my Maxis' 800Mbps (after FSU2023) for RM219.
1Gbps for RM159? why not?

i'm interrupting here. i've never dealt with MPLS before.
but what i understand is every gateway router passed along will reduce TTL inside packet by 1. else stale packet will never age and will never get removed. imagine packets from the original 1970s network still bouncing around because TTL never reach 0.

it make sense that a packet outside whatever-kind-of-tunnel will get TTL reduced as it hops by each gateway router.

it also makes sense for a packet inside whatever-kind-of-tunnel get not get modified by MITM gateway routers in-between, but only by the ingress and egress devices of that the tunnel.

--

website is generally at application leyer. OSI 7.
unless the webserver is built ground up to access and retrieve the test packets all the way from layer 3 where TTL is, it is correct to assume that whatever hop information is unreliable and at best only a guess. plus, on an IP network, back-to-back packets don't have to travel on same route to same destination. you can see the effect by repeating traceroutes again and again to distant targets.

This post has been edited by Oltromen Ripot: Jun 21 2024, 11:41 AM

i'm fed up with the offering on market.
on a journey of building my own internet router appliance using Ryzen3200G desktop.

was sanity testing newly-purchased 4-port gbe card.
just leaving this 1-port speedtest over 2Gbps unifi subscription. white ONR. nampak cantik, kan? at least i know what the link is capable before bad international routing in telco space comes into play.

don't do it from outside your LAN, okay? 😮‍💨😂

both sides need to confirm transferred properly.
not just the wires in your house but also paperwork and billing.
just be patient, there is temporary overlap period that you'll be billed by both sides.

you also don't want either or both to wash hand if suddenly got problem.

honestly, 11days is too much. why not 11yrs since already taking sweet time anyway.
i opine that it's to max out last kopek of your wallet.

private IP ranges
10.0.0.0/8
169.254.0.0/16
172.16.0.0/12
192.168.0.0/16

those 4 ranges (at least) are not routable on the public Internet.
if your router gets assigned outside those 4, chances are you are directly assigned public IP.

you can't with the white ONR. period.
hardware limitation.
even if you somehow magically able to bond (the ONR does not support aggregation/bonding/trunking), individual network thread is limited to theoretical maximum of 940Mbps. so your application need to create 2 threads to run through 2 ports at same time in order to potentially reach 2x940Mbps.

that's why TM's 2Gbps documentation says if you want to know max speed test, you need 2 machines each with 1Gbe cable to do the test at same time, in order to saturate 2 ports of the white ONR. and then you have to summ the values from both machines.

technician TM pun menyumpah. bila mereka komplen macam mana nak buat speedtest customer minta, TM suruh mereka bawa 2 laptop ke site. gila.

that Dlink AIR app is total crap. siapa yang tulis app dlink tu patut dibuang kerja dan di blacklist daripada menjawat apa-apa kerja IT dengan mana-mana firma, kecil atau besar, seumur hidup.

i limit the ONR to only be on 2.4GHz.
i cabled M9 Plus and use it only on 5GHz.
basically i "disabled" band steering by using separate hardware.

fast roaming 802.11k/v/r can wreak havoc.
802.11k supplies clients with list of known related APs, so client get a ready list of alternatives to switch to and does not need to perform own scan.

802.11r makes it possible for client to switch to alternative APs immediately by exchanging already-authenticated token with related AP it is switching to, instead of having to repeat the whole authentication cycle as if hooking to new unrelated AP.

802.11v is when AP pushes "better" recommendation to client. i think band steering is under here.

by end of the month,
TM will probably end up having all IPv4 and IPv6 imaginable on their hijack route

--

just another nail into the coffin.
instead of fixing the current 2Gbps debacle, they focus well - exceedingly over the top well - on hijacking and blocking DNS traffic. and moreover, even business subscribers are also affected.
i can still tolerate if TM only implement filtering for unsecured DNS queries, that would be good to protect young ones and nonagenarians. but they went step beyond to even block DoH and DoH.
While everyone is coming up with schemes to secure the internet, TM wants its user to go back stone age.

i stand by my earlier resolution to disconnect TM when my contract is up.

dude.... where have you been in the past 48hrs?

1. Assume all unencrypted plain DNS udp/53 and tcp/53 queries to popular public DNS resolvers can, is, and will eventually be hijacked.

2. Unifi almost-confirmed is blocking DoT tcp/853. Probably no regard to which DNS resolvers, simply wholesale blocked.

3. Unverified claim that DoH tcp/443 is also blocked. This is probably hit-and-miss and precision-targetted since HTTPS tcp/443 will also be broken if done without care.

With those in mind, good luck

Gomen: kita nak kurangkan outflow ringgit ke luar negara

Gomen: kita akan cipta keadaan yang memaksa hampir kesemua pengguna internet Malaysia untuk berbelanja melanggan VPN luar negara

ALL Malaysian ISPs are required to implement by 30th September 2024.

But so far Unifi is almost-proven to be the most *.@!§>~' going beyond by even blocking DoH and DoT. Basically about to send all its users back to DNS' stone age.

Buat penat aje pakar-pakar teknologi memikirkan macam mana nak lindungi pengguna daripada DNS poisoning.... whoever is pushing this inside TM is really stupid. really really shortsighted. patut kena buang kerja, dan diwartakan supaya tidak diambil bekerja oleh mana-mana syarikat telnologi seumur usia yang berbaki.

"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. "

yeah, TM is going to the extremities.



we're so f**ked.

that's DoH client embedded inside browser.
almost all modern browsers have the feature tucked inside.

that, can expect will continue to work only as long as TMnut does not nuclear-option total block tcp/443 of the selected DNS resolvers.

DEY! WHY YOU LIST THEM IP ADDRESSES DOWN? MAHU KENA BLOCK?

of course it's that bloody fool of a took...

but TM is currently like a half-bright student trying to score extra points by going the extra mile, closing down DoH and DoT which otherwise should be encouraged instead.

why ktards keep shooting themselves in their foot by keep on listing IP addresses for TM to harvest?

WHY ARE YOU DOING JOB FOR TM?