nanog mailing list archives
Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based)
From: "Andy Johnson" <andyjohnson () ij net>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 00:52:23 -0400
----- Original Message ----- From: "Barney Wolff" <barney () databus com>
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 10:59:04AM +0800, Ong Beng Hui wrote:When I switched from 1600/384 to 3000/768 dsl, download speed went up
to
very nearly the promised 3Mbps, but latency to the first hop went from 14 ms to 26 ms.Is there a reason for that ? that, latency goes up when bandwidth goes
up
for your case ?I assume it had to do with different settings for interleaving on the DSLAM, as some prior poster mentioned. -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I never met a computer I didn't like.
Interleaved adds some error correction, allowing the connection to be more resistant to interference (noisy lines), but at the expense of latency. Fast-path is the other way data is sent, which obviously, is much faster, I've personally seen less ~10ms for a loop around 11000ft. -- Andy
Current thread:
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based), (continued)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Florian Weimer (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Luke Parrish (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Valdis . Kletnieks (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Petri Helenius (May 05)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Joel Jaeggli (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Joe Maimon (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Barney Wolff (May 04)
- Message not available
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Barney Wolff (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Andy Johnson (May 04)
- Re: Acceptable DSL Speeds (ms based) Luke Parrish (May 04)