Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2006
- Posts
- 2,752
- Location
- Yorkshire
Any current customers feel free to PM me your registered email address, looking to sign up and we get £25 credit each - can't grumble at freebies!
*** Official Hyperoptic Discussion Thread ***
- Thread starter ntg
- Start date
Sent
If you do single-connection speedtest.net tests to TNP/FAELIX/Boundless Networks/B4RN in Manchester or Structured Communications/Vodafone/Telxius in London, what sort of performance do you get?
Amusingly I always get REALLY weird throughput when testing to Coreix, it jumps all over the place. Could be their network. Probably not.
Sidenote, I use NetMeter Evo on my PCs to monitor bandwidth usage, it's handy (and portable). http://www.metal-machine.de/readerr...55995de88333a972eb14af5&action=tpmod;dl=get31
Amusingly I always get REALLY weird throughput when testing to Coreix, it jumps all over the place. Could be their network. Probably not.
Sidenote, I use NetMeter Evo on my PCs to monitor bandwidth usage, it's handy (and portable). http://www.metal-machine.de/readerr...55995de88333a972eb14af5&action=tpmod;dl=get31
I'll disagree with you in that I don't think installing more network drops around your house is the remit of an ISP - and I am pretty sure Openreach don't install telephone extensions for you either. You get to have a discussion about where the point that their service is presented on when it's installed, and they're quite accommodating. I wanted a bit of a weird installation (no surface-run cabling, and was prepared to run conduit myself) and Hyperoptic were more than reasonable in the way they drilled the communal areas and left me with the router and pulled out a bunch of cable, and then came back to check the terminations and turn the service on, all for no install charge.
The support can be hit-and-miss but like all things (annoyingly) they seem to be quite helpful on Twitter.
Yes the network can get contended, and they need to do something about the awful CPE hardware they provide, but a gigabit headline service that might dip to 600Mbps while costing £46 a month is just the nature of broadband services and I think there would have to be packet loss or majorly increased latency introduced for me to have an issue with that.
The support can be hit-and-miss but like all things (annoyingly) they seem to be quite helpful on Twitter.
Yes the network can get contended, and they need to do something about the awful CPE hardware they provide, but a gigabit headline service that might dip to 600Mbps while costing £46 a month is just the nature of broadband services and I think there would have to be packet loss or majorly increased latency introduced for me to have an issue with that.
I have to pretty much agree to disagree
My first ISP here in the UK was Origin Broadband (£25 for 67 Mbps Down / 17 Up + £1.49 for an IPv4 if you are unlucky enough to live in a CGNAT area). They did accommodate my Flat's multi-socket situation. Openreach initially pulled a cable to the main Socket - they took forever BTW. ISP then send staff to install "BT" sockets at 3 different rooms. I don't remember the exact price for the service, however it was not £200 like some people have reported that BT itself is charging. I was never in a situation were an ISP refused to install a second socket before, and I really can't understand why they would refuse to do it given that they have the staff, equipment and expertise to do the job (of course that charging a fee is acceptable and expected).
Are you talking about multiple telephone lines with a master socket per line, or multiple Cat5e data outlets wired back to a central point (or even telephone extensions I guess)? Openreach will install a socket per telephone line, but I've not heard of an ISP going any further - the majority of them won't even have any staff that can be sent do carry out that sort of work, as it's all dealt with by Openreach.
CGNAT is a bugger, and it's a PITA to have to pay £5 a month. For £5 a month I would expect a /29 block, but you get a /31, which is a bit sneaky. It's useless if you want to have multiple devices assigned their own IPs.
I've also have occasional geoip problems with the 188.210 IP I've received (I think they bought it from another provider who used them over Europe, because some sites locate me to Romania, some to Switzerland, a couple to Ukraine, I suspect because they're all using obsolete versions of the legacy maxmind geoip database).
Frustratingly, Hyperoptic has locked some of the most useful features of the Tilgin CPE behind their own root account and refuse to enable them to end users using the 'admin' account. I had to beg customer services to enable ICMP response for my line monitoring. (I know I can swap in my own router, and I have done in the past, that's not the point.)
Poor routing to London, Europe and US is my biggest bugbear at the moment. Even to fast UK2 or M247 servers, the actual throughput speed per connection is rubbish. I saw 4 megabits per second on a connection earlier!
The main issue with wanting more than one socket for a Hyperoptic install is that they would need to hook you up to another switch port, or install a switch just for your property. No way that's going to happen.
Your Hyperoptic ethernet wall socket is basically just a tieline back to your property's port on the building switch, with (hopefully!) BPDU guard enabled. That's why you need to run a router with PAT on your side, you can't just hook up multiple devices.
It's good that Hyperoptic are offering these speeds, but it's bad that it's costing so much that they can't roll out to entire cities. However that would quickly cause them to go bust, there's no way they could scale that quickly without paying third party contractors for install work. And I don't think they could afford sufficient backhaul, judging from the recent slowdown in speeds I've witnessed just in my area. GTT and Telia transit, which seems to be used for a lot of Europe and US routes, is also a pile of ****, tons of packet loss and massively slow throughput.
I have friends in Norway, Sweden, Spain, France and so on, all of whom chat about their massively fast fibre internet to the premises at super low cost. It's an enviable position most of Europe is in for high speed internet.
I've also have occasional geoip problems with the 188.210 IP I've received (I think they bought it from another provider who used them over Europe, because some sites locate me to Romania, some to Switzerland, a couple to Ukraine, I suspect because they're all using obsolete versions of the legacy maxmind geoip database).
Frustratingly, Hyperoptic has locked some of the most useful features of the Tilgin CPE behind their own root account and refuse to enable them to end users using the 'admin' account. I had to beg customer services to enable ICMP response for my line monitoring. (I know I can swap in my own router, and I have done in the past, that's not the point.)
Poor routing to London, Europe and US is my biggest bugbear at the moment. Even to fast UK2 or M247 servers, the actual throughput speed per connection is rubbish. I saw 4 megabits per second on a connection earlier!
The main issue with wanting more than one socket for a Hyperoptic install is that they would need to hook you up to another switch port, or install a switch just for your property. No way that's going to happen.
Your Hyperoptic ethernet wall socket is basically just a tieline back to your property's port on the building switch, with (hopefully!) BPDU guard enabled. That's why you need to run a router with PAT on your side, you can't just hook up multiple devices.
It's good that Hyperoptic are offering these speeds, but it's bad that it's costing so much that they can't roll out to entire cities. However that would quickly cause them to go bust, there's no way they could scale that quickly without paying third party contractors for install work. And I don't think they could afford sufficient backhaul, judging from the recent slowdown in speeds I've witnessed just in my area. GTT and Telia transit, which seems to be used for a lot of Europe and US routes, is also a pile of ****, tons of packet loss and massively slow throughput.
I have friends in Norway, Sweden, Spain, France and so on, all of whom chat about their massively fast fibre internet to the premises at super low cost. It's an enviable position most of Europe is in for high speed internet.
Last edited:
+1
Maybe there are better providers across the EU, but IMO, Hyper is by far the best ISP I've used in the UK. This is compared to Sky / BT / Virgin. With Hyper you get to avoid all the usual BS from other UK ISPs. Line Rental, Phone/Internet packages, that stupid "installation period" only for them to send you the router on the last day etc etc
Speed is the obvious main selling point, but stability has also been rock solid for me - with maybe two ~12hr outages over a 3+ year period. While not really using Customer Service for Tech Support, they did upgrade my 100/100 package to the 170/170 package, completely free of charge.
Only real downsides would be the two mentioned: CGNAT / £5 static IP and the router (which I immediately replaced with an R7000)
I just had to have an IP reallocation this evening because my Netflix traffic since Sunday was down to <3 mbit. Testing on PC, using v6 -- full speed (though connecting to US servers?!). v4 -- slow as a donkey (and still connecting to US servers).
Looks like Hyperoptic's traffic is being classified as American by Netflix for a stupid reason, perhaps due to GTT routing IPv4 traffic to Netflix via hops which are considered to be 'in' the US (Tata America)? wtf?!
IPv6 traffic to Netflix also gets routed by GTT to American-operated hops (NTT America), who are apparently marginally less **** at providing network capacity. It's still mindboggling.
VPNing to a London server: London, Belgian and Dutch servers offered by Netflix, as expected. One to watch out for if you start noticing Netflix unable to get above 480p...
GTT have been the common factor in so many speed issues I've seen on Hyperoptic. I'm convinced their network is the reason I can't get more than 200 Mbit/sec to any London VPN server (all on 1gig links).
Looks like Hyperoptic's traffic is being classified as American by Netflix for a stupid reason, perhaps due to GTT routing IPv4 traffic to Netflix via hops which are considered to be 'in' the US (Tata America)? wtf?!
IPv6 traffic to Netflix also gets routed by GTT to American-operated hops (NTT America), who are apparently marginally less **** at providing network capacity. It's still mindboggling.
VPNing to a London server: London, Belgian and Dutch servers offered by Netflix, as expected. One to watch out for if you start noticing Netflix unable to get above 480p...
GTT have been the common factor in so many speed issues I've seen on Hyperoptic. I'm convinced their network is the reason I can't get more than 200 Mbit/sec to any London VPN server (all on 1gig links).
Last edited:
Please report it to Hyperoptic support - only way we'll get them (or their transit providers) to acknowledge this issue and deal with it. I believe the core network is OK and it's ultimately the fault of their bandwidth providers, but it's frustrating either way.
As of a few days ago, my reports were escalated to the advanced technical support team but no word back yet. I even recorded a video showing the dramatic (thousand-fold) difference when using IPv4 and IPv6 on Netflix.
Incidentally using speedtest.net in both multi-connection and single-connection mode, what speeds do you see on PIA? In the past month or two I've noticed massive drops in throughput via both TCP and UDP on NordVPN, my other provider and connections through my private VPS in Amsterdam. Most VPN servers now seem unable to deliver more than 100-200 mbps tops, frequently less. I'm convinced it's the upstream peering or routing, because even HTTP test downloads crawl where they should be screaming along. Previously I'd get about 80% of my line speed to a Manchester server... Other VPN providers can often be even slower, 50-90 mbps speeds.
I usually test in single-thread mode on speedtest.net as it replicates VPN conditions. For London servers, Vodafone London or Structured Communications; when using Manchester VPNs, either TNP, FAELIX, B4RN or BT Lancashire (Vodafone usually also gives full possible speeds, their network seems quick).
As of a few days ago, my reports were escalated to the advanced technical support team but no word back yet. I even recorded a video showing the dramatic (thousand-fold) difference when using IPv4 and IPv6 on Netflix.
Incidentally using speedtest.net in both multi-connection and single-connection mode, what speeds do you see on PIA? In the past month or two I've noticed massive drops in throughput via both TCP and UDP on NordVPN, my other provider and connections through my private VPS in Amsterdam. Most VPN servers now seem unable to deliver more than 100-200 mbps tops, frequently less. I'm convinced it's the upstream peering or routing, because even HTTP test downloads crawl where they should be screaming along. Previously I'd get about 80% of my line speed to a Manchester server... Other VPN providers can often be even slower, 50-90 mbps speeds.
I usually test in single-thread mode on speedtest.net as it replicates VPN conditions. For London servers, Vodafone London or Structured Communications; when using Manchester VPNs, either TNP, FAELIX, B4RN or BT Lancashire (Vodafone usually also gives full possible speeds, their network seems quick).