> On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Curt Sampson wrote:
>
> > Hasn't Rogers indicated that they're going to move to DHCP at some
> > point? If that's the case, the IP addresses are just as `static'
> > with ADSL; BC Tel is giving out 1 week leases, and I've been getting
> > the same address back every time I renew for several weeks now.
>
> Rogers is always "waiting for the @Home merger". I'd heard that @Home
> was using DHCP but that it basically gave out static addresses.
I had a WAVE modem partially installed on Monday afternoon. It is
only partially installed because the Shaw cable technician who was
supposed to arrive first to bring the cable plant in my house up to
specifications, and install a cable "data port", hasn't come. They
subcontracted the modem, ethernet and software install to a third
party and that part has been done.
To verify that everything is working I split off a signal from the TV
and established connectivity. Performance was glacially slow. A
traceroute from my home to the University of Victoria showed lots of
delays along the path. I have done a traceroute from the University
back to the first hop point from my house, to eliminate the cable
plant in my house, and that doesn't look very good either.
$ traceroute 24.64.3.193
traceroute to 24.64.3.193 (24.64.3.193), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 ci1CLEd050.bb.UVic.CA (142.104.22.254) 0.955 ms 1.098 ms 0.912 ms
2 CF-UVicrtr.atm.BC.net (207.23.240.102) 4.997 ms 4.97 ms 4.962 ms
3 HCrtr.atm.BC.net (207.23.240.2) 5.998 ms 5.635 ms 5.778 ms
4 C7507-GRF.hc.BC.net (207.23.240.141) 253.48 ms 441.469 ms 453.303 ms
5 bxsfu-fddi4-0.vancouver.canet.ca (192.68.61.1) 11.873 ms 7.251 ms 6.96 ms
6 bxsym-atm2-0.vancouver.canet.ca (205.207.238.174) 54.452 ms 206.722 ms 19
.151 ms
7 bxstp-h0-0.kent.canet.ca (205.207.238.134) 12.677 ms 11.585 ms 12.947 ms
8 bordercore4-hssi1-0.Seattle.mci.net (166.48.217.253) 25.422 ms 22.24 ms 2
7.356 ms
9 core1.Seattle.mci.net (204.70.4.165) 199.827 ms 274.963 ms 23.339 ms
10 sej-uunet-nap.Seattle.mci.net (206.157.77.122) 30.623 ms 29.168 ms *
11 uunetca-sea1gw1.ALTER.NET (137.39.136.54) 65.312 ms 66.089 ms 66.344 ms
12 h5.bb1.van1.h4.bb1.cal1.uunet.ca (205.150.241.66) 66.501 ms 66.232 ms 66.
495 ms
13 frcal01-f8-1-0.cal.sfl.net (205.150.143.18) 104.9 ms 350.956 ms 324.004 m
s
14 wave-fe.cal.shaw.ca (139.142.0.94) 67.194 ms 66.791 ms 67.713 ms
15 172.16.4.69 (172.16.4.69) 123.189 ms * 144.173 ms
16 10.0.186.38 (10.0.186.38) 149.486 ms * 180.131 ms
Pinging this same IP address from the University showed that 1/3 of
the packets are loss.
$ ping 24.64.3.193
PING 24.64.3.193 (24.64.3.193): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=4 ttl=242 time=229.8 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=6 ttl=242 time=216.5 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=10 ttl=242 time=129.3 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=11 ttl=242 time=126.2 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=12 ttl=242 time=125.8 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=13 ttl=242 time=129.3 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=14 ttl=242 time=129.0 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=15 ttl=242 time=130.3 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=16 ttl=242 time=117.3 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=17 ttl=242 time=134.1 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=19 ttl=242 time=127.1 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=20 ttl=242 time=133.9 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=21 ttl=242 time=138.6 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=22 ttl=242 time=137.0 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=23 ttl=242 time=139.1 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=24 ttl=242 time=128.2 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=26 ttl=242 time=144.3 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=27 ttl=242 time=151.7 ms
64 bytes from 24.64.3.193: icmp_seq=28 ttl=242 time=141.7 ms
--- 24.64.3.193 ping statistics ---
29 packets transmitted, 19 packets received, 34% packet loss
Shaw in Victoria is installing the Terayon TeraPro Modem TCM100
cablemodem which is described at
http://www.terayon.com/products/terapro.html. The specs for this
cable modem are very impressive. Hopefully the rest of Shaw's cable
infrastructure will improve quickly because interactive sessions using
telnet, rlogin and ftp are unworkable with this high level of packet
loss.
Shaw is also moving to "@Home" and my understanding is that I will not
receive monthly bills until that happens. They are using DHCP to
assign static IP addresses which will change as local users come
online and new subnets are created. The lease period is one hour. I
imagine that this period will be increased once the network
infrastructure starts to settle down. Installations in my area
(Gordon Head) have just started.
> Meanwhile, various people on Wave have registered their static addresses
> with some other DNS to get a personalized domain name.
Just a side point here. The Shaw @Home service contract stipulates
that one cannot run a web site from home. They provide webspace on one
of their servers for that purpose.
> Wave is going with @Home for infrastructure; they're a tier 2 (or
> whatever) network and have reasonable connectivity to the major US
> backbones - stuff like Netscape, Yahoo, AltaVista etc. - though not so hot
> to UBC, BCnet etc at present. I'm not sure if BCTel have an infrastructure
After Shaw gets everything in place, if there is still severe packet
loss between my house and UVic (0.5 km away), I will have to
investigate other alternatives. At the moment I still need my modem
to get useful work done. To be fair, Shaw provided a letter with the
install advising customers to maintain their present ISP service until
the @Home switch-over occurs.
> plan at this point. I heard from someone that their route to UBC went via
> San Francisco.
>
> Andrew Daviel
> http://pc-13030.bc.rogers.wave.ca/net/nodes.frameset.html etc.
>
>
------ Dr. Raymond Rusk ------|\^/|------------Internet: ---------
Network Services _|\| |/|_ rrusk@uvic.ca
University of Victoria > < Voice: (250) 721-7654
------ Victoria, BC V8W 3P4 ---->_./|\._<---- Fax: (250) 721-8778 ---