Lying to the customer is seldom sustainable. To setup some sort of «QoS» to fake the results would be detected sooner or later and will end up in negative press.
While I agree with your proposal of the automated test scenarios I think it‘s rather an illusion to achieve it.
Note that BAKOM refuses to discuss the topic with the SWINOG community despite the accumulated expertise (where else then here?) which I think is wrong.
At least we should try to achieve a fair and unspoiled setup unlike in Germany. My proposal is a point to start the discussion.
-- Fredy Künzler
Init7 (Switzerland) Ltd. Technoparkstrasse 5 CH-8406 Winterthur https://www.init7.net/
Am 12.06.2020 um 23:51 schrieb Jeroen Massar jeroen@massar.ch:
On 2020-06-12 20:16, Fredy Künzler wrote: Dear all, Please see below my communication with BAKOM (OFCOM) regarding the official speed test measurement system which is proposed in the FDV (Fernmeldedienstverordnung).
So I guess that all these providers will apply nice "QoS" to the well known speedtest prefix, while still applying negative "QoS" for the competition, or by not doing proper peering etc etc etc...
What is the point of doing this, when it will never match reality?
Also, it seems that there are monopoly providers who are present at IXs and won't peer then with other ISPs, thus.... not very useful all that, as the speedtest will be amazing, but the actual packets to the other ISP will fly over timbooktoo...
Thus maybe, next to speedtests to standardized sinkholes, doing speedtests between ISPs is a good idea; of course, with changing IPs.
That is: if you participate in this speedtest setup, you host a bunch of nodes in your network, which automatically do speedtests & traceroutes all the time.
Something akin to RIPE's RIS system, or NLNOG Ring or heck Sam Knows, but then a non-corrupt version of that ;)
Greets, Jeroen