🚀 go-pugleaf

> mreid@rogers.wave.ca wrote:
> >
> > Please note that this is also mirrored now at
> > http://home.on.rogers.wave.ca/mreid/ottisp/index.html . My cable modem
> > has been acting up a bit lately, so this URL may be more reliable.
> >
> > Unfortunately, performance testing can be quite complicated. The results
> > shown favor any ISP on the iStar/MCI or UUNet networks and I've tried to
> > include sufficient notice of this on my pages. I want to make that clear.
> >
> > iStar is on iStar and Sympatico is on the Bell/CANET network. This tends
> > to make Sympatico look worse than iStar. Sympatico doesn't allow their web
> > servers to respond to pings. That tends to make Symapatico look better
> > again as I'm pinging their last pingable router. Routers often treat pings
> > as low priority however...
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mike.


Check out the July edition of Boardwatch magazine for some interesting
performance comparisons of major backbone providers. Although the tests
are US-centric, they did include Bell Canada which was ranked dead last.

It's entirely possible their tests were unfairly biased towards U.S.
providers, and in fact all of their test agents were in U.S. locations.

How Bell managed to be so far behind the pack is still interesting
though - unless their webserver was at fault.

The URL is http://www.boardwatch.com/MAG/97/JUL/bwm22.htm

You'll have to fill out a form if you're not a member, but it is
free.


-- 
Colin Stuckless
Junior Network Administrator
Revenue Canada - Information Highway Initiatives Division
colins@rc.gc.ca