I don't think I have deleted emails in 10 years, and I have the largest email inbox of my entire staff, get the largest flow of emails, and most of the staff share email accounts (reception/lab/etc). I am using about 2.5gb
How are people using more than 10gb? Are y'all sending ISOs via email?
Images.
In every fucking mail.
Also, hi-res scans of literally everything even though we have multiple document management systems. One user has hundreds of 20MB+ PDFs “because I deal with the insurance companies.” Ugh.
I don't think I have deleted emails in 10 years, and I have the largest email inbox of my entire staff, get the largest flow of emails, and most of the staff share email accounts (reception/lab/etc). I am using about 2.5gb
How are people using more than 10gb? Are y'all sending ISOs via email?
Images.
In every fucking mail.
Also, hi-res scans of literally everything even though we have multiple document management systems. One user has hundreds of 20MB+ PDFs “because I deal with the insurance companies.” Ugh.
Don't forget hi-res scans of print-outs of documents and web pages so we can turn them into PDFs.
Because well, okay, I know you said to use this PDF printer, and I tried it, but it asks me where to put the file, and I just want it in my email where I can find it.
At my last place our attachment size limit was 100MB because for some reason the engineers decided that emailing CAD drawing around was the most efferent way to do their work and the owner of the company just said "make it happen"
we had 5TB of exchange databases for a company with 100-120 staff.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
+3
Options
lwt1973King of ThievesSyndicationRegistered Userregular
Don't lie to me that the normal non-billable support team doesn't have the technical expertise to do something so I'll have to pay for it. I've talked to the support team and they do know how to do it, you just want to bill me for it.
"He's sulking in his tent like Achilles! It's the Iliad?...from Homer?! READ A BOOK!!" -Handy
Dealing with VPN tunnels to third parties is probably my least favorite thing I have to do at my job.
Because it is never their fault.
Dealing with any sort of "problem" is never the other side's fault.
I can't even keep track of how many times I've had to spend 3-4 hours of research to document that the problem was on their end and then they spend roughly in the ballpark of 32 seconds to fix it once I actually prove it.
The hospitals (except 1) around here are notorious for it.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
I sure love it when there are no helpdesk around to take calls (because we constantly understaff our helpdesk) and I'm trying to do a time sensitive job that requires concentration but I can't focus on it because helpdesk calls are ringing through to my phone
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
+1
Options
KakodaimonosCode fondlerHelping the 1% get richerRegistered Userregular
In an amusing bit of irony, our head of IT fell victim to a spear fishing attack.
At least they admitted to it. But now it's time for a password firedrill. :rotate:
Multitasking between coaching my junior coworker on how to deploy a new SAN, myself configuring two new on-prem Exchange servers, and taking helpdesk calls.
No big deal, right?
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Got a networking question(s) that I think should go here?
I'm redoing some of my "office" in the near future and I plan on moving all my devices to wired via a switch to my router, instead of using wifi, on non mobile devices. This is basically a couple PC's and a whole mess of consoles.
Anyway, due to some incompetence by our builder when we had the house built some years ago they completely dorked up the network wiring I had them do and didn't realize it until well after the period that was covered by when they should fix that stuff. That was my fault, but oh well; I almost never used any of the network ports (I didn't expect to, it was a backup thing anyway), and just didn't know. What actually happened is, while they ran cat5e cables to the locations I told them to, the jacks they hooked up the cables were basic modem jacks which....:rotate: It's not like it's a hard thing to fix, just obnoxious.
Regardless, before I make some changes in my office I'm trying to decide the best course of action with wiring. I've got 1gb fiber but the only wired device in my house, my main pc, is only getting 200-250mb at any given time, and I can't really figure out why. My wireless devices aren't really any better, but none of them are using a wireless protocol that could get 1gb anyway, so I'm not terribly concerned. It's still fast! Way faster than what I had previously, so it's less performance, and more principal that bugs me.
So, first question: is there fake cat5e? I know just generally no wires are of equal quality, but just by basic standard, cat5e should be doing well above 200-250 and should easily handle 1gb, as both my router and my pc are 1gb connections. I don't know of any way to test my modem directly to see if the speed problem is at the modem or between the modem and pc. Is there a way? Since I don't have any other devices actually wired to my network I also can't really test a file transfer to see if the network speed itself internally is 1gb. On my router it says the jack my PC is hooked to is set to 1gb, I'm not entirely sure how to check on my PC what it is set to? But I don't have any reason to assume it would be limiting itself. (As I type this my internet went down for the first time in months, which is pretty obnoxious!) If anyone has any tips to troubleshoot this, that'd be great.
Second question, would there be any real benefit to rerunning the cables with cat7? It's been a very long time, but I used to run cabling for a security company and I have a lot of experience pulling cables through existing runs, so I'm fairly confident I could do it again if needed. My main concerns would be that 1) there isn't really any reason to upgrade to cat7 given I'm not running a business, and 2) if I did do it I'd just assume replace my cables with a shielded variety because I'm sure the builders didn't bother to not run the networking cables right next to electric lines. However, I'm to understand that shielded cat7 is pretty "stiff" and I have no idea how sharp some of the bends the already installed wires are, or how actually stiff the shielded cable is, to know if it'd handle the run to begin with (there is only one run that this would even really be a concern for, and that's the one to the second floor that I can't see immediately from the basement).
Third question, how are switches these days? The last time I used a switch was uh...the 90's, when 100mbs was pretty blazing and many consumer things didn't use it to begin with. However I do know from various experience with lan parties and such that unmanaged switches would very quickly start dicking up things with constant collision. Has that changed any? Are devices better at handling this sort of thing at the source now? Is the vastly increased speed of modern connections (i.e. 1gb vs 10mb) enough to provide the sheer bandwidth needed to basically avoid packet collisions in the first place? The last thing I want is to wire all my devices for stability and then end up with higher latency and other side effects from network problems...though really at most I'd only really ever be using two devices at any given time, even if I had 8 things plugged in.
Fourth question, I guess, is if cat7 needs a special jack at the ends, or if it just uses a normal rj45 connector. I have no experience with it at all. I'd be doing all the jacks myself, but I have the tools for that, assuming it isn't something different and/or can't use the same crimping tools. Question 4.5 would be if any devices would have problems with cat7 if I went that route. I know it's supposed to be backward compatible but thought I'd ask anyway. The way I want to set things up I'd be running cables of specific lengths, so making my own anyway, as I don't want any slack or anything.
In an amusing bit of irony, our head of IT fell victim to a spear fishing attack.
At least they admitted to it. But now it's time for a password firedrill. :rotate:
This is why zero trust and MFA are everywhere now. The question isn't if you'll get attacked, it's when. And the more valuable you are as a target the more effort people will put into attacking you, especially via personalized means like social engineering and spear phishing.
I think you'd be wasting money to upgrade your existing cat5, even to cat6. You'll definitely have no use for the 10Gb over 100m capacity of cat7. Put new jacks on what you have and be done.
Unless they installed all your cat5 in really dumb, building code violating ways, I doubt you'll ever see interference issues arising from network cable proximity to your home electrical. The cable twist alone is usually enough to filter out the levels of EMI you'd typically have in a home without needing extra shielding, and certainly wouldn't need the per-pair shielding of cat7.
You're confusing hubs and switches. Switches don't have the same issues with collisions like hubs. Even cheap switches will likely have enough throughput, but as long as total throughput spec is greater than port speed x number of ports, i.e, an 8-port switch with 1Gb ports should have at least 8Gb of total throughput, you won't have any restrictions on LAN speed even under max port usage.
Your internet speed issues may be a limitation of your router. Some are limited by their processing power and thus restrict the overall traffic throughput. Though with speed tests, you also need to find one hosted by your ISP. Your ISP only cares about your rated speed from them to you, anything that goes over the wider internet has no speed guarantees.
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
You are correct that I'm mistaking a switch with a hub. It's been awhile, I forgot hubs existed as a thing.
ISP to ISP speedtest says I'm at 161 down which surely isn't in the ballpark of what I should be getting. My router is a nighthawk r7000. It's an older model at this point, sure, but it should be able to handle the 1gb fiber without issue. It's updated and everything, and I haven't fiddled with any wan settings that would impact its speed. The only thing I can think of that might be a problem is maybe the ONT centurylink installed isn't suitable? When they put it in I just had basic speed, I forget what it was now. 100mb? I don't know. But each house in our neighborhood is directly wired. I should go check the model of the ONT, but I have a recollection that I did that in the past when for some reason it became unregistered with centurylink and they "lost" me for reasons still unknown (forcing a reset at the ONT fixed the issue, they wanted to charge me to send someone out and I said nah, I'll figure it out).
EDIT: Would using a google dns instead of the provided one make any real difference? Surely it couldn't make 840mbs difference.
Weird, speedtest.net is nuking my internet connection every time it tests upload. Even the one centurylink uses on their website to test your speeds.
Also I'm finding all sorts of issues online with people not having their r7000's play nice at all with gig fiber. I might pick up a different router and see if it changes anything.
Even then, though, the speeds I'm getting are well below the speeds other people are saying they were getting, even a year or two ago. Looked up my ONT and it shouldn't be an issue, but there's no way to test it directly. I might need to call them and be transferred a dozen times tomorrow. I should probably just check a new modem first though, to be sure.
It sucks that they won't send someone to check for free. Hopefully once you get on the phone and wait 5 hours between all the transfers, they will be able to initiate a test from their end to your router, at least (or similar).
Did you happen to disable QoS on the router, save, reboot it, and try again?
Edit: Also, with your setup is it possible to test without your router in the loop? That is, connect the PC directly to the modem. I don't have fiber so I don't know what issues this would present. This may be what you mean by "no way to test the ONT directly" and I just don't know wtf that is
It's possible that the jacks in the wall are wired without all four pairs connected, although this should not permit you to get anywhere near 250Mbps if that was the case... (and this is me assuming that your router is in the same room as the pc, but using the wall to the modem).
I don't think there's any way to authenticate directly from the PC. It needs the router to do the pppoe login and requires a weird vlan offset for reasons I've never figured out; and reasons that I can't seem to get anything other than genie to work, spent hours last night trying to get a working setup with tomato with no dice.
I did end up rolling back my firmware to a older version that is considered more stable and better by a lot of people, and did see a bump to ~300mbs, but still not close to 1gb (wired. Didn't bother testing wifi, I know it'll never hit anywhere near where it should). Honestly I couldn't find any mention of people outside of pure test environments (and likely the support of their fiber provider) able to get more than ~450 with the R7000 (or ac1900, I don't know why it has two different models).
So basically I need to get a new router if I ever want to hit actual gigabit speeds. :rotate:
The only physical aspect I haven't tried, and without a laptop with a lan port I doubt I will be able to (now that I think about it, my wife has a work laptop that might have one, but the laptop itself would be locked down with all the stuff from her company, so that wouldn't be ideal), would be to go out to the ONT, run an extension cord and try a different lan cable from the ONT to the router, than the one they ran when it was installed. Even looking at the small loop they have inside the ONT box there is a distinct kink in two parts of the cat5e cable which is likely not ideal. However, as I said, it seems like lower speeds on this router are kinda the norm for gigabit fiber, so...? I might wander back out to the box later and take a look and see if the hole they ran the cable has any give, and see if I can just run some of my own and test it that way. I suppose I could also just pop off my screen on my office window and run a network cable into here, from there, and just move my router for the testing.
And yeah it sucks that Centurylink is not super friendly about on site support; at least for individual customers. When I had the fiber setup in the first place, I got to listen to the guy who did it bitch the whole time that he was against the company investing in running fiber directly to each house in all the new neighborhoods, as he thought very few people would ever sign up for the speeds that'd help for anyway. Which was pleasant. :rotate: There's lots of Centurylink customers around us, but I think I'm the only one with gigabit, or one of the only ones anyway. It was only recently the price came down into the realm of reasonable anyway, so I wouldn't blame people for not getting it in the past. When I first moved in it was $250/mo I think. But I caught a deal last year with a "price for life" at $85 and since I was already paying $75 for 30mbs it was a no brainer. The service itself is fine, it doesn't go down too often; or at least not nearly as often as Comcast would go down when we had their internet. it's just that their customer service leaves something to be desired, and the tech people I've had to deal with haven't been the friendliest. At least the ones in person; the ones I've spoken to on the phone I've had to explain to them their own setup ("what's an ONT, what are you talking about?" is not usually what you want to hear from someone who can't figure out why they can't detect your house on their network :rotate: but since I learned about the ONT from a tech agent at least some people know whats going on and aren't just using a script)
EDIT: ONT is the optical network terminal, it's the fiber interface at the point of service. Sometimes it is inside, but usually (around here at least) it's in a box outside by wherever the power box into your house is. At least one relatively modern houses with buried lines. On older houses or neighborhoods with power lines on poles, it might be different? Anyway it's just the last point of connection that is the ISP's responsibility that is used to get the fiber to you. Basically it takes an optical input in from their lines and translates the optical data to your typical rj45 connection for in-home/office use. It's also the place they can usually set bandwidth limits, and how they detect your specific house without needing to deal with always tracking your dynamic IP, since it's a hard connection point they control. It has to register with their stuff in order for you to even connect and if it has any sort of hiccup or locks up, it isn't something they can (always) remotely reboot, and I suspect a lot of their tech people end up just going to the house and rebooting the ONT. I just happened to know how to reboot it myself (and is worth doing occasionally anyway, like with any device it seems like it can get finicky after long periods of time); I just have to go and unplug the power box to it and remove the backup battery and leave it off for a couple minutes. I've had times where the internet will be down and even the neighbors call asking if ours is down too, and I just reboot it and get internet again. It seems whenever they have any issues with the connection in an area they should be sending out automatic reboots to customers, but since it also seems that after maintenance or damage to a line or something, they "lose" track of the ONT's, it isn't as straight forward, or automated as it should be? That's just a guess, really, because they've "lost" me more than once and several times that internet seems to be down for ourselves and even neighbors, I can get it back up. It's all sloppy, certainly, but I don't have even a remote idea of what it means to manage a massive fiber network of millions of customers. I just know I don't have the patience for tech support, and will always try to figure out how to fix stuff myself, and read up on what technicians can even do at a point of service, and figure out how to do it myself. I never tell them I'm doing it, obviously, I just get an idea from an agent, if I've tried everything I can think of, what the problem might be (that's how I learned about all the ONT stuff in the first place, one mentioned in passing, I think he was speaking out loud, not to me) that he couldn't find the ONT at my house, and even though I did schedule to have someone come out, I just went and looked up what I could and fixed it myself, and then cancelled the appointment. They were going to charge $85+ for it, and it took me about 20 minutes to read up on and 5 minutes to actually fix. And if the tech didn't really know what they were doing? I'm sure I would have gotten an earful about not using their router and likely would have just blamed it on that without doing any real testing, and the problem wouldn't have been solved.
Shit my downloads from steam are 80mbit/sec if I open it full throttle (I'm on gigabit). 25mbit is what I'd expect form esoteric or rural broadband, or suburban broadband from 2012.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
So last friday at 10 minutes to 5PM, servicedesk is called. "Newly migrated thing is not reachable from home through directaccess, many employees work from home, Monday the old system will be turned off and none of the homeworkers will be able to use it. PANIC! Can you look what's wrong? The migration project is also working hard to find the issue."
I fixed it 5 minutes later when the Servicedesk routed it to me (just adding the website to the right routing table+proxy), commented that the application migration project should probably have called us when they started their plan to migrate us so we could have done that in advance, but it should work now. Person that called in panic? Went home at 5PM. Everybody on that project that was looking in a panic? Not online anymore at 5PM.
Today? Not a single call with a question about it from either party.
So last friday at 10 minutes to 5PM, servicedesk is called. "Newly migrated thing is not reachable from home through directaccess, many employees work from home, Monday the old system will be turned off and none of the homeworkers will be able to use it. PANIC! Can you look what's wrong? The migration project is also working hard to find the issue."
I fixed it 5 minutes later when the Servicedesk routed it to me (just adding the website to the right routing table+proxy), commented that the application migration project should probably have called us when they started their plan to migrate us so we could have done that in advance, but it should work now. Person that called in panic? Went home at 5PM. Everybody on that project that was looking in a panic? Not online anymore at 5PM.
Today? Not a single call with a question about it from either party.
Joe: What you have just told me is that what is available to me at this address is copper/DSL technology at 40MBs, and that you have chosen to call that speed by the name "fiber" because you were told to do so. Am I right?
Jaqualon D.: You are correct.
I should note that this is a company whose defense to a class action lawsuit was, I shit you not, "we don't exist."
"That sole defendant, CenturyLink, Inc., is a parent holding company that has no customers, provides no services, and engaged in none of the acts or transactions about which Plaintiffs complain," CenturyLink wrote.
Also from my personal experience with CenturyLink, they are absolutely the worst ISP I have ever dealt with, and I've dealt with a lot of ISPs. I've ranted multiple times about CenturyLink's fuckery before.
My favorite thing is how CenturyLink acquired the company who acquired the company who used to run our metro Ethernet, so now to add any new metro Ethernet locations we have to call up CenturyLink.
And CenturyLink takes literally months; their "install by dates" are complete fictions. And I don't mean they'll claim they'll send a tech out on Tuesday but he'll arrive on Wednesday.
No, what I mean is that we'll order service (in writing) for a new branch office in January. In February we'll follow up on the order and find out it never got processed, so they submit a second order. Three weeks later, in March we'll get a promised install-by date of May. On April 30 we'll get a "revised" install-by date for June. On May 31 we'll get a "revised" install-by date for July. And so on. Month after month after month. Nobody will ever be able to explain why. The revised install-by date notifications are automatically generated.
I know some of the technicians who got pulled in by the CenturyLink acquisition. They commonly complain that with the old company, they'd at least understand what the goals of their visits were. "This customer is getting Internet upgraded from 100Mbs to 200Mbs, so they need a new router." But with CenturyLink, the techs aren't told the goal of their visit. They're given no context. The only thing they're told about the situation is the absolute bare minimum: install X device at Y location. And those task orders are generated by email from some project management system with no human name attached. There's nobody to go to for clarification.
So if the new connection doesn't work, it's not their problem. They did the task they were given. Even if they're motivated to help, they don't have he context or access to help. It's up to me to call up my sales rep and get the next step scheduled. But my sales rep doesn't understand the context, either. He doesn't know why X device at Y location isn't working.
Nobody knows. CenturyLink's processes are so compartmentalized, so siloed, that nobody ever has a birds-eye view of anything going on.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
TLDR: don't drive yourself crazy trying to nail down CenturyLink's transfer speeds. If you can be satisfied with what you have, then just accept it. If you need more, switch ISPs (and make sure whoever you switch to isn't using CenturyLink as the local carrier on the last mile).
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I don't want to clog this thread with this level of advice; I just need some direction where to look for the fix.
When I upgraded my desktop in July, I used the older parts to hobble together a FreeNAS box. It works fine for what I want, but it's only running at 100Mbit instead of Gigabit (confirmed by a quick ifconfig in the console).
Assuming new network cables don't fix the problem, I wonder if there's a way I can update the driver. How do I tell FreeBSD to go look for updates (or use ones I give it), or otherwise tell it to switch to Gigabit?
The system is a 4770k on an Asus Z87-Pro Mobo. I *think* I can find Linux drivers for the chipset/networking controller; I just don't know how to get them into use.
The lower speed isn't the end of the world, but I'm planning on setting up a secondary storage location for the photos we currently have on Google Photo and nowhere else; so intermittent saturation of that tube is already possible.
Shit my downloads from steam are 80mbit/sec if I open it full throttle (I'm on gigabit). 25mbit is what I'd expect form esoteric or rural broadband, or suburban broadband from 2012.
Thawmus works for a rural WISP, so that checks out.
100Mb/s feels pretty comfortable for my home internet. Comcast bumped me to 150 and I didn't even notice until I saw the free upgrade on my bill. I could probably do 50Mb/s without even feeling it.
Netflix HD uses roughly 7Mb/s. YouTube at 1080p is around 4Mb/s. Online games are generally pretty optimized so they use less than 1Mb/s.
So I could totally see a household of non-techies being happy on 25Mb/s. (Assuming you don't get some of the other limitations of wireless, like weather sensitivity or packet loss.)
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
+2
Options
ThegreatcowLord of All BaconsWashington State - It's Wet up here innit? Registered Userregular
I don't think I have deleted emails in 10 years, and I have the largest email inbox of my entire staff, get the largest flow of emails, and most of the staff share email accounts (reception/lab/etc). I am using about 2.5gb
How are people using more than 10gb? Are y'all sending ISOs via email?
Images.
In every fucking mail.
Fucking thiiiiissss. I worked for a payroll company doing IT work for them once that handled everything in securePDF formats. Back when exchange 2010 was the norm and the dreaded "If your mailbox exceeds 5gb in size, while running cached exchange mode, microsoft basically says, too-bad-so-sad, reduce the size of your mailbox or rebuild your local copy lol" problems. I regularly had customers with 30+gig mailboxes, often for the exact reasons people mentioned above. I had seasoned account managers who used their deleted items folder as a sort of long term archive with organized sub-folders within the deleted items folder.
Trying to get them to delete items, especially anything involving payroll went about as well as trying to tell folks that their job duties now included kicking puppies. We had one executive who, no lie, had at one point a 64.5gig mailbox and bitched endlessly about how slow her outlook ran, despite us telling her numerous times that she had to reduce the size of her mailbox if she wanted to avoid the problems she was facing. Otherwise, we'd run into the same issue every week of deleting the local cache of her mailbox and letting her computer run overnight trying to rebuild the damn thing. Then she was issued a laptop for business trips and the poor thing was basically dying from day one trying to sync that massive cache file every day.
I don't think I have deleted emails in 10 years, and I have the largest email inbox of my entire staff, get the largest flow of emails, and most of the staff share email accounts (reception/lab/etc). I am using about 2.5gb
How are people using more than 10gb? Are y'all sending ISOs via email?
Images.
In every fucking mail.
Fucking thiiiiissss. I worked for a payroll company doing IT work for them once that handled everything in securePDF formats. Back when exchange 2010 was the norm and the dreaded "If your mailbox exceeds 5gb in size, while running cached exchange mode, microsoft basically says, too-bad-so-sad, reduce the size of your mailbox or rebuild your local copy lol" problems.
The OST limit in Outlook 2010 + Exchange 2010 was 50GB.
(Though you could start having problems with the search index around 40GB.)
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
ThegreatcowLord of All BaconsWashington State - It's Wet up here innit? Registered Userregular
I don't think I have deleted emails in 10 years, and I have the largest email inbox of my entire staff, get the largest flow of emails, and most of the staff share email accounts (reception/lab/etc). I am using about 2.5gb
How are people using more than 10gb? Are y'all sending ISOs via email?
Images.
In every fucking mail.
Fucking thiiiiissss. I worked for a payroll company doing IT work for them once that handled everything in securePDF formats. Back when exchange 2010 was the norm and the dreaded "If your mailbox exceeds 5gb in size, while running cached exchange mode, microsoft basically says, too-bad-so-sad, reduce the size of your mailbox or rebuild your local copy lol" problems.
The OST limit in Outlook 2010 + Exchange 2010 was 50GB.
(Though you could start having problems with the search index around 40GB.)
Interesting, I wonder whether the 5gig limit we were advised was to deal with slower computers we ran maybe? I just remember our MS rep and all of my senior IT managers parroted the line so much I took it as gospel.
Shit my downloads from steam are 80mbit/sec if I open it full throttle (I'm on gigabit). 25mbit is what I'd expect form esoteric or rural broadband, or suburban broadband from 2012.
Thawmus works for a rural WISP, so that checks out.
100Mb/s feels pretty comfortable for my home internet. Comcast bumped me to 150 and I didn't even notice until I saw the free upgrade on my bill. I could probably do 50Mb/s without even feeling it.
Netflix HD uses roughly 7Mb/s. YouTube at 1080p is around 4Mb/s. Online games are generally pretty optimized so they use less than 1Mb/s.
So I could totally see a household of non-techies being happy on 25Mb/s. (Assuming you don't get some of the other limitations of wireless, like weather sensitivity or packet loss.)
Honestly, 75% of the time I could get by with 25 down on my home connection. if I had 50 down that would cover 95% of my daily use.
But I also said the same thing about 10 down a number of years ago.
right now I have 300 down and that's more than enough, and should be more than enough for the foreseeable future. What I really want, is more than 15 up. that's where a lot of ISP's are lagging. I can only get a max of 25 up, and that's on a plan with 600 down and would cost about 40% more than what I pay now.
My company migrated to Outlook 2016 / Exchange 2016 straight from 2010. We had a few people with 20+ GB mailboxes at the time. They were fine.
The only problem we had were various IT staff and middle managers going "OH MY GOD TWENTY JIGGAWATTS JIGGABYTES!? THAT'S SO BIGGGGG!!!!!!!!11one"
Somebody with a 10GB mailbox would call in complaining of computer slowness and instead of, y'know, addressing the fact that the user was still on 32-bit Windows 7 with 4GB of RAM while having 30 applications open one of which was Chrome with 100 tabs, the tech would say "your mailbox is too large"
No, Brian, the mailbox isn't too large, it's that they're running 100% memory utilization and 95% of that is Chrome
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Posts
This is a clickable link to my Steam Profile.
Don't forget hi-res scans of print-outs of documents and web pages so we can turn them into PDFs.
Because well, okay, I know you said to use this PDF printer, and I tried it, but it asks me where to put the file, and I just want it in my email where I can find it.
*headdesk*
we had 5TB of exchange databases for a company with 100-120 staff.
doing an exchange migration was so much fun.
Guess what the quota is:
how about 100mb mailbox limit, don't @ me
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Because it is never their fault.
Dealing with any sort of "problem" is never the other side's fault.
I can't even keep track of how many times I've had to spend 3-4 hours of research to document that the problem was on their end and then they spend roughly in the ballpark of 32 seconds to fix it once I actually prove it.
The hospitals (except 1) around here are notorious for it.
Community: "You can't get-help on an Exchange powershell command from a remote PC; help only works if you're running it directly on the Exchange server. This has been broken for years."
Microsoft: ...
Microsoft: ...
Microsoft: Powershell!
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Always apply if you want a job. You never know. . .
XBL:Phenyhelm - 3DS:Phenyhelm
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
At least they admitted to it. But now it's time for a password firedrill. :rotate:
No big deal, right?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I'm redoing some of my "office" in the near future and I plan on moving all my devices to wired via a switch to my router, instead of using wifi, on non mobile devices. This is basically a couple PC's and a whole mess of consoles.
Anyway, due to some incompetence by our builder when we had the house built some years ago they completely dorked up the network wiring I had them do and didn't realize it until well after the period that was covered by when they should fix that stuff. That was my fault, but oh well; I almost never used any of the network ports (I didn't expect to, it was a backup thing anyway), and just didn't know. What actually happened is, while they ran cat5e cables to the locations I told them to, the jacks they hooked up the cables were basic modem jacks which....:rotate: It's not like it's a hard thing to fix, just obnoxious.
Regardless, before I make some changes in my office I'm trying to decide the best course of action with wiring. I've got 1gb fiber but the only wired device in my house, my main pc, is only getting 200-250mb at any given time, and I can't really figure out why. My wireless devices aren't really any better, but none of them are using a wireless protocol that could get 1gb anyway, so I'm not terribly concerned. It's still fast! Way faster than what I had previously, so it's less performance, and more principal that bugs me.
So, first question: is there fake cat5e? I know just generally no wires are of equal quality, but just by basic standard, cat5e should be doing well above 200-250 and should easily handle 1gb, as both my router and my pc are 1gb connections. I don't know of any way to test my modem directly to see if the speed problem is at the modem or between the modem and pc. Is there a way? Since I don't have any other devices actually wired to my network I also can't really test a file transfer to see if the network speed itself internally is 1gb. On my router it says the jack my PC is hooked to is set to 1gb, I'm not entirely sure how to check on my PC what it is set to? But I don't have any reason to assume it would be limiting itself. (As I type this my internet went down for the first time in months, which is pretty obnoxious!) If anyone has any tips to troubleshoot this, that'd be great.
Second question, would there be any real benefit to rerunning the cables with cat7? It's been a very long time, but I used to run cabling for a security company and I have a lot of experience pulling cables through existing runs, so I'm fairly confident I could do it again if needed. My main concerns would be that 1) there isn't really any reason to upgrade to cat7 given I'm not running a business, and 2) if I did do it I'd just assume replace my cables with a shielded variety because I'm sure the builders didn't bother to not run the networking cables right next to electric lines. However, I'm to understand that shielded cat7 is pretty "stiff" and I have no idea how sharp some of the bends the already installed wires are, or how actually stiff the shielded cable is, to know if it'd handle the run to begin with (there is only one run that this would even really be a concern for, and that's the one to the second floor that I can't see immediately from the basement).
Third question, how are switches these days? The last time I used a switch was uh...the 90's, when 100mbs was pretty blazing and many consumer things didn't use it to begin with. However I do know from various experience with lan parties and such that unmanaged switches would very quickly start dicking up things with constant collision. Has that changed any? Are devices better at handling this sort of thing at the source now? Is the vastly increased speed of modern connections (i.e. 1gb vs 10mb) enough to provide the sheer bandwidth needed to basically avoid packet collisions in the first place? The last thing I want is to wire all my devices for stability and then end up with higher latency and other side effects from network problems...though really at most I'd only really ever be using two devices at any given time, even if I had 8 things plugged in.
Fourth question, I guess, is if cat7 needs a special jack at the ends, or if it just uses a normal rj45 connector. I have no experience with it at all. I'd be doing all the jacks myself, but I have the tools for that, assuming it isn't something different and/or can't use the same crimping tools. Question 4.5 would be if any devices would have problems with cat7 if I went that route. I know it's supposed to be backward compatible but thought I'd ask anyway. The way I want to set things up I'd be running cables of specific lengths, so making my own anyway, as I don't want any slack or anything.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
This is why zero trust and MFA are everywhere now. The question isn't if you'll get attacked, it's when. And the more valuable you are as a target the more effort people will put into attacking you, especially via personalized means like social engineering and spear phishing.
Unless they installed all your cat5 in really dumb, building code violating ways, I doubt you'll ever see interference issues arising from network cable proximity to your home electrical. The cable twist alone is usually enough to filter out the levels of EMI you'd typically have in a home without needing extra shielding, and certainly wouldn't need the per-pair shielding of cat7.
You're confusing hubs and switches. Switches don't have the same issues with collisions like hubs. Even cheap switches will likely have enough throughput, but as long as total throughput spec is greater than port speed x number of ports, i.e, an 8-port switch with 1Gb ports should have at least 8Gb of total throughput, you won't have any restrictions on LAN speed even under max port usage.
Your internet speed issues may be a limitation of your router. Some are limited by their processing power and thus restrict the overall traffic throughput. Though with speed tests, you also need to find one hosted by your ISP. Your ISP only cares about your rated speed from them to you, anything that goes over the wider internet has no speed guarantees.
ISP to ISP speedtest says I'm at 161 down which surely isn't in the ballpark of what I should be getting. My router is a nighthawk r7000. It's an older model at this point, sure, but it should be able to handle the 1gb fiber without issue. It's updated and everything, and I haven't fiddled with any wan settings that would impact its speed. The only thing I can think of that might be a problem is maybe the ONT centurylink installed isn't suitable? When they put it in I just had basic speed, I forget what it was now. 100mb? I don't know. But each house in our neighborhood is directly wired. I should go check the model of the ONT, but I have a recollection that I did that in the past when for some reason it became unregistered with centurylink and they "lost" me for reasons still unknown (forcing a reset at the ONT fixed the issue, they wanted to charge me to send someone out and I said nah, I'll figure it out).
EDIT: Would using a google dns instead of the provided one make any real difference? Surely it couldn't make 840mbs difference.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Also I'm finding all sorts of issues online with people not having their r7000's play nice at all with gig fiber. I might pick up a different router and see if it changes anything.
Even then, though, the speeds I'm getting are well below the speeds other people are saying they were getting, even a year or two ago. Looked up my ONT and it shouldn't be an issue, but there's no way to test it directly. I might need to call them and be transferred a dozen times tomorrow. I should probably just check a new modem first though, to be sure.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Did you happen to disable QoS on the router, save, reboot it, and try again?
Edit: Also, with your setup is it possible to test without your router in the loop? That is, connect the PC directly to the modem. I don't have fiber so I don't know what issues this would present. This may be what you mean by "no way to test the ONT directly" and I just don't know wtf that is
It's possible that the jacks in the wall are wired without all four pairs connected, although this should not permit you to get anywhere near 250Mbps if that was the case... (and this is me assuming that your router is in the same room as the pc, but using the wall to the modem).
I did end up rolling back my firmware to a older version that is considered more stable and better by a lot of people, and did see a bump to ~300mbs, but still not close to 1gb (wired. Didn't bother testing wifi, I know it'll never hit anywhere near where it should). Honestly I couldn't find any mention of people outside of pure test environments (and likely the support of their fiber provider) able to get more than ~450 with the R7000 (or ac1900, I don't know why it has two different models).
So basically I need to get a new router if I ever want to hit actual gigabit speeds. :rotate:
The only physical aspect I haven't tried, and without a laptop with a lan port I doubt I will be able to (now that I think about it, my wife has a work laptop that might have one, but the laptop itself would be locked down with all the stuff from her company, so that wouldn't be ideal), would be to go out to the ONT, run an extension cord and try a different lan cable from the ONT to the router, than the one they ran when it was installed. Even looking at the small loop they have inside the ONT box there is a distinct kink in two parts of the cat5e cable which is likely not ideal. However, as I said, it seems like lower speeds on this router are kinda the norm for gigabit fiber, so...? I might wander back out to the box later and take a look and see if the hole they ran the cable has any give, and see if I can just run some of my own and test it that way. I suppose I could also just pop off my screen on my office window and run a network cable into here, from there, and just move my router for the testing.
And yeah it sucks that Centurylink is not super friendly about on site support; at least for individual customers. When I had the fiber setup in the first place, I got to listen to the guy who did it bitch the whole time that he was against the company investing in running fiber directly to each house in all the new neighborhoods, as he thought very few people would ever sign up for the speeds that'd help for anyway. Which was pleasant. :rotate: There's lots of Centurylink customers around us, but I think I'm the only one with gigabit, or one of the only ones anyway. It was only recently the price came down into the realm of reasonable anyway, so I wouldn't blame people for not getting it in the past. When I first moved in it was $250/mo I think. But I caught a deal last year with a "price for life" at $85 and since I was already paying $75 for 30mbs it was a no brainer. The service itself is fine, it doesn't go down too often; or at least not nearly as often as Comcast would go down when we had their internet. it's just that their customer service leaves something to be desired, and the tech people I've had to deal with haven't been the friendliest. At least the ones in person; the ones I've spoken to on the phone I've had to explain to them their own setup ("what's an ONT, what are you talking about?" is not usually what you want to hear from someone who can't figure out why they can't detect your house on their network :rotate: but since I learned about the ONT from a tech agent at least some people know whats going on and aren't just using a script)
EDIT: ONT is the optical network terminal, it's the fiber interface at the point of service. Sometimes it is inside, but usually (around here at least) it's in a box outside by wherever the power box into your house is. At least one relatively modern houses with buried lines. On older houses or neighborhoods with power lines on poles, it might be different? Anyway it's just the last point of connection that is the ISP's responsibility that is used to get the fiber to you. Basically it takes an optical input in from their lines and translates the optical data to your typical rj45 connection for in-home/office use. It's also the place they can usually set bandwidth limits, and how they detect your specific house without needing to deal with always tracking your dynamic IP, since it's a hard connection point they control. It has to register with their stuff in order for you to even connect and if it has any sort of hiccup or locks up, it isn't something they can (always) remotely reboot, and I suspect a lot of their tech people end up just going to the house and rebooting the ONT. I just happened to know how to reboot it myself (and is worth doing occasionally anyway, like with any device it seems like it can get finicky after long periods of time); I just have to go and unplug the power box to it and remove the backup battery and leave it off for a couple minutes. I've had times where the internet will be down and even the neighbors call asking if ours is down too, and I just reboot it and get internet again. It seems whenever they have any issues with the connection in an area they should be sending out automatic reboots to customers, but since it also seems that after maintenance or damage to a line or something, they "lose" track of the ONT's, it isn't as straight forward, or automated as it should be? That's just a guess, really, because they've "lost" me more than once and several times that internet seems to be down for ourselves and even neighbors, I can get it back up. It's all sloppy, certainly, but I don't have even a remote idea of what it means to manage a massive fiber network of millions of customers. I just know I don't have the patience for tech support, and will always try to figure out how to fix stuff myself, and read up on what technicians can even do at a point of service, and figure out how to do it myself.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
I fixed it 5 minutes later when the Servicedesk routed it to me (just adding the website to the right routing table+proxy), commented that the application migration project should probably have called us when they started their plan to migrate us so we could have done that in advance, but it should work now. Person that called in panic? Went home at 5PM. Everybody on that project that was looking in a panic? Not online anymore at 5PM.
Today? Not a single call with a question about it from either party.
So, a normal day then?
Not many people NEED it, but it sure is nice to have a giant steam game download in 5-10 mins
https://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2015/04/03/22001588/centurylink-apologizes-for-misleading-customer-about-its-gigabit-internet-service
I should note that this is a company whose defense to a class action lawsuit was, I shit you not, "we don't exist."
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/04/centurylink-fights-billing-fraud-lawsuit-by-claiming-that-it-has-no-customers/
Also from my personal experience with CenturyLink, they are absolutely the worst ISP I have ever dealt with, and I've dealt with a lot of ISPs. I've ranted multiple times about CenturyLink's fuckery before.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
kill me.
When I upgraded my desktop in July, I used the older parts to hobble together a FreeNAS box. It works fine for what I want, but it's only running at 100Mbit instead of Gigabit (confirmed by a quick ifconfig in the console).
Assuming new network cables don't fix the problem, I wonder if there's a way I can update the driver. How do I tell FreeBSD to go look for updates (or use ones I give it), or otherwise tell it to switch to Gigabit?
The system is a 4770k on an Asus Z87-Pro Mobo. I *think* I can find Linux drivers for the chipset/networking controller; I just don't know how to get them into use.
The lower speed isn't the end of the world, but I'm planning on setting up a secondary storage location for the photos we currently have on Google Photo and nowhere else; so intermittent saturation of that tube is already possible.
Thawmus works for a rural WISP, so that checks out.
100Mb/s feels pretty comfortable for my home internet. Comcast bumped me to 150 and I didn't even notice until I saw the free upgrade on my bill. I could probably do 50Mb/s without even feeling it.
Netflix HD uses roughly 7Mb/s. YouTube at 1080p is around 4Mb/s. Online games are generally pretty optimized so they use less than 1Mb/s.
So I could totally see a household of non-techies being happy on 25Mb/s. (Assuming you don't get some of the other limitations of wireless, like weather sensitivity or packet loss.)
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Fucking thiiiiissss. I worked for a payroll company doing IT work for them once that handled everything in securePDF formats. Back when exchange 2010 was the norm and the dreaded "If your mailbox exceeds 5gb in size, while running cached exchange mode, microsoft basically says, too-bad-so-sad, reduce the size of your mailbox or rebuild your local copy lol" problems. I regularly had customers with 30+gig mailboxes, often for the exact reasons people mentioned above. I had seasoned account managers who used their deleted items folder as a sort of long term archive with organized sub-folders within the deleted items folder.
Trying to get them to delete items, especially anything involving payroll went about as well as trying to tell folks that their job duties now included kicking puppies. We had one executive who, no lie, had at one point a 64.5gig mailbox and bitched endlessly about how slow her outlook ran, despite us telling her numerous times that she had to reduce the size of her mailbox if she wanted to avoid the problems she was facing. Otherwise, we'd run into the same issue every week of deleting the local cache of her mailbox and letting her computer run overnight trying to rebuild the damn thing. Then she was issued a laptop for business trips and the poor thing was basically dying from day one trying to sync that massive cache file every day.
Wud yoo laek to lern aboot meatz? Look here!
If anyone is looking for me I'll be in the fetal position in the IT storage room for the rest of the day.
The OST limit in Outlook 2010 + Exchange 2010 was 50GB.
(Though you could start having problems with the search index around 40GB.)
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Interesting, I wonder whether the 5gig limit we were advised was to deal with slower computers we ran maybe? I just remember our MS rep and all of my senior IT managers parroted the line so much I took it as gospel.
Wud yoo laek to lern aboot meatz? Look here!
Honestly, 75% of the time I could get by with 25 down on my home connection. if I had 50 down that would cover 95% of my daily use.
But I also said the same thing about 10 down a number of years ago.
right now I have 300 down and that's more than enough, and should be more than enough for the foreseeable future. What I really want, is more than 15 up. that's where a lot of ISP's are lagging. I can only get a max of 25 up, and that's on a plan with 600 down and would cost about 40% more than what I pay now.
GIVE ME MORE UPLOAD.
The only problem we had were various IT staff and middle managers going "OH MY GOD TWENTY JIGGAWATTS JIGGABYTES!? THAT'S SO BIGGGGG!!!!!!!!11one"
Somebody with a 10GB mailbox would call in complaining of computer slowness and instead of, y'know, addressing the fact that the user was still on 32-bit Windows 7 with 4GB of RAM while having 30 applications open one of which was Chrome with 100 tabs, the tech would say "your mailbox is too large"
No, Brian, the mailbox isn't too large, it's that they're running 100% memory utilization and 95% of that is Chrome
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.