| reply to JohnD
Re: System capacity problems in Port Angeles/Sequim area I do not know what's going on with the Concord system, but the Port Angeles / Sequim system is in the midst of an upgrade. This is a considerable system upgrade, including the addition of new lasers, a new CMTS, and re-segmentation of the nodes. You are going to see some service fluctuations during the upgrade.
The new CMTS (Cable Modem Termination System) is being installed (might already be done), and they are working on re-segmenting the nodes. This will divide the available bandwidth between nodes based on demand.
You may see service interruptions while they re-segment the nodes. It is also very possible you will see your speeds fluctuate a LOT while they "tune" the new hardware. By the end of next week, the process should be complete. |
|
Reviews:
 ·VOIPo
| reply to gtojim
quote:
Your upstream is too low, and your downstream is too high. Pick up a two-way or better yet a DC-6 from your friendly local Wave technician (or office) and you will probably solve your problem.
Generally speaking:
Acceptable upstream (Upstream Value - Power dBmV) is from around 45 to around 55.
Acceptable downstream (Power Level dBmV) is -10 to +10.
dont worry about the upstream, its fine. High upstream and low downstream make me believe that your close to an amp or node.
upstream is how much power your modem is transmitting and will be adjusted by the headend to be at the correct level in the node receiver. Low numbers there aren't bad. High downstream numbers can over saturate the modems receiver and would show up as packet loss.
If theres no packet loss between you and the headend then its not the signal strengths. My belief is that the neighborhood nodes can simply be overloaded. I'm seeing the same latency here in the Gorst area and can get different numbers just by getting through a different gateway... Remember that discussion earlier? Makes me wonder if they havent got their load balancing skills honed yet.
Heres a good article for those interested. »www.usr.com/support/6000/6000-ug/two.html
»www.usr.com/support/doc-popup-te···gVer.htm |
|
| reply to NxtPlato
said by NxtPlato:You may see service interruptions while they re-segment the nodes. It is also very possible you will see your speeds fluctuate a LOT while they "tune" the new hardware. By the end of next week, the process should be complete. Since you seem to have some inside information, could you update this thread when the work is "complete"? Right now I'm seeing what appears to be traffic shaping of all p2p traffic down to about 1.5 megabits, until after midnight. HTTP downloads still go at full speed. If this is going to be a permanent feature of the new system, I might as well switch the mid-speed plan and save $30/month. |
|
| reply to JohnD
I'll post information as I get it, which is pretty sporadicly. |
|
| reply to JohnD
quote:
Right now I'm seeing what appears to be traffic shaping of all p2p traffic down to about 1.5 megabits, until after midnight. HTTP downloads still go at full speed. If this is going to be a permanent feature of the new system, I might as well switch the mid-speed plan and save $30/month.
Haven't noticed any evidence of traffic shaping as yet, but I've paid little attention to Usenet and bittorrent downloads lately. I'm a heavy user of both and its the only reason I pay Wave BB the ~$840.00/year. Any messing with the p2p traffic and I too shall immediately cancel the 8/1.5 plan and go down to something that costs $29/month and would be so angry I'd run that little connection at maximum 24/7 until they booted me off. Hands off the p2p! |
|
| reply to JohnD
While you're getting vocal about the p2p, just remember that it's expressly against Wave's Internet Service Acceptable Use Policy to download copyrighted works, or share such works with other users.
»www.wavebroadband.com/img/subagree.pdf
And before the flood comes, yes, everyone knows that all ISP's have a similar policy, and everyone knows that all ISP's have users that use p2p, so just let it go. I just wouldn't bring it up when you're complaining to tech support. |
|
| reply to NxtPlato
2 50 ms 73 ms 95 ms 24-113-56-1.wavecable.com [24.113.56.1]
3 33 ms 34 ms 33 ms 24-113-127-41.wavecable.com [24.113.127.41]
4 76 ms 63 ms 53 ms wavebroadband-gw.g11-0.oly-cor0.noanet.net [64.1
46.232.253]
5 60 ms 23 ms 31 ms srp3-0.wtn-cor0.noanet.net [66.119.192.25]
6 66 ms 28 ms 122 ms six.above.net [198.32.180.19]
7 107 ms 43 ms 85 ms so-3-2-0.mpr3.sjc2.us.above.net [64.125.28.182]
8 63 ms 101 ms 71 ms so-0-0-0.mpr2.sjc2.us.above.net [64.125.27.246]
9 115 ms 69 ms 83 ms so-5-1-0.mpr1.lax9.us.above.net [64.125.27.1]
10 63 ms 115 ms 50 ms so-3-0-0.mpr2.lax9.us.above.net [64.125.31.102]
11 87 ms 542 ms 82 ms so-5-1-0.mpr1.iah1.us.above.net [64.125.29.98]
12 82 ms 117 ms 93 ms so-0-0-0.mpr2.iah1.us.above.net [64.125.31.62]
13 132 ms 119 ms 107 ms 289.ge-3-2-1.mpr1.iah1.us.above.net [216.200.251
.26]
14 147 ms 159 ms 101 ms ivhou-207-218-245-27.ev1servers.net [207.218.245
.27]
15 85 ms 89 ms 100 ms ivhou-207-218-245-125.ev1servers.net [207.218.24
5.125]
16 75 ms 92 ms 132 ms gaea.techexams.net [216.12.219.37]
Trace complete.
NxtPlato, I really don't care to hear your "It happens to everybody" speech. Little do you know I have a bit more experience in this field then you know. This is a classic example of overselling the area.
It does no good to talk to tech support as they feel 60 to 80ms pings at the first hop are totally acceptable and normal. And yes, I have talked to more than one tech on more than one occasion.
Total douchebags.... |
|
 EndorphineEndorphinePremium
join:2002-09-30
Silverdale, WA
1 edit | said by Badluckguy:Trace complete. NxtPlato, I really don't care to hear your "It happens to everybody" speech. Little do you know I have a bit more experience in this field then you know. This is a classic example of overselling the area. It does no good to talk to tech support as they feel 60 to 80ms pings at the first hop are totally acceptable and normal. And yes, I have talked to more than one tech on more than one occasion. Total douchebags.... So does this mean you actually got your modem levels fixed Badluckguy? My first hop is not even near 11-14ms, and yours shouldn't be that bad. |
|
| reply to JohnD
So you have a ton of experience, and you think Wave is a bunch of "total douchebags." But it's a free market, with many choices available for high speed internet. Why stick with them?
If Wave is really that bad, switch to DSL, or WiMax, or HughesNet, or VSAT, or anything else. Or is it some sort of masochistic compulsion that makes you stay with what you perceive as poor service?
But that's ok. I'm sure calling them a bunch of "douchebags" will help provide you with MUCH better service. |
|
gtojim
join:2002-03-18
Concord, CA | reply to JohnD
Ping times done at 3:35pm to yahoo.com. I'm located in Concord CA
Please wait, resolving yahoo.com....
Resolved to 216.109.112.135.
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 112 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 112 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 86 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 86 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 89 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 89 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 90 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 88 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 88 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 93 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 93 milliseconds. TTL = 55
Response from 216.109.112.135 received in 88 milliseconds. TTL = 55
User stopped ping.
Pings sent: 12
Pings received: 12
Pings lost: 0 (0% loss)
Shortest ping time (in milliseconds): 86
Longest ping time (in milliseconds): 112
Average ping time (in milliseconds): 92 |
|
|
|
gtojim
join:2002-03-18
Concord, CA | reply to JohnD
Ping times to my ISP Astound.net owned by Wave. I live in Concord CA.
Please wait, resolving astound.net....
Resolved to 64.79.201.139.
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 55 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 55 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 99 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 99 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 44 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 44 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 32 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 64.79.201.139 received in 32 milliseconds. TTL = 56
User stopped ping.
Pings sent: 8
Pings received: 8
Pings lost: 0 (0% loss)
Shortest ping time (in milliseconds): 32
Longest ping time (in milliseconds): 99
Average ping time (in milliseconds): 57 |
|
gtojim
join:2002-03-18
Concord, CA | reply to JohnD
Ping times after midnight. Anyone have any thoughts?
Please wait, resolving yahoo.com....
Resolved to 66.94.234.13.
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 13 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 13 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 16 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 16 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 19 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 19 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 14 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 14 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 15 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 15 milliseconds. TTL = 56
Response from 66.94.234.13 received in 13 milliseconds. TTL = 56
User stopped ping.
Pings sent: 11
Pings received: 11
Pings lost: 0 (0% loss)
Shortest ping time (in milliseconds): 13
Longest ping time (in milliseconds): 19
Average ping time (in milliseconds): 15 |
|
| reply to JohnD
Thank you for sharing but this thread is about problems in the Port Angeles/Sequim area, NOT California. The Port Angeles/Sequim upgrade seems to be mostly complete but the extent of the traffic shaping is not yet clear.
If you're having problems, which looks like typical prime-time overloading, you should contact your Tech Support or start a new thread. |
|
gtojim
join:2002-03-18
Concord, CA | reply to JohnD
Sorry... I was looking for feedback as to how my service compared to your area.
Take Care
Jim |
|
| reply to JohnD
After the upgrade here, ping times are back to normal, 5-25 ms. I'd say your ping times are typical of overloading, but you should be pinging the first or second hops (depending on whether you have a router) to get an indication of whether the lag is inside the ISP network or out on the Internet.
If it is on the ISP's network there's not much you can do besides call up and complain. Sorry. |
|
