I've mentioned this one before here. The push for high speed connections is
likely damaging latency, as there is only so much bandwidth and people are
using it for torrents etc.
On Saturday, 2 January 2016, Loganaden Velvindron <logan_at_afrinic.net> wrote:
> Hi Sun,
>
> 400ms latency is bad. The bandwidth requirement should not be much for a
> typical twitter session. e.g, even a 256Kb/s connection would be
> acceptable according to me.
>
> What's killing your user experience to twitter is the bad latency. I
> think that ISPs are slowly coming to terms with this reality. The
> regulatory bodies should enforce a policy upon the ISPs so that they
> comply with a latency threshold.
>
> If a policy is enforced, then the ISPs would have to re-engineer their
> infrastructure to meet those criteria. I have yet to see a policy from
> ICTA concerning latency. I heard about a policy for "QOS".
> (https://www.icta.mu/it/qos.htm). However, ICTA website has little
> information. Like I said many times previously, latency is as important
> as bandwidth, and with the rise of VOIP/online gaming/streaming, this
> becomes even more critical.
>
> That's my current latency:
>
> ping www.twitter.com
> PING twitter.com (199.16.156.38): 56 data bytes
> 64 bytes from 199.16.156.38: icmp_seq=0 ttl=240 time=313.494 ms
> 64 bytes from 199.16.156.38: icmp_seq=1 ttl=240 time=313.369 ms
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Sun Jan 03 2016 - 14:39:27 PST