Someone we all know phoned me last night with some disturbing news. Unfortunately it doesn't pass the D.I.M.S. test (Does It Make Sense). He wanted some confirmation before "flying off the handle". He said he had a couple of clients phone up saying MTS was threatening Linux users with disconnection unless they switched to an all M$ environment. I said I'd pass along the request and see what people say. My suspicion is MTS is saying the same thing to Linux users as they are saying to Windows 2000 users. Namely a) Direct connections will no longer be supported with the next generation of MTS software (older software may still work). b) Tech support will be cancelled for that particular operating system. c) Although the problem with connection will be fixed with a router, the router MUST be purchased from MTS for maximum compatibility. d) They will not sell their routers to people running unsupported operating systems. e) Install techs will not be trained or permitted to connect machines with unsupported operating systems. OTOH, it could be a hoax. Time will tell... Later Mike
I would say there is a thread of truth here but with respect to SUPPORT. MTS barely supports what they say they do and their 'special PPPoE' stuff is just that... special. Built in PPPoE support should continue to work unless they are migrating to something non-standard or require some extra PPPoE options that are not available to the publicly available implementations. MTS never supported Linux... never will unless 99% of their customers switch. Plus they are a "who can we call when stuff breaks" kind of shop with respect to infrastructure engineering which is kind of counter-culture to a FOSS stack. Should MTS be that aggressive then they will lose those customers... that's kind of a given and I feel for those who have no other options. Having left MTS 8 years ago and seeing how the place worked, I will personally never use their ISP again unless it is literally the only option available. The few people that had a clue were either incentivized to not use their clues for great service or were depressed politically so while the person probably had the worst possible agent speak to them I don't think the situation is as described other than the facts of MTS not supporting anything aside from their narrow band of training. MTS (when I was there, stuff may have changed) didn't support routers of any kind or shape so it doesn't surprise me they don't support them now. Note, LES.NET will provide DSL IP services using MTS' backhaul so that is an option for those DSL is the only option kind of situations. On 2010-07-13, at 11:46 AM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
Someone we all know phoned me last night with some disturbing news. Unfortunately it doesn't pass the D.I.M.S. test (Does It Make Sense). He wanted some confirmation before "flying off the handle". He said he had a couple of clients phone up saying MTS was threatening Linux users with disconnection unless they switched to an all M$ environment. I said I'd pass along the request and see what people say.
My suspicion is MTS is saying the same thing to Linux users as they are saying to Windows 2000 users. Namely a) Direct connections will no longer be supported with the next generation of MTS software (older software may still work). b) Tech support will be cancelled for that particular operating system. c) Although the problem with connection will be fixed with a router, the router MUST be purchased from MTS for maximum compatibility. d) They will not sell their routers to people running unsupported operating systems. e) Install techs will not be trained or permitted to connect machines with unsupported operating systems.
OTOH, it could be a hoax. Time will tell...
Later Mike
_______________________________________________ Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
-- Sean
On 10-07-13 12:24 PM, Sean Cody wrote:
I would say there is a thread of truth here but with respect to SUPPORT.
MTS barely supports what they say they do and their 'special PPPoE' stuff is just that... special. Built in PPPoE support should continue to work unless they are migrating to something non-standard or require some extra PPPoE options that are not available to the publicly available implementations.
MTS never supported Linux... never will unless 99% of their customers switch. Plus they are a "who can we call when stuff breaks" kind of shop with respect to infrastructure engineering which is kind of counter-culture to a FOSS stack.
Should MTS be that aggressive then they will lose those customers... that's kind of a given and I feel for those who have no other options. Having left MTS 8 years ago and seeing how the place worked, I will personally never use their ISP again unless it is literally the only option available. The few people that had a clue were either incentivized to not use their clues for great service or were depressed politically so while the person probably had the worst possible agent speak to them I don't think the situation is as described other than the facts of MTS not supporting anything aside from their narrow band of training.
What you say makes more sense. This is closer to what I've been seeing. I can relate to your experience with MTS too. The first tier aren't allowed to do anything useful. The second tier don't know much more either. At least when tech support was here in Winnipeg we were able to get the occasional straight forward answer.
MTS (when I was there, stuff may have changed) didn't support routers of any kind or shape so it doesn't surprise me they don't support them now.
They support routers now. Only the ones they sell though. They gave another friend a hard time because he kept using his old router when he made a switch from Shaw to MTS. One client from the CLL was told to return a router purchased from CBit and buy a more expensive one from MTS before they would connect the clients system.
Note, LES.NET will provide DSL IP services using MTS' backhaul so that is an option for those DSL is the only option kind of situations.
Do you have any "literature" I can pass along to the CLL? There are still a few people which can't get Shaw. This may be an alternative. Later Mike
On 2010-07-13, at 11:46 AM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
Someone we all know phoned me last night with some disturbing news. Unfortunately it doesn't pass the D.I.M.S. test (Does It Make Sense). He wanted some confirmation before "flying off the handle". He said he had a couple of clients phone up saying MTS was threatening Linux users with disconnection unless they switched to an all M$ environment. I said I'd pass along the request and see what people say.
My suspicion is MTS is saying the same thing to Linux users as they are saying to Windows 2000 users. Namely a) Direct connections will no longer be supported with the next generation of MTS software (older software may still work). b) Tech support will be cancelled for that particular operating system. c) Although the problem with connection will be fixed with a router, the router MUST be purchased from MTS for maximum compatibility. d) They will not sell their routers to people running unsupported operating systems. e) Install techs will not be trained or permitted to connect machines with unsupported operating systems.
OTOH, it could be a hoax. Time will tell...
Later Mike
_______________________________________________ Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
On 10-07-13 01:07 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
Note, LES.NET will provide DSL IP services using MTS' backhaul so that is an option for those DSL is the only option kind of situations.
Do you have any "literature" I can pass along to the CLL? There are still a few people which can't get Shaw. This may be an alternative.
A side note: Les just got the signed CLEC letter. All the best, Robert Keizer
I used to be on MTS with their DSL, but went to les.net as he provides better options for what I would like -- and when I switched to les, my speed doubled and my RTT went in half -- obviously MTS didn't have things setup properly - I was even told from MTS at one point that the loop length may have been an issue -- but, obviously it was not. Good thing I switched as I now have a nice full-speed DSL line :-) I also have my VoIP hosted with les.net -- can't get better than that -- you can call .. but you can also get some information from the site http://les.net Dan. On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Robert Keizer <robert@cluenet.org> wrote:
On 10-07-13 01:07 PM, Mike Pfaiffer wrote:
Note, LES.NET will provide DSL IP services using MTS' backhaul so that is an option for those DSL is the only option kind of situations.
Do you have any "literature" I can pass along to the CLL? There are still a few people which can't get Shaw. This may be an alternative.
A side note: Les just got the signed CLEC letter.
All the best, Robert Keizer _______________________________________________ Roundtable mailing list Roundtable@muug.mb.ca http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable
Heh. "FEC" = Forward Error Correction. MTS uses it. They probably shouldn't in most cases, or rather: not so aggressively. For every 100 bits of user data your DSL modem transmits (or receives), it also sends anywhere between 1 and 50 bits of EDAC (error detection and correction) data. The particular schemes used in ADSL are collectively referred to as FEC, and typically convolutional Trellis Coding is combined with Reed-Solomon block coding. The The DSL Forum Technical Report TR-63 (addendum to TR-57) clarifies that in general DSL management systems may specify - independently - upstream and downstream FEC overhead between 1% and 50%. I don't recall where MTS has it set usually, but I do recall that it's substantial. And on slower connections (e.g. the <1Mbps upstream connection) adding that much overhead *can* introduce noticeable latency. In theory, it shouldn't be double, but implementation details can alter that assumption. The reason FEC is used is the same reason ARQ was added to modems back in the 2400baud days - phone lines are "noisy". We aren't talking Cat6 cable here, we aren't even talking Cat3, which is generally what gets run inside a building for telephone use. We're talking a single pair of copper wires, often with no twist whatsoever, sometimes both in direct contact with the ground (which does *not* provide infinite electrical resistance, i.e. it's a partial short), sometimes with "load coils" (don't ask if you don't already know!)... basically a worst-case scenario for data transmission. Without FEC, so many packets would be discarded that your DSL line would be completely useless. Ever try to download a file when you're getting 10% packet loss? Try it at 90% packet loss. Good luck :-). So the bottom line is, MTS errs on the side of reliability over performance. HOWEVER: the FEC parameters are tunable on a per-modem basis, and the upstream and downstream knobs are independent. Does MTS implement this? I know they sure didn't the last time I had anything to do with their OA&M systems (about 6 years ago). The telco (ILEC, but not MTS) I do work with now certainly doesn't - because management systems that can tune those knobs intelligently and automatically are !#@$%^&* expensive, and it's just too much work to do manually. If Les has convinced MTS to reduce the FEC overhead, you'll get a speed improvement of UP TO 50%, and a latency decrease of UP TO 50%. (Anything beyond 50% indicates non-standard implementation.) On the other hand, if Les didn't actually ask for that, I have to wonder if MTS is turning FEC back down to the minimum in order to make Les' service appear less reliable??? Considering some of the anti-competitive behaviour they exhibit (not quite illegal, though) it wouldn't surprise me. FWIW, previous generations of ADSL equipment typically had FEC as an on/off switch, not a controllable parameter. And Sean and I probably share the same information sources inside MTS, from several years ago... And since I don't work there anymore, and I don't know the details of their DSLAMs, anything I've said here might be inapplicable or just plain wrong. -Adam -----Original Message----- From: roundtable-bounces@muug.mb.ca [mailto:roundtable-bounces@muug.mb.ca] On Behalf Of Dan Keizer Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 15:55 To: Continuation of Round Table discussion Subject: Re: [RndTbl] Request confirmation... I used to be on MTS with their DSL, but went to les.net as he provides better options for what I would like -- and when I switched to les, my speed doubled and my RTT went in half -- obviously MTS didn't have things setup properly - I was even told from MTS at one point that the loop length may have been an issue -- but, obviously it was not. Good thing I switched as I now have a nice full-speed DSL line :-) I also have my VoIP hosted with les.net -- can't get better than that -- you can call .. but you can also get some information from the site http://les.net Dan.
The response from my contact within MTS: "Haven't heard a thing like that. Misinterpreted information from talking to a first-level tech, I'd guess. Next-gen stuff should work with linux easy; it's DHCP on the Ultimate TV side."
participants (6)
-
Adam Thompson -
Dan Keizer -
Mike Pfaiffer -
Raymond J. Henry -
Robert Keizer -
Sean Cody