Hughesnet Community

Trouble accessing Google Drive and Docs

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
dk3
Sophomore

Trouble accessing Google Drive and Docs

Does anybody else have troubles accessing Google Drive and Google Docs? I am not throttled. And I don't have any trouble accessing other website - even those that are bandwidth heavy, e.g. YouTube or Facebook. But often I have troubles accessing Google Drive and Docs. The browser will hang, network errors are reported, or timeouts. I've cleared caches and disabled Google's offline extensions. I've restarted all my network devices. Often this will be a problem for hours at a time (typically mornings or evenings) and then clear up.

 

I need this for work and now that my kids are home, they need access for school. It's incredibly frustrating that they can't access a Google Doc even while they are successfully participating in a Zoom meeting! (Kudos to the Zoom folks for engineering an impressively robust video chat client that operates well even with attrocious satellite latency and typically consumes less than 1G/hr - but I digress.)

 

I am certain that this is a HughesNet routing problem. How do I know? Because when I connect to my company's VPN and route all my traffic through my employer, then I can retrieve Drive and Docs URLs with no significant delay (except the relatively modest VPN delay). Today I had to have my kids use my laptop so they could retrieve their assignments.

 

What does this imply? It suggests that the HughesNet path to Google's network is regularly congested. HughesNet needs to increase their land-based bandwidth to Google or add some peering or something. This is so frustrating. And with Covid-19 forcing us all to work from home, it's a showstopper!

 

27 REPLIES 27
MarkJFine
Professor

Routing is handled by the gateway's provider, not HughesNet.


* Disclaimer: I am a HughesNet customer and not a HughesNet employee. All of my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent HughesNet in any way.
maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

I often have the same experience with Google drive, and with icloud.com.  Changing networks solves it (for the most part), and I agree with you it's the gateway's provider, and whatever clogging happens along those intertubes as a result.  It's just what it is, and it's likely going to get worse.  I think right now we should shift priorities a bit. 

 


@MarkJFine wrote:

Routing is handled by the gateway's provider, not HughesNet.


 

I hope you're not giving HughesNet a pass.

 

The ISPs bandwidth providers are still the ISPs responsibility to the customer. From my traceroute, HughesNet uses Cogent for its access to the internet - to both Google and my work VPN. One path is regularly congested and the other isn't. It's HughesNet's responsibility on behalf of us to raise congestion concerns with its providers, purchase redundant connections with different gateway vendors and reroute network traffic appropriately, and peer with large providers such as Google or Netflix in order to provide its customers with reliable service.

 

These are basic responsibilities of any ISP.

 

maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

"I hope you're not giving HughesNet a pass."

 

Oh dear, not this again. I fear @MarkJFine  may not have the energy to repeat his explanation of how the backbone provider works. 


@maratsade wrote:

"I hope you're not giving HughesNet a pass."

 

Oh dear, not this again. I fear @MarkJFine  may not have the energy to repeat his explanation of how the backbone provider works. 


A reference to another thread is welcome. I stand by my argument that the ISP is responsible to its customers for the backbone performance. No passing the buck.

 

maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

You can use the search box at the top. 

I did. And I limited my search to Mark's posts, too. Couldn't find what you are referring to. There are lots of posts on this board.

 


@maratsade wrote:

You can use the search box at the top. 


 

GabeU
Distinguished Professor IV


@dk3 wrote:

I stand by my argument that the ISP is responsible to its customers for the backbone performance. No passing the buck.

HughesNet can't control, nor are they responsible for, things that happen down the line. 

 

It's very possible, and even likely, that the problem is the result of CenturyLink's progressively worse service.   

Thanks for your replies, all.

 

Of course I understand that HughesNet's backbone providers are ultimately responsible for transit performance. But those entities (Cogent, here) are vendors of HughesNet, and HughesNet has many options to address congestion by these operators. It fundamentally is an ISPs responsibility to provide good service. To mitigate issues HughesNet may monitor congestion and raise trouble tickets with their provider, Cogent; they may choose to purchase additional backbone connections through secondary vendors; they may choose to colocate with major content delivery companies such as Amazon (Netflix) or Google. 

In my day job, I oversee a municipal fiber optic network. That network renews its ISP contract on a regular basis. The choice of ISP is chosen in part based on that ISP's internet connectivity that includes the availability of redundant paths for fault tolerance and congestion,  colocation with major content providers, and their ability to respond to congestion with routing changes.

 

Unless there is something unique about HughesNet, they have the same professional responsibilities to ensure reliable transport. And to that end, they are failing us badly. I'm mystified why folks want to give HN a pass.

 


@GabeU wrote:

@dk3 wrote:

I stand by my argument that the ISP is responsible to its customers for the backbone performance. No passing the buck.

HughesNet can't control, nor are they responsible for, things that happen down the line. 

 

It's very possible, and even likely, that the problem is the result of CenturyLink's progressively worse service.   


 

maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

"HughesNet has many options to address congestion by these operators. It fundamentally is an ISPs responsibility to provide good service."

 

We shouldn't assume they're not doing whatever they can to get their providers to fix their issues. We shouldn't assume their providers have the capacity to fix the issue. 


@maratsade wrote:

"HughesNet has many options to address congestion by these operators. It fundamentally is an ISPs responsibility to provide good service."

 

We shouldn't assume they're not doing whatever they can to get their providers to fix their issues. We shouldn't assume their providers have the capacity to fix the issue. 


Then let's here that from them instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt. How about an honest technical blog published by senior engineers that shares with customers what issues they are aware of and what mitigation strategies they are employing? That transparency would build a lot of credibility. Or how about a status.hughesnet.com website that lists currently known system health? Lots of companies do this: https://ecogent.cogentco.com/network-statushttps://status.aws.amazon.com/, etc. 

 

I think we should assume that they are doing nothing until they demonstrate otherwise.

maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

I've suggested a status website (EDIT: in the past, a couple of times).  That'd be awesome.  I'm sure something like that is in the works, probably, but all of these things take a lot of time. 

 

"I think we should assume that they are doing nothing until they demonstrate otherwise."

 

Do you also assume people are guilty until proven innocent?


@maratsade wrote:

I've suggested a status website (EDIT: in the past, a couple of times).  That'd be awesome.  I'm sure something like that is in the works, probably, but all of these things take a lot of time. 

 

"I think we should assume that they are doing nothing until they demonstrate otherwise."

 

Do you also assume people are guilty until proven innocent?


Ha! HughesNet is not on trial. But it is up to them to proactively demonstrate that they care and are acting to address network issues or are at least aware of them. That's building customer confidence in a situation that is otherwise shrowded in uncertainty. What makes you sure that something like a status page is in the works? What friendly wager could we accept that HughesNet will do no such thing in the next, say, 12 months. I've been a customer for a decade.

 

Trust is everything. And without that, yes, I assume corporations are guilty until proven innocent.

This thread is a perfect example of the difference between opinions and real facts.


* Disclaimer: I am a HughesNet customer and not a HughesNet employee. All of my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent HughesNet in any way.


@MarkJFine wrote:

This thread is a perfect example of the difference between opinions and real facts.


Indeed, I'd love to see some real facts from HN. Congestion reports, for example. Mitigation strategies, for example. Acknowledgement of problems, for example. Without it, it is all just hearsay and assumptions: I'm sure they're working on it, it takes time, they must be doing their best, it's out of their control. 

 


@dk3 wrote:


Indeed, I'd love to see some real facts from HN.


Sigh... I was talking about you.


* Disclaimer: I am a HughesNet customer and not a HughesNet employee. All of my comments are my own and do not necessarily represent HughesNet in any way.


@MarkJFine wrote:

@dk3 wrote:


Indeed, I'd love to see some real facts from HN.


Sigh... I was talking about you.


Yes, I caught that.

I've provided basic facts of my experience, first hand testimony, that are not disputable - specific slow downs during certain times to specific hosts that is ameliorated by changing network routes. I don't think anybody is doubting these facts, but I could provide traceroutes and load times the next time it happens. All I've heard in response is handwaiving "not their responsibility" arguments. From my specific experience as someone responsible for hiring an ISP to serve a network I've shared the facts of the sorts of criteria that a competitive bidder must respond to - that include mitigating downstream congestion. In response I've heard handwaiving "I'm sure they're working on it", that corporations act in mysterious ways that we mortals may not understand, and that I should just deal with it in the whole scope of things. 
I'm surprised at the consisent, fact-less defense of HughesNet.

maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

Thanks again for the thoughts and opinions you have shared, and please continue.

 

EDIT: I never claimed that "corporations act in mysterious ways that we mortals may not understand,"  You can read trade and corporate regulations yourself and see how they shape corporations.  These laws and regulations are factual and they bind corporations, and they are available to everyone to read.  There is no  mystery at all. 


@maratsade wrote:

Thanks again for the thoughts and opinions you have shared, and please continue.

 

EDIT: I never claimed that "corporations act in mysterious ways that we mortals may not understand,"  You can read trade and corporate regulations yourself and see how they shape corporations.  These laws and regulations are factual and they bind corporations, and they are available to everyone to read.  There is no  mystery at all. 


Thanks for your thoughts and opinions, too. Sorry if you feel that I misrepresented you. What I read was that corporations may be acting according to contracts or rules that affect transport efficiency. Without identifying anything specific that actually applies, my interpretation is that you're saying that there might be such regulations that keep one or more of these companies from fixing the problems. Maybe. The existance of such contracts and rules are a fact. Whether they are contributing to network congestion is speculation unless specific factual examples can be presented. 

 

That hasn't happened. And without that, the argument is purely opinion that diverts us from the problem at hand. If you have an example, please share.

maratsade
Distinguished Professor IV

This is a limited medium, and the topic is so complex it gives me headache. 🙂

I respect your opinions and views on the topic; my own opinions and views come from experience of being a corporate lawyer (international mergers and acquisitions) for years.   

I'd say the best way to understand the topic is to become a lawyer.

Sadly, I don't have time to give you specific laws and regulations, because it's not a straighforward proposition; it's a fluid one of quite serious complexity. 

Not sure you'd understand (this is not an opinion on your intelligence, not at all -- it's more a comment on the complexity of the law), have the time or inclination to even venture in there,  or avoid being bored to brain death by them anyway. 🙂