1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

contention ratio ... better with smaller isps ?

Discussion in 'Networks & Internet Connectivity' started by builder22, 7 Mar 2010.

  1. builder22

    Mobster

    Joined: 14 Dec 2005

    Posts: 3,803

    with a 50:1, is the 50 shared amongst users only with the same isp??
    therefore if you use an isp with less users is there likely to be say , only 25 of the 50 slots being used as opposed to using an ISP like BT Broadband, where the 50 slots are likely to all be used up ?


    or is the 50 just shared between users from any isp (any BT Wholesale max users)

    does this make sense ? lol
     
  2. wij

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 27 Dec 2006

    Posts: 1,422

    Location: -

    Not really as at the end of the day you're still going to be contented within BTW's network - though over 21CN connections I am led to believe that there is so much capacity at the moment it generally isn't BT but the shoddy ISP at the other end where the contention happens.

    Best off just going for an ISP that doesn't oversubscribe their network in the first place and are proactive about maintaining that level of service.

    Such ISP's are not cheap though.
     
  3. Bond

    Gangster

    Joined: 22 Nov 2002

    Posts: 269

    It will all depend on what the ISP uses within their capacity planning. There planning will involve the contention ratio as it drives bandwidth - unless they disclose this it will be hard for you to make a decision on who to go for driven by this factor alone
     
  4. tolien

    Caporegime

    Joined: 16 May 2003

    Posts: 25,368

    Location: ::1

    The 50:1 contention ratios that used to be quoted on IPStream don't exist any more. Any congestion is almost certainly going to be on the connection between the ISP and BT Wholesale and the ratio of that will depend on how much you're paying and the ISP in question.
    You certainly better hope it's nowhere near 50:1.
     
  5. builder22

    Mobster

    Joined: 14 Dec 2005

    Posts: 3,803

    it doesnt matter too much for me just now anyway as I'm in a contract with BT.... happy with it but could be better at peak times...

    I have the idea of there being a 'server' capable of supplying 50 users, this would be a 50:1 contention ratio, is that right ?
    is that "server" (as I call it) owned/controlled by BT Wholesale or is the 'server' rented/controlled by the ISP ?

    I ask as my exchange only supplies about 400 houses, lot of old people too so the chances of lots of people using a 'quality' ISP here are very slim....so I'm thinking if the 'servers' are owned by the ISP rather than BT Wholesale then the less popular ISP(s) would be better as far less users ?
     
  6. tolien

    Caporegime

    Joined: 16 May 2003

    Posts: 25,368

    Location: ::1

    It's far away from your exchange, it isn't a server and it never ever got to 50:1.

    The connection between the ISP and BTw is paid for by the ISP so how many/how fast they buy is governed partly by how much you're paying.
    The connection's capable of servicing essentially as many users as the ISP wants to pack onto it (there's a limited number of users you can have using a given "connection", but they'd be seeing ridiculous levels of congestion before you got anywhere near that).
     
  7. Invictus

    Gangster

    Joined: 5 Mar 2009

    Posts: 109

    contention ratio is a way of keeping costs down and they pass that on to the consumer.
    if you pay for a 5 to 1 connection then thats what they set up for you.
    normally its the cheap deals that dont give you the option for static ip or lower than 50 to 1.
    its why they give you certain download capacity a month. to make them look good and keep costs down
     
  8. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    i have often thought if it would have been better if they just had 10mbit/10mbit actually 1:1 per customer. instead of this over stretched, where you can't just use it, there are limits restrictions.

    i think i would pay £40 a month for 10/10 which is the same price as the 50/half a mbit. Are there any reason for asynchronous networks? as standard network equipment that i have come across has always been full duplex. the only theory that i can think of is that they do it to make more money, it is not a technical limitation but the use of "bandwidth optimization" to maximize profits.
     
    Last edited: 8 Mar 2010
  9. rpstewart

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 11 Mar 2003

    Posts: 10,746

    Location: Greenock, Scotland

    ADSL can be, and generally is, delivered over the same cable pair as the voice service on a given line. SDSL on the other hand requires too much of the available frequency spectrum and hence has to be delivered over a separate line to any voice service.

    Therefore there's a cost and complexity disadvantage to SDSL which makes it uncompetitive as an offering when most users don't need a synchronous connection.
     
  10. tolien

    Caporegime

    Joined: 16 May 2003

    Posts: 25,368

    Location: ::1

    You're confusing asynchronous and asymmetric.

    "They" do 1:1 connections. They're called leased lines, and cost a good bit more than ADSL or cable for exactly that reason.
     
  11. builder22

    Mobster

    Joined: 14 Dec 2005

    Posts: 3,803

    so does where you live matter at all?
    what kind of area does the thing that's far away from the exchange cover ?? :D
     
  12. timefalls

    Gangster

    Joined: 17 May 2009

    Posts: 132

    Location: Leeds/Vilnius

    not necessarily. Be broadband (and O2 broadband, as Be resale to O2) have a guaranteed contention ratio of 1:1, and they're regular ADSL lines.

    I'll be definitely be switching to one of them in the next few months, I'm currently with virgin, and with a contention ratio of 20:1, it starts to get pretty ridiculous in my area at peak times. I pay for 20Mbps down, and ~1Mbps up, and after 7pm i'll be lucky to get 4Mbps down, 100Kbps up, with rediculously high latency! :mad:
     
  13. tolien

    Caporegime

    Joined: 16 May 2003

    Posts: 25,368

    Location: ::1

    It depends; on 21CN where you live sets which node you're connected to and some see more congestion than others.
    People aren't put on Centrals, though, based on where they are. It's completely random.

    Do they hell; congestion has happened at peak times before and will no doubt continue to happen. The "contention ratio" will likely rise as O2 pack the customers in as well.

    You're getting ~5:1 there, so if it's advertised as 20:1 (and I doubt very much it is) you're getting better than advertised...