Microwave setup, rural area. business connection

[sst3ph3nss]

Hi all, just thought id post about my internet, I've had this for 3 years now

I had to pay for the tower to be built

Its a 40 meter Tower with a microwave dish on it.

It has line of sight to a base station owned by the ISP

 https://www.yurika.com.au/capabilities/telecoms/

the base station is 19km away.

i have a 1Gbps/1Gbps connection.

it is uncontested and has dedicated access to Tier 1 National Internet backbone .

also unlimited data.

Business connection

I live in a rural area hence the setup.

On other speedtest apps i normally score over 900/900, but here im scoring only 300's on my upload.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2023 by CA3LE
font color

[CA3LE]

Duuuuuuude!  Nice.  

 

I'd really like to get you testing on my new version.  You're just the kind of extreme case I'm looking for! 

 

Please visit the following topic and vote on it, the members who interact with that topic are invited to beta test.

Somehow @xs1's screenshot automatically became the thumbnail for that topic.  "And I mean NEW!" -- and then it shows a screenshot from 2001.  -- oh well, I like it like that now.  Everything happens for a reason.

 

I'll explain all the details about the difference between the current release version and new version in the documentation.  I imagine you'll get symmetrical results with the new method but we'll have to test and see.

[sst3ph3nss]

1 hour ago, CA3LE said:

Duuuuuuude!  Nice.  

 

I'd really like to get you testing on my new version.  You're just the kind of extreme case I'm looking for! 

 

Please visit the following topic and vote on it, the members who interact with that topic are invited to beta test.

Somehow @xs1's screenshot automatically became the thumbnail for that topic.  "And I mean NEW!" -- and then it shows a screenshot from 2001.  -- oh well, I like it like that now.  Everything happens for a reason.

 

I'll explain all the details about the difference between the current release version and new version in the documentation.  I imagine you'll get symmetrical results with the new method but we'll have to test and see.

sounds great, i'd love to see the symmetrical numbers working better. My up is normally always faster than my down

[sst3ph3nss]

On 4/8/2023 at 8:11 PM, sst3ph3nss said:

I'll explain all the details about the difference between the current release version and new version in the documentation.  I imagine you'll get symmetrical results with the new method but we'll have to test and see.

Ca3le, could you explain why we don't get the correct upload speeds here? and could you tell us about the current version v the new version and when will we be able to test it please.

[CA3LE]

Your upload speed isn't being reported incorrectly.  The reason you can't pull your full speed has to do with a few things.

 

First, TestMy.net's upload test you're currently using forces a stream of data.  You're essentially uploading a single (faux) file.  Your connection may have a lot more speed available but it can't be measured because of the way the data is being sent.  

 

If you run multiple upload tests at the same time you should be able to aggregate them and come up with a higher number.  If your connection was truly limited you'd still see ~300 Mbps but spread out across all of the simultaneous tests, instead of a higher aggregate number.

 

Obviously that's extremely inconvenient.  The new version does this for you, basically aggregating a bunch of threads into one result.

 

Second, the max test size on that method is still only 100 MB.  The method itself seems to have its limitations (I may find a solution for this one day, I keep trying).  The majority of users don't have upload speed anywhere near yours, you're currently an edge case.  But edge cases tend to become the norm with time.   If the test completes too quickly your connection may not have enough time to ramp up.  You can help this a bit by using the "SmarTest" option, where TMN cycles through until it lands on the largest size or by quickly re-testing after results hit.

 

The new test has no maximum size limits and slices the test data into 100 chunks, which then simultaneously upload or download up to the maximum your device, browser, network and ISP can handle.  It also graphs your speed and latency while the test is taking place and forces a ramp up period.

 

I think in cases like yours, comparing the two tests will give you a much better perspective.  But I don't think it replaces the current upload test completely.  It's the most valid real-world upload test on the internet.  Streamers have shown us many times, other speed tests don't tell you what you need to know.  

 

I'm trying very hard to get that single thread upload test into the new system, with graphs.  It's extremely difficult, not even past the stage of working it out in my head yet.  In development I've tried different methods to try to achieve the same thing and they failed.  The linear download test was no problem.  

 

There are people who get higher speed on the same test using the same servers as you.  But a lot of things need to be right for that to happen.  The fact that it happens shows that there's room for improvement and that the test itself is not the limiting factor.  ISPs have the ability to shape our connections and make single thread performance weak.  Poor single thread performance can be masked with more threads.  You may be able to pull faster speed when more simultaneous connections occur but what about when you want to stream or upload a single file?  My aim is to help people understand the difference and to make sure ISPs do not under deliver single thread performance.  

 

What good is a 1000 Mbps connection if the single thread performance is limited to 100 Mbps (for example)?  Sure, if you have 10 devices connected and they're all uploading... theoretically you have 1000 Mbps.  But I personally don't see this as 1000 Mbps.  That's a 100 Mbps connection that can do 10 devices at full speed... since none of the clients can EVER actually see 1000 Mbps.  This "made up" scenario is actually a real thing!  Other speed tests tell those users lies.  I want connections without traffic shaping that performs on all levels and you all should too.

 

To verify TMN upload results go upload a 100 MB file somewhere and time it, I'll bet it falls in line with TestMy.net.  Or go on twitch, youtube or where ever and try to stream video at a higher quality than TestMy.net's result.

 

Release to beta testers is only days away.  I could have released it well over a month ago but I have an extra component I wanted to see in this release.   --"it needs that."

 

I'm just running it through some additional tests.  It'll be ready for scrutiny soon.  Beta testers will be notified.

[sst3ph3nss]

Thank you for sharing this information. It is very helpful to understand the challenges of measuring upload speeds and the limitations of current speed test tools. It is also encouraging to know your working on a new version of TestMy.net that will address these challenges. I am looking forward to testing the new version and seeing how it performs.

 

[xs1]

15 hours ago, CA3LE said:

What good is a 1000 Mbps connection if the single thread performance is limited to 100 Mbps (for example)?  Sure, if you have 10 devices connected and they're all uploading... theoretically you have 1000 Mbps.  But I personally don't see this as 1000 Mbps.  That's a 100 Mbps connection that can do 10 devices at full speed... since none of the clients can EVER actually see 1000 Mbps.  This "made up" scenario is actually a real thing!  Other speed tests tell those users lies.  I want connections without traffic shaping that performs on all levels and you all should too.

 

 

Exactly!  This is what most ISP's do. I've been saying this forever.    I noticed this with P2P, (some) FTP and even trying to send a friend a large file via IM. I can actually prove it in DC++ hubs. Transferring file to another PC on my OWN network will be limited to a fraction of my "Gigabit" connection, unless the receiving PC has multiple upload slots, which will than have almost symmetrical speeds from the host pc (x) the amount of connections. Just about all residential ISP's shape network bandwidth and its infuriating.  

 

This is also done on cell phone data as well. Hence why they will "give you the option" or examples of their different "plan tiers". I have T-Mobile for example; If I do a speed test I can pull lets say 100/80 , but if I try and play a YouTube video @ 2160p all of a sudden I have buffering @ 332kbs.... Makes no sense right? Now if I drop the resolution to 1080p , it'll almost instantly download the video @ 18mbs. lol  I believe they take the known ports or name servers from certain applications and limit them intentionally, whereas speed tests are just raw data.  idk. I just work here.

 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2023 by xs1

[sst3ph3nss]

@CA3LE

 

 reuse existing radio service and add an additional 1Gbps radio service.
 internet service upgrade from 1G to 2Gb including customer radio link upgrade.

 

Hi CA3LE,

I wanted to show you a quote I received to upgrade my service from 1Gb to 2Gb.

From my understanding they are adding a separate 1Gb service to run beside my existing 1Gb service and mesh them together.(???)

 

I will list the work they say is involved in this upgrade , i was hoping you could explain more about the proposed upgrade

and the nature of the connection once complete.

 

Radio Hardware upgrade.

 

Promiseland (PROMCS) and Bullyard SS (BULLCS) - Quotes are ready from

 

New Agg switch should be installed ad BULLCS (YT separation)

 

Allocate 1 x single fibre cable between BULLCS and WEBUCS:

 

1- Splicing is required at P2033059

 

2- Patching at BUNDCS

 

3- Allocate 1 x Single core fibre to BUDECS

 

4- Patching is required at BUDECS

 

5- Allocate 1 x Single core fibre between BUDECS and WEBUCS

 

6- Patching is required at WEBUCS.

 

 

Backhaul Component, Internet charges ,Design and PM, Utilise QCN network to NEXTDC B1 ,Migrate the customer internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC

 

Question, if this is correct, will the new 1Gb only come into play when my existing 1Gb is at capacity?

 

Will it be 2 independent lines with one supporting the other when needed or will it be 2 lines meshed together acting as one

Any feedback is much appreciated

 

This work to be covered by me ,the offer is a 3 year contract at $8375 per month 

This includes unlimited data, for a 2Gb Business grade connection , which comes to $300,852

FYI , I've just finished paying them just over $200,000 for the hardware and setup costs for my 1Gb service

Surely this new upgrade wouldn't warrant those prices?  

The tower(separate cost) and hardware are mine,  I've not inquired about a different ISP being able to accommodate me , but I will.

 

Here are some prices for a 2Gb connection is the city

 

TPG

• Business Fibre 2000: $1,499 per month

• Business Fibre 2000 with Static IP: $1,799 per month

iiNet

• Business Ultrafast Fibre 2000: $1,499 per month

• Business Ultrafast Fibre 2000 with Static IP: $1,799 per month

Aussie Broadband

• Business Fibre 2000: $1,499 per month

• Business Fibre 2000 with Static IP: $1,799 per month

Telstra

• Business Fibre 2000: $1,699 per month

• Business Fibre 2000 with Static IP: $1,999 per month

Optus

• Business Fibre 2000: $1,599 per month

• Business Fibre 2000 with Static IP: $1,899 per month

 

I'm hoping you can shine some light on the situation.

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by CA3LE
formatting for proper display in dark-mode

[CA3LE]

8 hours ago, sst3ph3nss said:

I'm hoping you can shine some light on the situation.

 

Wow, the lengths you've taken to get your connection.  I imagine it provides some kind of return on your investment but maybe you're just an eccentric billionaire for all I know.

 

To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure and can only speculate based on what you've shown.

 

First, for the price, it had better end up as a single connection to your network.  

 

They're allocating 1x single core fiber across the setup.  I'm curious how your connected between those points currently.  Don't you already have fiber between those points?

 

I'm not sure what BULLCS, WEBUCS and BUDECS are.  Maybe you can shed light on that, searches turned up nothing.  My guess is that the connection comes in from your tower, hits some equipment/hardware at the tower, then travels to more hardware at your building and then to your network.

 

I think at the end of the day what you're going to see on your end is what appears to be a single connection.  But you may only be able to transfer at the maximum of one of those lines if you're making a single connection to a host.  In most cases, unless stated otherwise, they're still two separate connections and when you make a connection to a host the decision will be made which one to use.  Some type of load balancing (Round Robin or Least Connection) will take place.  If you're making multiple connections then they'll be distributed across the connections.  

 

Like I said, in most cases.  But dude, you're an edge case.  Probably the most extreme I've ever seen.  You're not like "most cases".

 

They mention a "Backhaul Component".  This could refer to a backhaul within your own network OR they may be talking about a backhaul to the ISP.  In that case your connection has more direct access to the spine (think of connections like nerves running through your body).  The 2 connections may be backhauled and then combined on the ISP end.  In other words, it transmits and receives as two connections but you'll see it as one.

 

Again, this is me speculating.  I don't know the tech they're using well enough to tell you for sure.  I'd definitely get it detailed in writing from them before moving forward.

 

Please update this thread with more information as you get it.

[sst3ph3nss]

On 6/13/2023 at 3:29 AM, CA3LE said:

Wow, the lengths you've taken to get your connection.  I imagine it provides some kind of return on your investment

Living in a rural area is always a challenge when seeking bandwidth, fast pings, minimal packet loss. The return on investment is my happiness

 

On 6/13/2023 at 3:29 AM, CA3LE said:

First, for the price, it had better end up as a single connection to your network

guess.  Yes i agree, but its not really reading that way, could you tell me what to ask them regarding this matter. Is it simply " hey, is this going to be a single connection"

 

On 6/13/2023 at 3:29 AM, CA3LE said:

They're allocating 1x single core fiber across the setup.  I'm curious how your connected between those points currently.  Don't you already have fiber between those points?

Do you mean between BULLCS and WEBUCS , yes i think so.  To  my knowledge the distance between the 2 points is no more than 20meters

 

I gave the quote to Bard(google AI) and asked to explain in detail each listed item 

 

The first step is to upgrade the radio hardware at Promiseland (PROMCS) and Bullyard SS (BULLCS). This will involve replacing the existing radio equipment with newer, more powerful models.

Next, a new aggregation switch will be installed at BULLCS. This switch will help to distribute the increased bandwidth from the upgraded radio equipment to the rest of your network. 

Finally, a single-fiber cable will be installed between BULLCS and WEBUCS. This cable will provide the physical connection for the increased bandwidth from the upgraded radio equipment. 

In addition to the hardware upgrades, there will also be some additional costs associated with the upgrade. These costs include:

Backhaul charges: These charges cover the cost of transporting the increased bandwidth from your location to the internet.

Internet charges: These charges cover the cost of your internet service.

Design and PM: These charges cover the cost of designing and planning the upgrade, as well as providing ongoing maintenance and support.

Utilise QCN network to NEXTDC: This charge covers the cost of using the QCN network to connect your internet service to NEXTDC.

Migrate the customer internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC: This charge covers the cost of migrating your internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC.

 

 

additional details about the specific items listed in the quote:

Radio Hardware upgrade: This includes replacing the existing radio equipment at PROMCS and BULLCS with newer, more powerful models. The new radio equipment will be able to support the increased bandwidth of a 2Gbps connection.

New Agg switch should be installed ad BULLCS (YT separation): This refers to the installation of a new aggregation switch at BULLCS. The new switch will help to distribute the increased bandwidth from the upgraded radio equipment to the rest of your network.

Allocate 1 x single fibre cable between BULLCS and WEBUCS: This refers to the installation of a single-fiber cable between BULLCS and WEBUCS. The cable will provide the physical connection for the increased bandwidth from the upgraded radio equipment.

Backhaul Component: This refers to the cost of transporting the increased bandwidth from your location to the internet.

Internet charges: These charges cover the cost of your internet service.

Design and PM: These charges cover the cost of designing and planning the upgrade, as well as providing ongoing maintenance and support.

Utilise QCN network to NEXTDC: This charge covers the cost of using the QCN network to connect your internet service to NEXTDC.

Migrate the customer internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC: This charge covers the cost of migrating your internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC.

 

FYI from Bard also....

 

Utilize QCN network to NEXTDC:

The QCN network is a high-speed fiber optic network that connects various data centers and other telecommunications facilities in Australia. NEXTDC is a data center company that operates a number of data centers across Australia.

When you upgrade your internet service to 2Gbps, you will need to connect your internet service to a data center that can support that level of bandwidth. The QCN network is a good option for this because it is a high-speed network that can support large amounts of bandwidth.

The cost of using the QCN network to connect your internet service to NEXTDC will vary depending on the specific location of your internet service and the data center that you choose.

Migrate the customer internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC:

When you upgrade your internet service to 2Gbps, you will need to migrate your internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC. CITEC is a telecommunications company that provides internet service to businesses and consumers in Australia. NEXTDC is a data center company that operates a number of data centers across Australia.

The cost of migrating your internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC will vary depending on the specific services that you are using and the data center that you choose.

Here are some of the benefits of migrating your internet service from CITEC to NEXTDC:

• Increased bandwidth: NEXTDC offers a wider range of bandwidth options than CITEC. This means that you can choose a bandwidth option that meets your specific needs.
• Better performance: NEXTDC's data centers are located in more strategic locations than CITEC's data centers. This means that you will likely experience better performance when using your internet service.
• More reliable service: NEXTDC has a better track record of reliability than CITEC. This means that you are less likely to experience outages or disruptions when using your internet service.

 

I searched 2Gb microware  services and I couldn't find a ISP offering 2Gb.

The max speed on offer was 1Gb @ $2000 a month. (I'm charged  $2275 )

so I'm thinking ok, $4500 a month for 2GB is reasonable, but they want to charge me $8357 per month.

If i subtract $4500 from $8357 it leaves $3857 x 36 months(contract) is $153,643.

Is there $153,643 worth of upgrades in this quote, that is my issue, and is it a single connection.

I hope this makes more sense.

I appreciate your time responding.

[CA3LE]

I would ask them to justify the additional monthly charges.

 

You said,

On 6/12/2023 at 1:44 AM, sst3ph3nss said:

This work to be covered by me ,the offer is a 3 year contract at $8375 per month 

 

So I was thinking that you had to come out of pocket for the upgrades also.  And then be charged extra monthly on top of that.

 

Then you said,

On 6/14/2023 at 3:06 AM, sst3ph3nss said:

If i subtract $4500 from $8357 it leaves $3857 x 36 months(contract) is $153,643.

Is there $153,643 worth of upgrades in this quote, that is my issue, and is it a single connection.

 

Makes me think they're footing the bill for the upgrades.

 

If that's the case, if it were me and I absolutely wanted the 2 Gbps I'd see how much of that work I could do myself.  I'd also check the secondary market (eBay) for the hardware.  What you need may be too new but you might research and find older models that do the exact same thing.  Possibly the majority of the system can be built out this way, you may still need a specific component or two from them but you may be able to still save a lot.  Pretty much just running a few cables and making a few connections.

 

But part of what you're paying them for is piece of mind.  They're going to be fully responsible if anything goes wrong and if equipment needs to be changed or upgraded for whatever reason they should be there for you.

 

Is it worth that premium?  I'm not you so it's hard for me to tell.  If the ISP you're using has been reliable for you and you're thrilled with your speed already... I'd say it's not worth it.  I'd also need to understand better how you use your connection.  How much data do you transfer each month?  If you transfer only 1-2 TB/month then you'll probably be totally happy keeping 1 Gbps.  But if you're serving lots of data from this connection, running servers 2 Gbps upgrade might make sense.

 

(size in MB) / seconds per month * 8 bits per byte = Mbps

(1000*1000) / 2678400 * 8 = 2.99 Mbps

 

So 1 TB/ month is really only a constant 3 Mbps.  You're not putting hardly any load on the network capacity in that scenario.  But if you're transferring 100 TB/month then that average of 300 Mbps is going to be much more noticeable on a 1000 Mbps connection, especially if your network has peak hours of operation.

 

If I needed the extra 1000 Mbps, I'd only do that deal if the pricing was in line with the 1000 Mbps connection I'm already paying for.  I feel like you should be getting a discount compared to your initial setup.  Unless I'm missing something, the hardest parts of the setup are done.  What do they have to do, swap out a few things?!  And I bet the cables are in conduit, making it simple.  Maybe the equipment lease is the bulk cost.  

 

You're basically being serviced and charged like a wireless provider would be.  You've left the consumer realm, that comes at a premium.  But to pay 3.67x more for 2x speed increase is steep.

 

You said you pay $2275 now and the new price would be $8357 -- so 3.67x the current price you pay.

 

Let's put it to scale.  I have 1000 Mbps/40 Mbps and pay $100 right now.  Let's say that my ISP (Comcast) offered 2000 Mbps/80 Mbps... but it was $367/month.  Obviously the guy who created TestMy.net loves speeds but I'm not going to pay that premium, just not worth it.  I could almost setup 4 of my current connections at the same price.  So I'd tell them to stick that quote....... back in their pocket.

 

If you're not using the connection to serve lots of data (let's say you use 5 TB / month) but just want the speed maybe you could work a better deal with them.  Tell them, "Hey, I'm just a single household and just want a decent connection in my rural area, not a big business reselling the bandwidth.  Can we work a better monthly rate with a data cap of 10 TB?" --- a number that gives you headroom to grow.

 

On 6/14/2023 at 3:06 AM, sst3ph3nss said:

Yes i agree, but its not really reading that way, could you tell me what to ask them regarding this matter. Is it simply " hey, is this going to be a single connection"

 

I would ask, "Are the two connections load balanced or do they aggregate into a single connection?  Can I make a single 2000 Mbps connection to a capable host on the internet like I can with my current 1000 Mbps connection or will I be limited to the speed of one of the two connections?"

 

btw, interesting read on backhaul I found yesterday

https://dgtlinfra.com/what-is-backhaul-wired-wireless-fiber-ethernet/

 

On 6/14/2023 at 3:06 AM, sst3ph3nss said:

The return on investment is my happiness

 

...and that's priceless.

 

Edited June 15, 2023 by CA3LE
transposed numbers

[sst3ph3nss]

Thankyou CA3LE for that reply,

 

I appreciate the time you have given to this thread.

 

here is the latest response from the ISP

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please see below for answers to your queries highlighted in yellow:

 

Q:Are the two connections load balanced or do they aggregate into a single connection? 

 

A:This is one single Internet Service.

 

Q:Can I make a single 2000 Mbps connection to a capable host on the internet like I can with my current 1000 Mbps connection or will I be limited to the speed of one of the two connections?"

 

A: As this is one single Internet Service, yes you can.

Q:Could we discuss and data cap as I'm a household/office and I'm not reselling bandwidth or using excessive amount of data.

 

A: Sorry this isn’t possible as we do not have capped data plans, we only provide an Unlimited Data Internet Service.

 

Q:Could i get a charge that's in line with the $2,275 for 1Gb to say $4550 for a 2Gb and cap my data usage?

 

or $5050 for 2Gb with $500 going towards the upgrades. over 3yrs

 

 As above, we cannot offer a data capped plan. However please find some options below where ......has had some sharper pricing approved for you. The pricing is more inline with the figures you have quoted in the above question and if you are open to extending to a 60 month term the price per month is actually below those figures.

 

 

2Gbs

Internet

3 years

$4,784

 

2Gbs

Internet

5yrs

$3,912

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'm very happy with this result, thankyou again for your insight, it helped me a lot.

I think I'll take the 5 yrs.

[sst3ph3nss]

On 6/16/2023 at 4:22 AM, CA3LE said:

btw, interesting read on backhaul I found yesterday

https://dgtlinfra.com/what-is-backhaul-wired-wireless-fiber-ethernet/

 

A very informative read, thankyou, I enjoyed it

[CA3LE]

Wow, nice!  $3912 is way better.  $4463 per month saved.  That blows away my record by a long shot. 

 

$54K per year or $161K over the 3 years you were initially looking at.  $268K over the 5 years.  Sweet.

 

2 hours ago, sst3ph3nss said:

I appreciate the time you have given to this thread.

 

Anytime.  I appreciate you using my services.

 

2 hours ago, sst3ph3nss said:

I'm very happy with this result, thankyou again for your insight, it helped me a lot.

I think I'll take the 5 yrs.

 

I'm very happy to hear that.  I look forward to you testing that new connection on my new test.  Which can combine servers together on both upload and download to serve a connection like that.  But I'll also look to get some 10 Gbps connected test servers online ahead of your upgrade so you can properly test the single thread performance over 1 Gbps.

 

If you'd like to help the cause I accept donations.  Just scroll down here in the forums.

 

Your connection is already a beast, you'll really be tearing it up after that upgrade.  Can't wait to see it and hear more, please keep us updated on the progress.

 

2 hours ago, sst3ph3nss said:

it helped me a lot.

 

Thank you.  THAT IS why I do this.