Re: Proving Gig Speed

[James R Cutler <james.cutler () consultant com>]

> On Jul 16, 2018, at 4:31 PM, Carlos Alcantar <carlos () race com> wrote:
>
> It's a complete rabbit hole different hardware with different browsers give different readings, even not having your 
> laptop plugged into power can cause a change in results due to dropping cpu to power save.  The only reliable 
> solution we found for field techs was the exfo ex1.    Still talks to the ookla speedtest server etc.  Obvious this 
> is a well known issue and exfo has a solution.
>
>
>
> https://www.exfo.com/en/products/field-network-testing/network-protocol-testing/ethernet-testing/ex1/


This is an interesting device. But the manufactures pages promote it like “Speedtest for Dummies”.

Why don’t the User Manual or Spec Sheet mention IPv6 (or even (IPv4)?

I should think technicians would want technical answers.

        Cutler


> Carlos Alcantar
>
> Race Communications / Race Team Member
>
> Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / carlos () race com<mailto:carlos () race com> / http://www.race.com<http://www.race.com/>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> on behalf of Chris Gross <CGross () ninestarconnect com>
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 12:39 PM
> To: Matt Erculiani
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
> Subject: RE: Proving Gig Speed
>
> Winner winner chicken dinner. I forgot to pull "Antivirus is at fault" card from my deck. 250/675 with it installed, 
> 920/920 when removed so now I get to pass the the issue onwards.
>
> Thanks everyone for your replies and the responses for the adolfintel/speedtest github, I'll definitely look at it as 
> a replacement for later.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Erculiani <merculiani () gmail com>
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 2:17 PM
> To: Chris Gross <CGross () ninestarconnect com>
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog () nanog org>
> Subject: Re: Proving Gig Speed
>
> We use Iperf3 for customers that complain about throughput, it's relatively low overhead compared to the Ookla HTML5 
> client. Same scenario as you, we have the tech hook up their laptop to the customer's drop and perform testing. I 
> suspect your antivirus may be attempting to perform real-time inspection on the http(s) traffic, which would crush 
> the little laptop CPU for sure.
>
> Message me off-list and I'll send you a private Iperf3 server IP to test with.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:58 PM, Chris Gross <CGross () ninestarconnect com> wrote:
> > I'm curious what people here have found as a good standard for providing solid speedtest results to customers. All 
> > our techs have Dell laptops of various models, but we always hit 100% CPU when doing a Ookla speedtest for a server 
> > we have on site. So then if you have a customer paying for 600M or 1000M symmetric, they get mad and demand you 
> > prove it's full speed. At that point we have to roll out different people with JDSU's to test and prove it's 
> > functional where a Ookla result would substitute fine if we didn't have crummy laptops possibly. Even though from 
> > what I can see on some google results, we exceed the standards several providers call for.
> >
> > Most of these complaints come from the typical "power" internet user of course that never actually uses more than 
> > 50M sustained paying for a residential connection, so running a circuit test on each turn up is uncalled for.
> >
> > Anyone have any suggestions of the requirements (CPU/RAM/etc) for a laptop that can actually do symmetric gig, a 
> > rugged small inexpensive device we can roll with instead to prove, or any other weird solution involving ritual 
> > sacrifice that isn't too offensive to the eyes?