The borough of Kensington of all places still doesn’t have FTTC AFAIK as they didn’t want the streets dug up and another ‘ugly green box’ on the street. Or a least that was the case a few years so.
Interwebs outside the UK
- Thread starter ThatsWhatSheSaid
- Start date
It's been broadly resolved now, but originally they wanted Openreach to create some sort of special underground DSLAM just for them, that would somehow be installed where it's possible to dig down 8ft, have flexible cables so that it can pop out of the ground to be worked on, and not flood when it rained a lot.
https://www.theregister.com/2012/05/31/kensington_and_chelsea_bt_cabinets/
https://www.theregister.com/2012/05/31/kensington_and_chelsea_bt_cabinets/
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
Yeah, I find it amusing on a forum that's supposed to be for geeks / techies / ethusiasts / whatever... there are quite a few who are perfectly happy stagnating with "enough". Great for them. I vividly remember my teenage years in a quiet village with not much more than my computer and a 56k modem, dreaming of a 512kbit connection. Short sighted back then maybe, but I never dreamed of getting my own 10Gbit connection to play with. Working to get the most out of it makes me feel like a kid again.
Upload is very important to what I do... but I "need" maybe a 100/100 connection, yet that would be quite limiting a little too often. A 1000/1000 connection is a good sweet spot. A 10000/10000 connection means I can do more.
I've liked using pfSense at home, it's served me well for years. Will be interesting to see & I'll report back.
TNSR sounds very interesting, but I'll miss the pretty wGUI.
On the contrary. I can post the entire e-mail conversation. What package do you actually have?
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
L
1. As mentioned earlier in thread, more than once, the PC I was testing with has a 5Gbit NIC, I am waiting on other devices to arrive to test at full 10Gbit speeds.
2. I mentioned the mountain villages do not have access yet. The full 10Gbit option appears to be available to a little over 30% of households at the moment. I wouldn't consider that "very small". It will exceed 60% by 2025.
3. Another ~30% or more who have access to the FTTC network can request to have an FTTP cable pulled and jump on this package. These figures aren't included in their quoted 30% because these lines aren't active FTTP connections, these customers likely don't know they can do this or don't care as it's already fast enough.
4. It's a GPON network, it's not designed for all users to use full 10Gbit simultaneously. Nearly every home provider has some element of contention, otherwise home internet connections would be prohibitively expensive. I'm not sure why you bring this up as an "issue"... I'm not claiming to have a 10Gbit leased line for £30/month.
5. The packages aren't identically priced, that's an introductory offer for new subscriptions only and for the first 12 months. There is now only a small price difference though. The "big" FTTP package used to be a lot more expensive. It states this clearly on the website & customer services are keen to point that out, even if you're not placing an order.
6. Then there are the other providers you don't know about... like interGGA and UPC Cablecom... these guys (UPC especially) have a good network coverage and offer gigabit speeds in the regions Swisscom doesn't
The saturation of options to get a 1Gbit+ home connection in Switzerland is very high.
I've linked this before. At one point the UK was leading the charge in Full Fibre and was on track to have had it across most of the country decades ago. Until Thatcher decided competition was good. How Thatcher killed the UK's superfast broadband before it even existed | TechRadar
I have a 940/940 connection with 2ms latency to London PoP's.
This is even excessive for me as it's very rare for me to download a large file where it's 100GB+ where I'll see a significant difference in speed. I have no fantasy on having faster speeds until it becomes necessary where the file sizes increase.
So I'm not sure what you mean when you say 'there are quite a few who are perfectly happy stagnating with "enough". Great for them.', why would I obsess over something that has no benefit to me at all.
I understand everyone has a different use case, but not everyone needs that sort of speed. I'm always more concerned over latency/packetloss & drops which I never experience nowadays with FTTP.
To put the UK rollout in perspective, Openreach have 6 million premises that can now order FTTP from them, Switzerland has 3.9m households.
Headline speeds make good news stories, and I have loads of things I can be critical of Openreach for, but to build at the sustained level to be delivering these numbers is very impressive.
Headline speeds make good news stories, and I have loads of things I can be critical of Openreach for, but to build at the sustained level to be delivering these numbers is very impressive.
Is anyone suggesting that we stagnate?
I'm a game developer, and rely heavily on my connection. The 900/150 ish service I get is great, but I wouldn't notice the difference at half or even a third of that, in actual usage. The limiting factor is other services still. Like when I had 1gb symmetric in Hong Kong 10 years ago.....that had the rather large caveat that the international links were saturated so while you could get 1gb anywhere within HK, going outside you were frequently down to single mb speeds at busy times.
I wish an internet connection could make me feel like a kid again
I'm not happily stagnating with "enough" given that I'm stuck with ~24Mbps FTTC, and 3 children who like to game as well as myself (game updates etc are therefore an absolute nightmare despite implementing "tricks" like a local lancache).
As soon as 150Mbps/500Mbps/1000Mbps is available in my area, then I will certainly be taking up the option (although probably 500Mbps will be "enough" for now).
For 99% of home users there is no need for 10Gbps.
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
Finally got my main desktop setup... the provider says to expect an actual throughput of 8Gbit... so I'm happy with the results 
Battle.net is managing some healthy speed:
Battle.net is managing some healthy speed:
Last edited:
How are you testing? Speedtest app or through the browser? I'd have thought the latter improbable verging on impossible, but just asking. This is under Windows I assume? Be interesting to see the same test under Linux (eg https://speedtest.net/apps/cli ).
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
That's with speedtest app... browser was about 6 down and 7.8 up
Ubuntu CLI is the worst performing so far... perhaps relating to the emulation of VMWare Workstation?
Ubuntu CLI is the worst performing so far... perhaps relating to the emulation of VMWare Workstation?
That's with speedtest app... browser was about 6 down and 7.8 up
Ubuntu CLI is the worst performing so far... perhaps relating to the emulation of VMWare Workstation?
Yeah absolutely, you'd need to reboot bare-metal (eg a live USB). Debian and RHEL/CentOS/Rocky/Alma tend to be best for network throughput out of the box. I was just wondering how much variance you'd see with the (usually superior) Linux drivers and stack.
VMWare won't tell you much because you're still relying on the (Windows?) host network stack + VMWare's network stack. Windows networking is notoriously bad, especially for 10G upwards. I was wondering whether you'd see closer to the full throughput under *nix (NVMe storage or RAM disk notwithstanding). Getting >4Gbps is still impressive for VMWare, mind you!
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
When I get the time, I'll have a poke at it
Just been re-installing OS on new SSD and decided to install BF2042:
Bonkers haha... under 2 minutes to install BF2042 from scratch.
Just been re-installing OS on new SSD and decided to install BF2042:
Bonkers haha... under 2 minutes to install BF2042 from scratch.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
A lot of people on these forums would never "need" that kind of speed. Most can get away with 80/20. It's a nice thing to have but when you think of it logically it then requires you to spend money to get your inside network to match the external speeds anyway. To get that sort of speeds with full coverage will be difficult for a lot of people on here.
60x18TB = 1.08 petabytes
I won't ask what you are doing with all of that in the house.
60x18TB = 1.08 petabytes
I won't ask what you are doing with all of that in the house.
Whatever they want!
(Edit: Useable size won't be that once it's in a RAID array, either - still fab though!).It's no different to spending over a grand on a graphics card and multiple grands on a 'gaming rig'. Some of us prefer to build workstations and servers, and 10Gb would be mighty nice to run it on! I, for one, am unashamedly jelly.
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
There were times when it was the same for 100 or 1000 network... I remember having to wait to upgrade to 1000 because I couldn't afford it.
Apparently some stock issues... today they came back to me with a favourable offer to upgrade to 20TB drives
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2021
- Posts
- 156
- Location
- Geneva
Whatever they want!
It's no different to spending over a grand on a graphics card and multiple grands on a 'gaming rig'. Some of us prefer to build workstations and servers, and 10Gb would be mighty nice to run it on! I, for one, am unashamedly jelly.
I'm totally going to raid-0 it, if only for the screenshot...