http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16907345 en Sun, 06 Dec 2009 13:33:13 EDT Sun, 06 Dec 2009 13:33:13 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16950006 anon : If the pages are opening slow then you are not getting the speeds that they say you are getting. I am in texas new customer WB. I am in a battle with them to get my speeds up. We ran three different broadband test with the tech support. We are allove the page up and down. If you will try to download a movie watch the transfer rate of KB/s. Mine goes from around 50-60 then drops rapidly to the low 30's. This is not right and when you talk to tech support how can a person 18-19 yrs old have enough experience to be tech support but at least they speak english. I am in the same shape I can't get DSL because I live to far out of town.WB was my only option other than dialup.My speeds are about the same as dialup for 49.95 month.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16950006 Thu, 21 Sep 2006 23:19:59 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16930888 dnekm : Sorry, speeded up my connection...

Thank you again....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16930888 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 02:14:53 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16930884 dnekm : Open DNS has seeped up my connection....

Many, many thanks....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16930884 Tue, 19 Sep 2006 02:12:55 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16929786 beldin : I'd suggest resetting Windows Communications in general. Click Start then Run. Type "cmd" without the quotes, then click ok. At the prompt, type the following commands and press enter after each one:

netsh int ip reset resetlog.txt
netsh firewall reset
netsh winsock reset catalog
netsh int ip delete arpcache
ipconfig /flushdns

After typing these commands, type the word exit and press enter. Restart your computer. If you are using a 3rd party firewall, you may get a message about the Windows firewall being enabled. Or, you may get a message about something being blocked by the Windows firewall. This is normal.
--
DSL Extreme 6.0]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16929786 Mon, 18 Sep 2006 22:38:01 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16924840 pa_viper : What beldin says is pretty much it. But if you need detailed XP instruction, here they are. Open a browser and Click Tools --> Internet Options --> Connections Tab --> Lan Settings. When the box opens up deselect everything. Then you need to open up your network connections. Select the one that you are using, right click and select properties. When the box opens up, select Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)--> Properties. At the bottom select the radio button for Use the Following DNS Server Address. You can do a search on Google for Open DNS servers to find one that is available to you. After that things should work much faster. The other thing that you way want to do is get Tree Walk from this site. »ntcanuck.com/ Install this and flush the DNS cache and use the other utilities. This has cleaned up my issues so far, time will tell if it holds.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16924840 Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:54:27 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16923157 beldin : Take a look here:

»www.opendns.com/

It has a walk-through on how to change your DNS Server addresses to an open DNS.
--
DSL Extreme 6.0]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16923157 Sun, 17 Sep 2006 23:09:47 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16922002 Golferdude770 : I looked at my connection settings and don't see the direct connection....is that just unclicking auto detect? Also, how do you go about changing the DNS entries to open root servers? I am not even sure what open root servers are...I did a search on here but didn't find anything to explain it to me. A real newbie here..]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16922002 Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:00:10 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16921584 pa_viper : It seems that the issue was with WB's DNS entries. I changed them to open root servers and now pages pop right up and load like lightning compared to before. If a dummy like me can figure this crap out with a little help from the good folks in this forum, why can't WB with the millions of dollars that they have? They just seem to want to blame it on the end user's pc or other problem that is not theirs. Passing the buck seems to be the way that their "Customer Care" wants to do it, or that they have people in that have no clue. Thanks for all the help folks, now at least I can surf again.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16921584 Sun, 17 Sep 2006 18:42:33 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16916347 Spice300 : Try a program like Ping Plotter Freeware at »www.pingplotter.com/ It might help you locate the source of the delayed and dropped data packets.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16916347 Sat, 16 Sep 2006 18:51:17 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16915896 pa_viper : Thanks for the response ITK, I have PM'd you the MAC address as well as the pings from last night along with some speed test data.

The optimizer has been removed and the Connection Settings proxy has been removed. I have done a search in the forum and am going to try using an open root server in the DNS to see if that makes a difference. the results of 50 pings to yahoo are posted below.

C:\>ping www.yahoo.com -n 50

Pinging www.yahoo-ht2.akadns.net [209.73.186.238] with 32 bytes of dat

Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=690ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=606ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=710ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=624ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=746ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=636ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=737ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=679ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=582ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=681ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=613ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=726ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=629ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=727ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=646ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=757ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=674ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=591ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=692ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=615ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=724ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=645ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=733ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=644ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=749ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=659ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=587ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=694ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=608ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=686ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=596ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=1267ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=729ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=4141ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=594ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=593ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=584ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=581ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=584ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=588ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=620ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=730ms TTL=46
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=4209ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=723ms TTL=47
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=652ms TTL=46
Reply from 209.73.186.238: bytes=32 time=759ms TTL=47

Ping statistics for 209.73.186.238:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 46, Lost = 4 (8% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 581ms, Maximum = 4209ms, Average = 826ms

C:\>

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16915896 Sat, 16 Sep 2006 17:07:56 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908705 jm : I too have had horrible page load/browsing for about 2 months now.

I have called WB support many times during this time. my issue is latency, not speed, most of the time. Most of the time I get correct dl/ul speeds, but my latency is horrible. I used to average 650ms, now I average closer to 800/780. They insist this is ok, and within guidlines. Never mind the fact that I drop 5-10 % packets.

I have to be on VPN for work, when they hear that, that becomes the reason. I have to explain to them that the vpn is not the issue, speed is not the issue, optimizer is not the issue( I have never loaded the optimizer), spyware is not issue. All was fine from the time I got it, up till about 2 months ago.

I finally got somebody to escalate the ticket, but I haven't heard back from WB yet.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908705 Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:06:34 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908056 lostinspace70 : After disabling the optimizer did you verify in your browser settings that the "Connection settings" were checked for Direct Connect, not auto detect? If that is set to auto detect then you are still using the WB proxy and the proxy's dns servers, which have been a source of slow browsing for many.
--
WB Pro | Beam 21, Riverside | SW Oregon | NRTC Installed 9/25/05 |
Linksys WRT54G Router | Treewalk DNS | XP Pro, W2K and Theos | Ex-Starband 360 User (5 years)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16908056 Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:11:46 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907621 ITK : PM me, or blacksheep or one of the other installers your MAC address or the phone number used to build your account. We'll take a look at your modem from the inside.
I personally would look at a pointing/TRIA issue.
Mind post up the results of about 50 pings to yahoo?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907621 Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:56:46 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907345 pa_viper : I got my WB set up last Saturday and for the most part things seemed to be running pretty well. But the last few days pages take forever to load. Not 10-15 seconds, more on the order of 75-90 seconds. My dial up is faster than that! I understand that there is latency, but WB advertises that latency is on the order of a few seconds. The puzzling thing is that speeds from test my net are as advertised. I have the Value Pack, and last night DL was 672 Kb/s and UL was 107 Kb/s.

I have active spy ware protection and anti-virus protection as well as a firewall. The spy ware program scans once a week and does the whole C drive not a selective scan. Internet cache and cookies are deleted when the program is closed and disks are defragged once a week. I have tried both IE and Firefox browsers, I have also tried the system with and without the WB optimizer.

My computer system has a 1.8 Gig processor with 1 Gig of RAM running XP Home. The modem at this time connects right into the PC, no router or network set up yet. I didn't want to introduce too many variables into the equation until I get everything sorted out. I called WB Tech support and the girl that I was connected too basically had no idea of what was wrong. Her first answer was that it was spy ware. I told her that the system scans every week and that I had check the logs and there was none. Then it was on to the cookies and internet cache, none again. Modem was rebooted and the PC was rebooted still with no better results. Her analysis of the problem, "I have no idea what to tell you." That answer is totally unacceptable to me. If I have to deal with this type of service for the next year, it's going to be a very long year. My feeling is that it is a configuration setting somewhere that needs to be set. If there is anyone that has an idea for things that I can start to test please let me know. Like grandpa always said "If you want something done right you gotta' do it yourself."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16907345 Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:53:28 EDT