speed tiers, I think speedtest.net can actually be your > friend, and you don’t want to doctor the results. If the guy on a 10 Mbps > plan is complaining his Internet is slow because he can’t watch 5 HD > streams simultaneously, it helps to show him “you’re getting what you’re > paying for”. Then you can maybe upsell him to a higher speed tier. > > > > If he’s downloading a 150 GB Xbox game, your tech support is going to have > to educate him about restricting the hours that game consoles can do > downloads. Making speedtest.net results look better isn’t going to avoid > that, in fact it may make that more difficult. The effort might be better > spent finding a way to deprioritize software downloads, so people can watch > video or pay games while new games are downloading. > > > > If you sell best effort “up to” speeds, the answer may be different. > > > > > > *From:* AF mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com *On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:46 AM > *To:* af@af.afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Priority on Speedtest.net > > > > If I'm being honest, it's partly a failure on the sales end to manage > expectations on wireless ("up to 50mbps" etc), and partly a failure of tech > support to manage the conversation. IMO they need to not let the customer > focus on a speed test result and instead prompt them to talk about what > their actual problems are. Whether the speed test says 10 meg or 50 meg has > no bearing on the fact that you suck of Call of Duty or that your VPN to > the office doesn't want to connect this morning. > > I think the idea is just make the speed test show what they want to see > and then we can move the conversation forward. It strikes me as a viable > but lazy and dishonest solution. I'm trying hard to be open minded. > > I appreciate all the thoughts on this. Thanks everyone. > > > > On 11/5/2019 8:01 AM, Daniel White wrote: > > I've worked extensively with Sandvine and Saisei and this is a topic that > always comes up since it is fairly easy to implement via those appliances > (and easier to implement across multiple speed testing sites). > > I don't see it as evil on a best effort connection. Customers typically > are not likely to understand what the results mean and the only congestion > it masks is on your network (which you should be aware of anyways). You > can chalk it up to reasonable network management practices, as the intent > is to show what your connection is capable of vs. what is available to you > at that moment. Furthermore, unless the speedtest server is on your > network, sometimes the issue is on the net or with the server so further > impacting the results by giving the testing a low availability on your > network is further giving your customers the wrong impression of your > actual delivery. > > By implementing something though - how many support tickets are you > potentially reducing? How about customer churn? If these are issues for > you is it because you have actual congestion on your network? Is hacking > the response worthwhile from a technical effort - and if your customers > found out about it is it worthwhile from a PR standpoint? > > I usually end up somewhere in the it's cool to tinker with but of limited > value in the real world. The PR fallout if your competition finds out and > uses it against you is probably more damaging. > > My 2 cents. > > > > [image: photograph] > > > *Daniel White*Co-Founder & Managing Director of Operations > > *phone:* +1 (702) 470-2766 > *direct:* +1 (702) 470-2770 > > Adam Moffett wrote on 11/4/19 12:32: > > > > I can set a higher priority DSCP value on speedtest.net traffic. I tested > this on one SM and it works great. On a busy AP at 9:30pm I was getting > speedtest results from 12-20mbps. I set the speedtest traffic to DSCP 26 > and enable a "medium" priority channel and now it's 34mbps every single > time without fail (and at my data rate, frame size, etc that's all I could > ever hope for). > > The question is: Would this be evil? > > The feeling is that for some customers there's nothing actually wrong > except they run speedtest.net simultaneously as their XBox downloads a > game and then call to report "slow" speeds. The feeling is that it would > be easier to just let them see a bigger speed test number than to educate > them (and some will always refuse to be educated). > > The evil part is that it would mask an actual congestion problem. > > There's also a notion being tossed around the office that our competitors > are already doing this. I have no idea if they actually are, and I'm also > not sure if I care what they're doing. > > -Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
