[162140] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nick Hilliard)
Wed Apr 3 18:35:46 2013
X-Envelope-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <we7dqr3gi43yngkq8ymvfiit.1365027524628@email.android.com>
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 23:35:33 +0100
To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 3 Apr 2013, at 23:20, Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.c=
om> wrote:
> Try it with upwards of 900ms of variable latency.=20
The last crazy result I got was 146mbit/s on a hardwired 100 mbit link and 1=
-2ms latency to the speedtest.net server I was using at the time (same data c=
entre). Testing this sort of thing with high latency and jitter is understa=
ndably hard, but I didn't see a good reason at the time why it should have b=
een so badly out with good underlying network characteristics.
Nick
>=20
>=20
> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>=20
> Date: 04/03/2013 3:04 PM (GMT-08:00)=20
> To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu=20
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org=20
> Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test=20=
>=20
>=20
> On 3 Apr 2013, at 22:48, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> > (If anybody's got evidence of it reporting more than the link is technic=
ally
> > capable of, feel free to correct me...)
>=20
> I've seen speedtest.net give results significantly greater than the physic=
al bw of the client's network link.
>=20
> Nick
>=20
>=20
>=20
