Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Double paid traffic

wiki.hetzner.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 106 posts

Re: Double paid traffic

#31

Post by ullus12 »

Ao7bei3s wrote: post #29
ullus12 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet you can expect Cable service (Kabeldeutschland/Vodafone) to be to be lossy/congested at every days peek hours. Whereas DTAG _does_ way better. I dont like it, but as others have said: Relying on transit peering will not work well once you reach certain traffic levels. Also you can get Servers from Strato (DTAG Sub) for about the same price as from Hetzner and pump your Traffic directly into a Tier1.

Vodafone doesn't just offer cable service but also DSL and VDSL, and that's rock solid. The cable service slowdowns are technology inherent. But that's a last-mile problem and not a backbone problem. Also, these providers aren't trying to use their customer base to extort money from hosters.

Agree on the last-mile part

yet i doubt that buying from a (DSL-)Reseller is improving service quality and prices are roughly the same.

Re: Double paid traffic

#32

Post by Tepix »

ullus12 wrote: post #26
Ao7bei3s wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who are the providers that misbehave The article is about T-Systems (AS-DTAG), which is the largest ISP in Germany and basically the company we mean when we talk about net neutrality violation here. Look at the speeds of their exchange points: https://beta.peeringdb.com/net/196 - 34 Gbps total: 1x 20G, 1x 10G, 4x 1G. Seriously, 1Gbps! Now compare with another ISP with only 25% the revenue: https://beta.peeringdb.co…

Yet you can expect Cable service (Kabeldeutschland/Vodafone) to be to be lossy/congested at every days peek hours. Whereas DTAG _does_ way better. I dont like it, but as others have said: Relying on transit peering will not work well once you reach certain traffic levels. Also you can get Servers from Strato (DTAG Sub) for about the same price as from Hetzner and pump your Traffic directly into a Tier1.

I'm a Unitymedia customer in Germany (200mbps down, 10mbps up for 42€/month including VoIP) and they have been pretty good in terms of speed. I haven't noticed any slowdowns. They also make sure that you get a little extra bandwidth so even with overhead you will actually see those advertised transfer rates in the wild.

Re: Double paid traffic

#33

Post by icebraining »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #7
Pyxl101 wrote: post #3

Frequently it seems as though statements by neutrality advocates mention "providers" without naming any. Who are the providers that misbehave, and what are they doing? Can we see a graph of their traffic and a depiction of the misbehavior? (Saturated links, offers to peer and expand the links that are refused, etc.) I'd love it if the evidence were laid out. Unfortunately at the moment, it seems like there's a lot of…

The latter. There is no incentive to pay for additional bandwidth if there is enough capacity for everyone, so supply is restricted. Thus the ISP saves on network infrastructure and gets additional income to prioritize higher-status traffic. What a clusterfuck, I'm embarrassed by my government.

My question is: why aren't the companies being asked to pay for priority telling their users about the problem? Where are the JS libraries that show a warning to the users of those ISPs?

Re: Double paid traffic

#34

Post by fiber »

Ao7bei3s wrote: post #30
fiber wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reflects only the peering capacity available for public peering and only what has been documented by each ISP for that network. Private peerings (that are direct connections to another network) are much much more cost-effective and easier to scale for a large ISP. In any case you can safely assume that DTAGs peering capacity by far exceeds one or the other Tbit, but it's also far from being sufficient capacity a…

Private peerings are very cost-effective for DTAG because DTAG usually takes money for them.

While that is certainly true, that is not what I meant. For one, it's very cheap to reach such exchanges for companies like Hetzner, because they usually operate their data centers on the same campus, to safe exactly on that backhaul cost to the exchange. By implication all the ISPs are expected to extend their network into these facilities to pick up traffic. While it's true that some ISPs operate big POPs near exchanges, it's not where their customers are. And both users and data center operators rightfully expect a professionally built network with redundancy etc. In that respect it's not necessarily unfair that they charge for the traffic. (While it is certainly unfair that they don't upgrade their connections to extort outrageous prices from other market participants and what's much worse to contain internet growth on a large scale, which is why Germany is a fairly under-developed country in terms of internet connectivity).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Internet_...

But also, people who work for exchange point operators are the only ones left flying business class in the telecom industry. At the same time public exchanges are a single point of failure in the network that one should(!) design around anyway. There are much cleaner solutions you can design into a network at a fraction of that cost.

Re: Double paid traffic

#35

Post by Cakez0r »

thomaskcr wrote: post #18
omgtehlion wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If data flows unequally, money should flow the other direction Ok, data flows (mostly) this way: Hetzner (or any other DC) --> ISP --> customer DSL companies want money to flow this way: Hetzner --> ISP <-- customer

I'm not sure I understand the difference between Hetzner and a customer. They are both utilizing the ISP for the same purpose, transporting data. We still need to pay for an Internet connection for our servers. You're not paying the ISP for access to a specific person's server, you're paying to be part of their network which happens to be connected to other networks. Everyone pays to be part of the network. The end u…

But Hertzner aren't pushing data onto DTAG's network. The ISP's customers are requesting it.

Re: Double paid traffic

#37

Post by blueflow »

Mojah wrote: post #36

Aren't they basically saying "We support net neutrality but since we have no choice, we'll pay for priority access"?

More "We support net neutrality but since we have no choice, we'll allow you to pay for priority access for your server". Its opt-in.

Re: Double paid traffic

#40

Post by merb »

ullus12 wrote: post #26
Ao7bei3s wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who are the providers that misbehave The article is about T-Systems (AS-DTAG), which is the largest ISP in Germany and basically the company we mean when we talk about net neutrality violation here. Look at the speeds of their exchange points: https://beta.peeringdb.com/net/196 - 34 Gbps total: 1x 20G, 1x 10G, 4x 1G. Seriously, 1Gbps! Now compare with another ISP with only 25% the revenue: https://beta.peeringdb.co…

Yet you can expect Cable service (Kabeldeutschland/Vodafone) to be to be lossy/congested at every days peek hours. Whereas DTAG _does_ way better. I dont like it, but as others have said: Relying on transit peering will not work well once you reach certain traffic levels. Also you can get Servers from Strato (DTAG Sub) for about the same price as from Hetzner and pump your Traffic directly into a Tier1.

That is simple not true (telekom customer). And I know a lot of people on Telekom.

We even needed to contact Github to change our peering since the default route from Github to DTag just sucks.

Our overall bandwidth with Telekom simply sucks. Most networks are really really slow, compared to Kabel Deutschland.

Post reply on HN