Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

you

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I'm surprised no ones commented on yours Kymmy, was the packet loss noticable on both your connections ?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

is it worth contacting vm about it

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Yes and no. They may admit you're in an over subscribed area and issue a fix date, or they may say you're a minority and do diddly squat. Can't hurt to try.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Nope, only the 50Mb one.. It seems fine now.. Only time I've seen anything like that before was when the idiots coming home from the pub thought it was great to try to dismantle a cabinet

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Wasn't me, honest.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/03/20.png

mine doesnt seem to be working??

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It looks a bit weird though wouldn't you agree, maximum latency took a bit of a nose dive and packet loss went up at the same time.

I always think rightly or wrongly that it may be VM trialling varying degrees of traffic management when I see graphs like that.

Glad it's eased off now though :)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

my take is the packetloss did affect users, which in turn lowered the utilisation which in turn lowered the latency.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Here is my ping graph, this is after Uddingston upload upgrade has came in play for me.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/03/23.jpg

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Looking really good right now. There has been a significant improvement since my old monitor went all red. There has been a change locally, but I'm not sure what. I can't remember my old IP, but I guess that has changed.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...20-03-2012.png

http://www.pingtest.net/result/59288211.png

This is my normal ping now. Before superhub I invariably got 0% jitter. Not complaining. :D

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I'd be almost inclined to ask you if that was a VM graph... no doubt the best i've seen so far if it is... a bit mad how your latency humped up after 6PM, as even on my jittered to hell connection it has never done that, but still, i'd rather suffer that than 24 hrs of spikey heaven.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

My graph has been pretty flat since December, last night it went a bit odd and did this (I was barely using the internet so I'm pretty sure it wasn't me). What would cause the minimum latency to step like that?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Definitely VM. :erm: PCs were in constant use 4.30pm until 10pm. It doesn't quite match the bump.

---------- Post added at 08:56 ---------- Previous post was at 08:55 ----------


Interesting bump at roughly the same time as mine. Could it just be because that the whole street were on line too, until bedtime?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...20-03-2012.png

Mine doesn't look too bad.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/03/12.png
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2012/03/13.png

Getting better... Most of the spikes are down to my own usage now.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Not too shabby qas

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Yeah. I believe upstream capacity got quadrupled over the last month and we're now on the verge of the 10:1 upgrade, perhaps 3rd time lucky (after 3 delays and overruns)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Everything comes to those who wait :)

I just hope it isn't short lived, right now I suspect's its about as good as you can expect it to be.

Nice to see for a change

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Only been a virgin customer since the start of the month but i've been unable to do anything in the evenings or weekends due to huge latency / jitter.

I've contacted virgin and we all know how well that goes......so i thought i'd post here to see if anyone knows why it's doing this? I have my ping monitor posted below (which clearly shows my line dying in the evening)

High traffic in my area a guess? :S

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/m...6290752a67.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It stayed good for about 2-3 weeks now, but my service is getting disconnected in 11 days anyway. 15 months of waiting? Nah... They had their chance a long time ago

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

normally adsl congestion causes that kind of slope, whilst cable congestion instead usually just pushes up max and average latency.

however peering congestion can cause that as well.

---------- Post added at 15:12 ---------- Previous post was at 15:05 ----------

Persoanlly I think it will be shortlived but at the same time it wont be as bad as it was pre uplift.

You have some congestion there in late afternoon evening time, so thats obviously going to increase when the speeds get put on 10:1. But with more overall capacity and a bigger shared pipe it wont be anywhere near as bad as before.

I think VM have abandoned congestion relief in my area as march fix date is delayed until end of may, end of may is conveniantly the time when the speed doubling work is been done so now VM seem to be treating that work as the congestion relief. Seems I didnt get the "extra US added" like some people get when they have US congestion. My area also still has downstream congestion and no upgrade there either. I just hope infinity isnt late to town.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It's something within VM's network. Not peering and not local. It's been showing up increasingly lately on a lot of VM edge nodes.

---------- Post added at 16:34 ---------- Previous post was at 16:31 ----------

My extra US added was part of the upstream uplift works that most people had done a year ago.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I mean an extra US to take to 3 US's. Some people have 3 US's and others only have 2.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Apparently I posted a live graph, so you can see it again today. Yesterday there was a little 3ms step around 3pm, now every night I get that big block of minimum latency increase. Could it be a reseg that caused that?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

If Roughbeast and Maverick go through the same Core equipment, and if that is congested for other routing reasons, then minimum latency would rise.

Igni's written about that somewhere, I recall.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

yes core network congestion would cause that also but isnt the core network supposedbly in good shape :p

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It isn't the core network. It's a few edge nodes. It's been showing up in Scotland since at least Feb 26th.

Both Roughbeast and Maverick's base latency makes it look like they're up north somewhere, in fact pretty much as far north as VM's network goes. Even though RB's profile says he's in Coventry.

... That or they got routing problems.

---------- Post added at 22:51 ---------- Previous post was at 22:33 ----------

Ehm... When was Sky Anytime+ made available to VM customers again?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I'm in Cheltenham, pretty much the polar opposite :D

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Definitely Coventry. It all gets routed through Birmingham after that.


Tracing route to bbc.co.uk [212.58.241.131]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms REDDWARF [192.168.1.1]
2 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms 10.14.112.1
3 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms brhm-core-2b-ae3-938.network.virginmedia.net [21
3.106.230.157]
4 39 ms 8 ms 7 ms brhm-bb-1b-ae8-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.253
.174.77]
5 12 ms 132 ms 35 ms nrth-bb-1a-as4-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.253
.185.105]
6 18 ms 13 ms 13 ms nrth-bb-1b-ae0-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.253
.185.118]
7 16 ms 15 ms 15 ms tele-ic-4-ae0-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.253.
174.18]
8 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms pos6-1.rt0.thdo.bbc.co.uk [212.58.239.237]
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 15 ms 14 ms 16 ms ae1.er01.rbsov.bbc.co.uk [132.185.254.46]
11 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 132.185.255.134
12 14 ms 15 ms 15 ms 212.58.241.131

Trace complete.

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]






[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]


All tests done within a 10 minute slot.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Of course, it could all be that TBB glitched as happened a few weeks ago.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It's not a TBB glitch as it's been happening several days a week for over a month, and only affects certain nodes even along the same route (say Edinburgh CMTS 13 but not CMTS 14)

---------- Post added at 19:47 ---------- Previous post was at 19:32 ----------

VM seem to have some very slow routes for some reason. Edinburgh to Manchester is a ~250 mile path, and takes only 5ms. Birmingham to London is about 100 miles but taking 8ms for you. Manchester to London, which is about twice as far, only takes 6-7ms for me.

(Incidentally VM also have a very slow route to Amsterdam)

Despite having over four times as far for my data to go, it only takes 15% longer (18ms) to reach London from Edinburgh than it does for you. My TBB monitor actually has the same minimum ping as yours, despite being 4 times further away as well, which is really odd.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Not sure of the infrastructure implications, but from Staverton pinging a Manchester based server, it goes Staverton -> Aztec West -> Guildford -> Birmingham -> Manchester (TC). Which from a geographical persepctive makes no sense at all, and if you view the VM business infrastructure map there is a direct link from Staverton to Birmingham.

:confused:

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

tracert to pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com before and during the 'hump'??

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

where are these maps?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It was a little Flash tool someone posted in one of the other threads on here a while back. Showed infrastructure paths, fibre access areas, a few other bits and pieces - you could flick through different views of the UK showing different things.

Can't find the link off the top of my head, if I find it i'll post it.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

yeah please :)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It's on VM Business' website.

---------- Post added at 22:06 ---------- Previous post was at 22:06 ----------

Yeah I was seeing London => Birmingham traffic going via Manchester as well, but only in one direction.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

this > http://www.virginmediabusiness.co.uk...lw105-VRB.html

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

My evening bump was much smaller yesterday. Why would Wednesday be any different than Tuesday? PC usage was the same.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Looking at the two humps in the TBB graph and your traceroute - if the traceroute was taken while that was happening, and if there was congestionin the VM network (one of the possible causes), then all of the traces in that traceroute would have shown the same cdelay at and after a certain point in the list.

If the traceroute was not taken during the middle of that, there's nothing we can glean from it.

---------- Post added at 12:08 ---------- Previous post was at 11:57 ----------

So they're not in the furthest northern regions. I think Qasi is approaching this from the wrong angle. a 15% difference in transit times doesn't account for the minimum latency humps we're seeing.

It's one (or all) of three things:

1. LAN related issues

2. TBB glitching like it did earlier

3. Some issue in the Core as stuiff queues due to routing issues or whatever

Any traceroutes must be done during the peiod of the humps in order for there to be any deduction made, and, as Craigie has suggested, it should be back to the TBB site.

I wish this was Simples, because these are buggers to determine.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

No, but their latency looks like they should be, if it takes longer for data to go from London to Birmingham than London to Edinburgh, something is wrong with the route it's taking. His base ping should be around the 10ms mark, not the 16-18 it's showing on the chart.

The 15% was an illustration of my speed vs. theirs, it has nothing to do with the humps RB is seeing.

Their latency (or rather the latency during the traceroute) shows either the route is very slow or alternatively taking a bad route - e.g. going Birmingham => Manchester => London. Route flapping between direct and indirect routes like that could explain the humps, but so could congestion. Or even the latter causing the former.

I think the problem is, well, there's two problems which are impossible to isolate from each other.

Since it affects nodes within VM's carrier network then it can't be purely a LAN issue

If that were the case you'd expect it to affect many/every route/destination along certain paths. It doesn't

Most likely explanation.

Indeed - pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Minimum ping. The green line on his chart. London to Birmingham should take around 6ms, then to his cable modem from Birmingham, 4-5ms.

Not sure what you mean by that. Too much jitter on your trace to get anything meaningful, and you're tracing to a different server. Looks like your hop to Winnersh core is taking ~9-10ms when it should be taking 4-5, and from Winnersh to London is 1ms which is about right. Birmingham to London should be about 5-6ms, but RB's is taking 8+ and his first hop is 7ms+ when it should be <5


No, I was trying to explain why his base ping was so much higher than it should be. We already know the humps are localized pockets of congestion. That's the only plausible explanation.

It's not the queues that matter, it's the fact the data is taking a longer route to avoid a shorter, more congested one. But that would show up on a traceroute when done at the time of the humps.

I think I've said at least 3 times now it's NOT TBB.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

You said: "Most likely explanation.

Indeed - pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com"

Anyway, the humps are too large to be accounted for by the few ms you're arguing about.

I think your analysis of my traceroute was a load of mumbo jumbo; unusual for you, Qasi.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

No, I said " Indeed - pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com" which was in direct response to your statement " and, as Craigie has suggested, [traceroutes] should be back to the TBB site." which was clearly quoted above that line.

The statement "Most likely explanation" was in response to your statement "3. Some issue in the Core as stuiff queues due to routing issues or whatever", which was again, clearly quoted directly above that line.

i.e.:

[the above statement is the] Most likely explanation.

END STATEMENT HERE

---------- Post added at 16:46 ---------- Previous post was at 16:43 ----------

Which part did you not understand?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Looks like it was a kickback from some routing changes - I had another 'step' in my minimum latency around 3pm this afternoon, back down to the original levels. The trace to pingbox now correctly goes straight to London, which would explain it.

Doesn't bode well for the network if its that close to breaking point...

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I had no latency bumps last night, so was unable to run useful tracert or ping tests.

I wonder why it has all settled down for me. Has everybody else lost the mid-evening bump?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I haven't seen it on Edinburgh core since the 16th.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

So... i switched to modem mode a couple of days ago after finally getting sick of the superhub's hardware issues. Modem mode is definately better with jitter, but i'm yet to see any improvement with FIFA, other games seem better.

I've still got my other graph on the TBB monitor, and it seems whoever has claimed my Superhub's IP address since it's been in modem mode is one hell of a bandwidth whore... it wouldn't surprise me if this fella was responsible for quite a lot of the spikes on the line, all he seems to do all day is torrent or upload at full capacity

Superhub

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...19-03-2012.png

Superhub Modem Mode - You an see the clear reduction in minmum latency and average latency also.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/03/6.png

Now this is the guy who has claimed my old IP address when in router mode. What an ********. I'd love to go and rip his box off his wall as he obviously has no respect for other people on his line what so ever... luckily, and wierdly, it doesn't seem to be affecting me since i went into modem mode... but when in router mode, i'd be susceptible to people who do this sort of stuff on a daily basis, most likely this bawbag.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...23-03-2012.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

The only person on his line is him and if he's paying for a service why is it disrespectful to use it?

You seem to be under the impression the only person who should be using their internet connection is you and anyone else using what they pay for is a bawbag.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

You like to put words in people's mouths quite a bit, don't you?

However, no, i'm under the impression that heavy users can have a detrimental effect on other people's quality of service, and the fact that this guy clearly shows typical torrent use through most hours of daylight up until midnight (which can bee seen days previous too) he clearly has no respect for other people in his area, which is why i referred to him as a bawbag.

I couldn't care less how people use their connection as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on mine.

Either way, the point of the post was to point out the clear differences between router and modem mode. The other guy on my old IP was just an observation, as when his connection isn't in use, his avg. latency seems a lot higher in off peak times especially. Looks like he's having some service issues on the end too... i didn't rip his box off the wall, i promise.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Don't get into an argument with Qasi, Boroboi. He never lets go.

Ask him to interpret the change in minimum latency when you switched to modem mode.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I've noticed :D

Indeed that one has me stumped... could it be that the Router MAC was registered to a different part of the network to the modem MAC? I'm not sure how VM routes it's customers, the channels are the same though.

In router mode, i'd see maybe 18-19ms min. latency. In modem mode it appears to be around 14-15ms from what i can guess looking at the graph, with a marked improvement in jitter, although it's still there.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

that user is on a different port anyway I think.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Your latency already changed before switching to modem mode, and you haven't provided any direct comparison between the two (i.e. before/after/before again). It could have been completely coincidental, something to do with the IP change, or the switch itself.

Looks like your Superhub Normal graph stops around 11:30pm. Your modem mode graph doesn't start until 4pm. We don't even know how many days apart that is, and anything could have happened in the intervening time that's nothing to do with either the Superhub or modem mode.

Comparing two things many hours/days apart really doesn't give us much to go on...

(If you want to compare latency and jitter in the two modes, get a decent ping program, and ping the nearest node you can on the VM network, and do an immediate comparison)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Qasi - are you up on the theory as to why modem mode might have lower latency than router mode? Or, of course, definitely wouldn't have lower latency?

I can see you're saying above that the particular results posted by Boroboi aren't of a standard from which deductions can be drawn.

But, in theory ......

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

It's quite possible that modem mode would have slightly lower latency, but I wouldn't expect that much simply between the two modes. There's a lot of variables though, for example the Superhub's firmware may simply not be programmed to respond to pings at the highest priority, something that is quite common on carrier network equipment. Another example variable would be the SH needing to inspect the IP packet in router mode, determine if it is for itself or a device being NAT'ed behind it and then determine where to pass it to, a process that takes time, and something it doesn't have to do in "modem mode". Also, higher average CPU load in router mode, etc.

In the end I'd expect ~0.5-1ms difference between the two modes but larger differences are probably a result of different routing in other parts of the network.

If we wanted to make a direct comparison between the SH in modem and router mode, best thing would be to ping from something *behind* the SH rather than relying on the SH itself to respond to pings - i.e. use the same endpoints in both situations, and also to try obtain the SH's WAN MAC and clone that if so that the PC/router would get the same IP address from VM's network. That'd rule out any differences in routing based on IP address.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

A lot of what you say makes sense. But if you displace the routing functions to an external device, the same factors arise.

I suppose someone could frig around with powerful and less powerful external routers which would confirm or otherwise the postulations you have offered.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

If we shift the routing to an external device, or remove it entirely (i.e. don't use a router) then we isolate the effect of the Superhub's routing functionality - isn't that what we want?

(I'll also add it's not how much power you have but how you use it, i.e. the quality of the software running on the device is more important. The Superhub runs some funny real-time operating system called eCos. Apart from the name, I know very little about it.)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Correct, it did, but even in Modem mode it is a couple of MS faster than (strangely) it was in Router mode if you look real carefully

The two graphs weren't measured at the same time, but were merely for visual purposes to describe what i was seeing. Here are the two time lapsed graphs from when i switched to modem from router... as you can see, the avg latency and jitter itself is noticably lower and/or stable at all times of the day.

There is around a 30 minute difference in the times as it was close to midnight, so i just showed the graph from the next day onwards.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...19-03-2012.png

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...20-03-2012.png

As i say, it was just to show a visual representation of what i was describing, nothing to make an in depth analysis over

Indeed that would be the best solution. I'm not really looking to do an in depth analysis, if it looks better on the TBB graph that's good enough for me :)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I'm really quite unhappy about the loss of my mid-evening latency bumps. I've got nothing to moan about.

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

Do you think I've had a visit from the latency fairy?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Don't jinx yourself fella :p:

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Yes, but because your latency was changing by itself irrespective of router/modem mode, it's hard to concretely attribute any further changes to modem/router mode.


Given those circumstances, then it's more likely (but not with absolute certainty) that there's only two possible causes - different routing due to different IP, or the modem/router mode switch itself. I suspect a combination of both, as neither alone should really be causing that big a change.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

The min latency has been up and down twice over the last couple of weeks, but never less than it was in the "dip down" you see in that graph, which is where it has been the most, around 18-19ms, never as low as it is in modem mode currently 14-15ish

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I did a little frigging around.

Superhub router mode, LAN side, firewall off:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.322 / 0.363 / 1.091 / 0.037
Superhub router mode, modem side, firewall off:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.363 / 0.401 / 1.170 / 0.033

Superhub router mode, LAN side, firewall on:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.419 / 0.472 / 1.012 / 0.054
Superhub router mode, modem side, firewall on:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.370 / 0.417 / 5.862 / 0.179

Superhub modem mode:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.260 / 0.293 / 1.103 / 0.043

VMNG300 modem mode:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.338 / 1.321 / 46.820 / 4.460


Not a lot of difference, router mode increases latency by about 0.05ms.

And just a bit of trivia:
A slower router:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.298 / 0.328 / 0.765 / 0.021
A faster router:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.215 / 0.254 / 0.578 / 0.029
BT FTTC Modem:
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.387 / 0.467 / 1.279 / 0.053

---------- Post added at 23:17 ---------- Previous post was at 23:06 ----------

No, maybe a visit from the network upgrade fairy :)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

My IP address changed recently, and there is a slight difference.

With 'New' 77.102.x.x IP Address
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...24-03-2012.png



With 'Old' 94.169.x.x IP Address
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...09-03-2012.png

Minimum latency has increased, but I don't notice any real difference in real-world use (I don't play ping-dependant games).

110Mb Product

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...012/04/113.png
Can anybody explain what on earth is happening in regards to those peaks and troughs? Those large average and max spikes are downloads while the packet loss seems to be a problem throughout my area as the core and ubr also show it my guess is congestion to tbb somewhere.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

its due to the way the VMNG300 buffers packets, basically a lot better than the superhub

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

What... the hell is going on with mine today, I have no idea.


http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...18-04-2012.png

EDIT: Someone was uploading an exceptionally large file, crisis averted.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

God only knows what's going on with mine lately... This 100meg upgrade has played havoc with my graphs :D
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...19-04-2012.png

And then you get the occasional day when all is pretty spiffing in the world of Cable...
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...10-04-2012.png

Tom

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

xxl 100 with the SH as router

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...19-04-2012.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...19-04-2012.png

Very interesting from mine. 12am onwards and there's quite a rise in latency. I guess protocol shaping is helping reduce the impact of torrenters in my area? (I'm probably wrong.) The rise at 8am is another file upload, YouTube failed three times in uploading a file... *facepalm*

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Looks like there was a nationwide reset or dropout? Mine and a friends also shows that spike at 11:30 this morning.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

No it's a problem with the TBB monitor. Nothing to do with this nation, it affected every monitor in every country.

See here

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

lovely VM core there qas

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Didn't affect mine apart from the short minimum latency blip, Qasi. My 80 meg is schmitt, btw. 30 meg if I'm lucky - less than I had on 40.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...19-04-2012.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

The same packet loss spike pattern is clearly showing on your graph so I'm not sure why you're saying it didn't affect yours...

As for the speed, what are you testing it with? Is it consistently poor or only so at certain times of day? I'm quite surprised it'd be worse than 40, as the only difference is increasing your speed cap. There's no change of technology, channel, frequency, etc. and I'm not seeing congestion on your graph either. P.S. Try the following speedtest: http://mcslhr.visualware.com/myspeed..._capspeed.html

---------- Post added at 02:06 ---------- Previous post was at 02:05 ----------

A lot are like that, some worse than others. They're just not programmed to respond to pings very fast on particular interfaces. It's a pattern common on particular Cisco kit.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Hi Qasi,

Putting aside the TB glitch (which had diffferent effects in different places, it seems) I test with BBMAX or BT. It's 30/9.5 plus/minus all the time - less in peak hours. I suppose I should put the opened firmware on the HG12. Can you manipulate the SNR margin with that?

Thanks for the link. Using that, I got this report first attempt:

Download speed: 35788 kbps
Upload speed: 10496 kbps
Download consistency of service: 89 %
Upload consistency of service: 99 %
Download test type: socket
Upload test type: socket
Maximum TCP delay: 47 ms
Average download pause: 1 ms
Minimum round trip time to server: 25 ms
Average round trip time to server: 26 ms
Estimated download bandwidth: 47274 kbps
Route concurrency: 1.3209413
Download TCP forced idle: 57 %
Maximum route speed: --
and this on next attempt a few minutes later at c. 08:30:


Download speed: 35999 kbps
Upload speed: 10432 kbps
Download consistency of service: 97 %
Upload consistency of service: 96 %
Download test type: socket
Upload test type: socket
Maximum TCP delay: 59 ms
Average download pause: 1 ms
Minimum round trip time to server: 23 ms
Average round trip time to server: 25 ms
Estimated download bandwidth: 50026 kbps
Route concurrency: 1.3896589Download TCP forced idle: 60 %
Maximum route speed: --

In your opinion, is there anything I should be doing with TCP Optimizer (Vista)? I hope not becasue I switch at will between VM & Infinity and in any case I'll be load balancing in the not too distant future.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Not much to change I'd say, Vista's networking stack is already quite well optimized for fast broadband out of the box, Windows 7 even more so. Nowhere near as limited as it used to be with XP.

The consistency of your results suggests either your line sync rate or IP profile are stuck low (or both). You can see your IP profile on speedtester.bt.com but your line sync rate you'll need to unlock your modem to see. Unlocking the modem won't let you change SNR margin though, only to see it and see where problems lie (if any).

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...21-04-2012.png

Lovely.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

I win

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2014/10/9.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

is crazy you wont swap your channel :)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

This is the new channel (4.58) so I presume its putting 100mb users on there as a preference hence why its looking like that, I think the packet loss is a separate issue though

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

They "activated" 100meg in my area at the same time they started doing the "not really 100 meg" 100meg, so there hast been too much of a difference on my line over the past few weeks. Its better than average for a VM connection, but still a jitterfest. Ignore the Fringe spike :)

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...21-04-2012.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Well... ours is similar really. :p Though I was reading my SuperHub stats today and it decided to reboot for no reason whatsoever, and I'm on a different upstream frequency and channel which iirc in my area, didn't have much utilisation.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

when i was with 30 mb

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...09-03-2012.png

upgraded to 100

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...22-04-2012.png

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Babis watched your video, thought ok thats some nice speeds etc from a "local" server, then at the end the recommended videos was some weird looking jesus guy and a few religious nuts vids lol

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

and as I have previously mentioned its also a false result, you cant download faster than the config allows

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

thanks..yes i upload one religion guy and a program with politics (the other guys asking about them so i have some views) ... mix up lol

---------- Post added at 16:54 ---------- Previous post was at 16:54 ----------

yes properly you are right but is nice advert for VM to have it ;)

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Encouraging yet more false advertising? Really?

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

False advertising is all they can come up with, if they advertised their actual service they wouldn't get any new subscribers:D

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/s...23-04-2012.png

Upstream frequency changed... yay.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Ohh that huge spike just before 6am must have hurt ;)

Nice connection qasi indeed.

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

A bit of packet loss there QAS???

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Re: Think Broadband Ping Monitor Results (POST YOURS)
 

Which Area 31 is that? Cambridge? My area (Reading) is also 31 and nobody get's that TBB any more (I used to).