FIOS

[tmanka at gmail.com (Ted Manka)]

Hi Tom,

Great post about verizon and FIOS.  I have FIOS now with VOIP sunrocket...I
have noticed some issues with latency.  Running a VOIP diagnostic my up and
downstreams were high as per the spec of the contract with FIOS but the
jitter was in the trash can.

I have also been using dyndns in tunneling into 443 with no problems.  I
should check out 25 and 80.

Also below are some ping times to some of the local universities VIA FIOS.
It would be interesting to see some ping times from other providers
(Comcast, Verizon DSL, RCN etc)

--Ted Manka

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

                     DD-WRT build #23
              some code portions OpenWRT and EWRT
       additional thanks to Cesar Gonzales, Toxic,
          Elektik, MBChris, Nbd, TheIndividual
      and all the wonderful supporters of this Project


                   http://www.dd-wrt.com

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


BusyBox v1.01 (2005.12.23-18:13+0000) Built-in shell (ash)
Enter 'help' for a list of built-in commands.

~ # ping mit.edu
PING mit.edu (18.7.22.69): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=0 ttl=244 time=20.8 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=1 ttl=244 time=19.6 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69 : icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=19.6 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=3 ttl=244 time=19.6 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=4 ttl=244 time=19.6 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=5 ttl=244 time=19.7 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=6 ttl=244 time=19.6 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=7 ttl=244 time=19.7 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=8 ttl=244 time=17.3 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=9 ttl=244 time= 19.8 ms
64 bytes from 18.7.22.69: icmp_seq=10 ttl=244 time=19.7 ms

--- mit.edu ping statistics ---
11 packets transmitted, 11 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 17.3/19.5/20.8 ms
~ # ping bu.edu
PING bu.edu (128.197.27.7): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=0 ttl=240 time=16.4 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=1 ttl=240 time=17.4 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=2 ttl=240 time= 17.4 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=3 ttl=240 time=17.4 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=4 ttl=240 time=17.5 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=5 ttl=240 time=17.5 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=6 ttl=240 time=17.5 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=7 ttl=240 time= 17.5 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=8 ttl=240 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from 128.197.27.7: icmp_seq=9 ttl=240 time=17.6 ms

--- bu.edu ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 16.4/17.3/17.6 ms
~ # ping www.harvard.edu
PING hno-webprod.harvard.edu (128.103.60.28): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=0 ttl=243 time=20.0 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=20.2 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=20.3 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time= 20.3 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=20.3 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=5 ttl=243 time=20.3 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=6 ttl=243 time=20.3 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=7 ttl=243 time=20.3 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=8 ttl=243 time=20.4 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=9 ttl=243 time=20.4 ms
64 bytes from 128.103.60.28: icmp_seq=10 ttl=243 time= 20.4 ms

--- hno-webprod.harvard.edu ping statistics ---
11 packets transmitted, 11 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 20.0/20.2/20.4 ms
~ # ping brandies.edu
PING brandies.edu (129.64.99.169): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169 : icmp_seq=0 ttl=50 time=18.1 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=18.3 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time= 18.3 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=18.4 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=15.8 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=7 ttl=50 time=15.9 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=8 ttl=50 time=15.9 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=9 ttl=50 time=20.9 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=10 ttl=50 time=18.5 ms
64 bytes from 129.64.99.169: icmp_seq=11 ttl=50 time= 15.9 ms

--- brandies.edu ping statistics ---
12 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 16% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 15.8/17.6/20.9 ms
~ # ping neu.edu
PING neu.edu (155.33.227.140): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=0 ttl=48 time=15.8 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=13.7 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=13.8 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=13.7 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=4 ttl=48 time=13.8 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=5 ttl=48 time=13.8 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=6 ttl=48 time=13.8 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=7 ttl=48 time= 13.9 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=8 ttl=48 time=13.9 ms
64 bytes from 155.33.227.140: icmp_seq=9 ttl=48 time=13.9 ms

--- neu.edu ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 13.7/14.0/15.8 ms
~ #


On 4/12/07, Mark Richards <mark.richards at massmicro.com> wrote:
>
> Tom Metro wrote:
> >>Has anyone tried business-grade FIOS and tested out their tech
> >>support? Or for that matter, residential support?
> Not business, but residential, yes.
>
> The technical quality of the support is far better than is was in the
> ADSL days (I am a long time customer with many horror stories).  IMO
> Verizon has attempted to up the quality of the initial contact.
>
> The good news is that the system seems far less likely to break.  Other
> than two brief outages It's been otherwise solid on since installed 8
> months ago.
>
> --
>
> The cost of rolling this out is enormous for Verizon.  They are making
> huge investments now because this is destined to be a very good cash cow
> for a very long time.  The difference in this and copper is that
> allegedly the infrastructure isn't being built by the feds, although the
> co-enabling between government and Verizon is quite obvious.
>
> --
>
> Verizon has upped the bandwidth availability for business FIOS in
> Massachusetts.  I spoke to them about getting a static: there's no way
> to get one for residential.  The cost for business service would double
> but we'd get a bit of a wider pipe.  Not quite worth it yet.
>
> --
>
> Other nations consider high speed internet service an essential service
> and one that helps fuel economies.  In Japan as an example, there's
> plenty of cheap bandwidth available.
>
> Not here.
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.