Streamyx is now implementing a transparenxy proxy to Streamyx home-package users which will be a problem to get the dynamic public IP address to be assigned to registered dynamic DNS service like DynDNS. I am working a way to overcome this annoyance. The real pain is is not just TM: some ISPs in other countries have implemented transparent proxies for quite some time already.

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 20 2008, 10:30 AM

Another way to look into this is TM may be upgrading their infrastructure which affects some users. Therefore, to avoid disruptions, the affected users will be channeled/redirected through a transparent proxy for a temporary measure until they are reconnected the usual way again. If the proxy servers are overwhelmed with a lot of traffic, they will crawl like baby.

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 20 2008, 10:51 AM

If they want to do this for long-term, they need to make sure the proxies perform at acceptable level. Proxy caching for millions of home Streamyx users are not cost-effective in short-term.

One of the concerns on ISP side is the proxy cache placement management. One solution is provided in this link:

http://www2003.org/cdrom/papers/poster/p30...iantafillou.htm

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 20 2008, 11:24 AM

Wow...that's too far-fetched!

This is an issue with ISP's employed transparent proxy servers. It has nothing to do with client's machine.

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 20 2008, 02:33 PM

The benefits are more on ISP side rather than customers. ISP will have reduced traffic. And, to some extent, they can analyze the contents of the proxy cache. That's why it is important to have a trusted ISP to hold sensitive information stored inside a proxy cache. If the content comes from non-secured sites (non-HTTPS), ISP can see your user credentials and password information on proxy cache.

Normally, proxies are never designed to cache encrypted pages like HTTPS used in banking and secure sites as those encrypted contents are gibberish. So, no password or user credential information can be extracted from an encrypted streams/data stored in the proxy cache.

On customer side, if the same page has been cached into a proxy cache, the browser will receive the cached page instead of the actual page from a server (usually that hosts a website). It will be "faster". The problem is that some websites are not designed to properly handle cache control.

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 20 2008, 02:52 PM

My connection is no longer running through any transparent proxy or proxy cache since the last time I posted the annoyance in this thread.

FYI, I don't complain about it or having any resentment because I understand why it is like this. It is only just an annoyance because there is always a solution to it. In fact, I don't have a problem with Streamyx since my subscription date in 2004.

The only email that I've sent to TM is pertaining to no dial-tone which cut me off online (either line phone or Streamyx) and it was solved within a few hours from my only call to TM 100 number. Yes, I gave TM enough details of why it happened to make it easy for them to solve my problem. I just treated TM call operator in assertive but amicable way and repeated many times so that the operator didn't make any mistake in typing the problem report. The other reason is that TM cannot treat me badly since I pay to TM on time in full every month before the dateline and never miss the dateline.

The GOOD thing is that: my connection is now constantly up running on "60.53.*.*" and is performing within the acceptable 70% speed of my Streamyx package, just like always. Thank you, TM Streamyx.

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 26 2008, 06:30 PM

I did nothing.

This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 26 2008, 08:25 PM

I do feel my connection is improving and it has never been disconnected (24x7). And, I am perplexed with the download speed test result of my 512kbps package right now:



It must be something wrong with SpeedTest's algorithm. I've repeated many times and they are above 512kbps (test under FF3).

The craziest download speed running under IE8:



Hmm, I need to try other speed test websites.

This test result is more reliable (The download speed is above 70% of the expected download speed):



This post has been edited by eclectice: Nov 27 2008, 08:45 PM

Possibly, people are suddenly interested to know the current event in Mumbai...

Yes, it is possible for the BBC servers to be flooded with many traffic. It can experience Digg- or Slashdot-effect.

To know whether you are being proxified or not depends on the tool you use to signify it. Downloading will be difficult if a website doesn't manage page cache control and web-page design in a way that improves user experience.