site Search:


Home Reviews Tools Forums FAQs Find Service ISP News Maps About  
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads

  
Forums >

US Cable Support > Road Runner > [TWC] Heavy Packet loss HIGH PING! Slow speed! ____CA & HI

Search Topic:
 Uniqs:
10394		 Share Topic
Posting?
Post a:
Post a:
Links: ·Web page ·Network Status ·RR FORUM FAQ ·Cable Users FAQ ·Tweaks ·Broadband Modem
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6
AuthorAll Replies


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
3 edits

[TWC] Heavy Packet loss HIGH PING! Slow speed! ____CA & HI



500byte/s to 5KB speed to the east cost

[code=..]
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 ping -t dslreports.com

Pinging dslreports.com [209.123.109.175] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=221ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=213ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=228ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=316ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=254ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=211ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=396ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=215ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=446ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=401ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=428ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=411ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=213ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=406ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=420ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40
Request timed out.
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=429ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=213ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=40
Reply from 209.123.109.175: bytes=32 time=203ms TTL=40

Ping statistics for 209.123.109.175:
Packets: Sent = 97, Received = 86, Lost = 11 (11% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 200ms, Maximum = 446ms, Average = 227ms

[code=..]
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 16:35:57 ·


rr_user

@rr.com

Re: [TWC] Hevey Packet loss HIGH PING! 500byte/s to 5KB speed

hey punker maybe they are doing upgrades maybe? or they finally are slowing you down because or your heavy useage? but more or less upgrades sounds to par what they are doing and why you are seeing these problems.
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 18:01:47 ·


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2

phone is dropping out also

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 18:34:28 ·


MacLeech
The one and only
Premium
join:2001-07-14
SoCal
kudos:3

reply to Anonymous_
Not sure what's up.

My speedtest.net test to Los Angeles is good:


But my results to others suck:




Usually that's caused by a route with a bad link... so some routes are fast and others slow...
--
Don't mind me, I'm just trying to help...

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 19:52:58 ·


mdfudge

join:2002-08-26
Palmdale, CA
1 edit

reply to Anonymous_
I am having issues with my internet as well and I'am in Palmdale, CA. lots of packet loss and my VOIP server is droping packets to it with a High Ping of 126 which is usually 24ms to the server. Here is my line quality test link. Hope they fix it soon, I'am a Mad Gammer! :P

»/linequality/nil/2409750

### UPDATE jULY 22, 2008 @ 1:36am PST ###

LOOKS LIKE THEY FIXED IT! It was some sort of fiber issue and routing issues they had to re-route, it was a mess I read in an earlier post. GG

Tracing route to lax01.hurricanehost.com [69.147.235.68]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  10.7.X.X
  2    48 ms    14 ms    12 ms  98.148.192.1
  3    12 ms    13 ms    13 ms  76.167.11.41
  4    11 ms    12 ms    13 ms  76.167.11.105
  5    14 ms    12 ms    13 ms  76.167.2.34
  6    16 ms    12 ms    13 ms  76.167.2.21
  7    21 ms    20 ms    21 ms  76.167.2.68
  8    22 ms    21 ms    23 ms  4.71.104.157
  9    22 ms    21 ms    21 ms  4.69.132.218
 10    23 ms    34 ms    21 ms  4.69.136.202
 11    34 ms    35 ms    35 ms  4.69.137.2
 12    25 ms    24 ms    21 ms  4.68.20.9
 13    25 ms    30 ms    35 ms  4.71.136.2
 14    28 ms    22 ms    30 ms  64.235.224.182
 15    24 ms    21 ms    26 ms  216.193.255.230
 16    25 ms    23 ms    24 ms  72.37.172.166
 17    24 ms    20 ms    23 ms  69.147.235.66
 18    24 ms    22 ms    22 ms  69.147.235.68
 
Trace complete.
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 19:53:18 ·


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
4 edits

reply to MacLeech

Click for full size
it look like the support line is full of calls
i am calling via skype

thanks to the person that has there wifi open
(my brothers friend)
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 20:11:45 ·

vxspiritxv

join:2003-10-29

reply to Anonymous_
I'm having packet loss / high ping as well (rialto CA 92376)

C:\Users\spirit>tracert vpn.uscbinc.com
 
Tracing route to vpn.uscbinc.com [216.65.212.120]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1     1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  ns.matrix.net [192.168.0.1]
  2    10 ms     8 ms     8 ms  cpe-76-93-0-1.socal.res.rr.com [76.93.0.1]
  3     8 ms     8 ms     *     gig2-3.ontrca1-swt1.socal.rr.com [76.167.9.57]
  4    10 ms     8 ms     9 ms  76.167.9.197
  5     *       48 ms    46 ms  tge4-0-0.lsanca4-rtr1.socal.rr.com [76.167.2.76]
  6     *      104 ms   107 ms  ae11.lsanca1-rtr1.socal.rr.com [66.75.161.50]
  7   113 ms   112 ms   115 ms  GIG2-0.TUSTCA1-RTR1.socal.rr.com [66.75.161.158]
  8    67 ms    69 ms    68 ms  te-1-3.car1.Tustin1.Level3.net [4.79.140.37]
  9   107 ms   105 ms   107 ms  ae-2-3.bar1.Tustin1.Level3.net [4.69.132.218]
 10   121 ms     *      107 ms  ae-6-6.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.136.202]
 11     *        *      109 ms  ae-61-61.csw1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.137.2]
 12   120 ms   110 ms     *     ae-1-69.edge1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.68.20.7]
 13   123 ms   123 ms   120 ms  192.205.33.225
 14   127 ms   126 ms   127 ms  tbr1.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.127.3.218]
 15   126 ms   121 ms     *     gar5.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.127.3.185]
 16    81 ms    79 ms    80 ms  12.122.255.246
 17    79 ms    80 ms    79 ms  core2-z-g1-1.irv.sbcidc.com [216.65.209.14]
 18    81 ms    89 ms    80 ms  dst1-b-g2-1.irv.sbcidc.com [216.65.208.137]
 19   125 ms   121 ms   119 ms  vpn.uscbinc.com [216.65.212.120]
 
Trace complete.
 
C:\Users\spirit>
(trace route is to my works vpn box in Irvine CA, about 40miles away, usually ping sub 50s)
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 20:28:47 ·


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
3 edits

my is not any better

 
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>ping -t vpn.uscbinc.com
 
Pinging vpn.uscbinc.com [216.65.212.120] with 32 bytes of data:
 
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=142ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=139ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=139ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=139ms TTL=103
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=103
Reply from 216.65.212.120: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=103
 
Ping statistics for 216.65.212.120:
    Packets: Sent = 12, Received = 10, Lost = 2 (16% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 137ms, Maximum = 142ms, Average = 138ms
Control-C
^C
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>

look like it's STATE wide

going by what the person on the phone was saying
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 20:32:45 ·


suckawha

@rr.com

reply to Anonymous_
I have the same problem coming from Oahu.

Whatever the 5th hop is, that's where I start to see the packet loss and increased latency, and I see that hop on your trace as well.

C:\Documents and Settings\matt>tracert vpn.uscbinc.com

Tracing route to vpn.uscbinc.com [216.65.212.120]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms nolove [192.168.1.1]
2 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10.99.96.1
3 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms gig11-0-6.oahuhimili-gsr2.hawaii.rr.com [24.25.224.33]
4 139 ms 139 ms * so-0-1-3.lsanca4-rtr1.socal.rr.com [24.25.224.86]
5 129 ms 127 ms * ae11.lsanca1-rtr1.socal.rr.com [66.75.161.50]
6 127 ms 128 ms 125 ms GIG2-0.TUSTCA1-RTR1.socal.rr.com [66.75.161.158]
7 140 ms 128 ms 128 ms te-1-3.car1.Tustin1.Level3.net [4.79.140.37]
8 183 ms 206 ms * ae-2-3.bar1.Tustin1.Level3.net [4.69.132.218]
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 204 ms 196 ms 198 ms ae-91-91.csw4.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.137.14]
11 182 ms 182 ms 182 ms ae-4-99.edge1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.68.20.199]
12 158 ms 140 ms 154 ms level3-gw.la2ca.ip.att.net [192.205.33.229]
13 141 ms 140 ms 141 ms tbr2.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.127.3.222]
14 * 138 ms 147 ms 12.127.3.189
15 140 ms * 142 ms 12.122.255.246
16 142 ms 145 ms 141 ms core2-z-g1-1.irv.sbcidc.com [216.65.209.14]
17 * 140 ms 142 ms dst1-b-g2-1.irv.sbcidc.com [216.65.208.137]
18 140 ms 151 ms 140 ms vpn.uscbinc.com [216.65.212.120]

Trace complete.

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:04:35 ·

forfrance

join:2003-01-23
Redondo Beach, CA

reply to Anonymous_


This is ABSURD!! After a few months at respectable EXTREME speed rates (what I am paying for....) I now have this!!

Anyone with a clue as to how long we have to live in this "ADSL" arena of slow-mo???!!!

What a pisser!

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:27:57 ·


avsir

@rr.com

reply to Anonymous_
Having same issue.
7 24ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% tge9-3.lamdca1-swt1.socal.rr.com [
76.167.2.52]
8/ 100 = 8% |
8 --- 100/ 100 =100% 92/ 100 = 92% tge4-0-0.lsanca1-rtr1.socal.rr.com
[76.167.2.56]
0/ 100 = 0% |

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:32:58 ·


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP

damn your internet is better then my
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:36:42 ·

go_ahead_ed

join:2008-02-29
Anaheim, CA

reply to Anonymous_
Yeah, mine stinks too...


as opposed to last week...


They'll sort it out soon (I hope).

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:44:29 ·


Zoglog

@rr.com

reply to Anonymous_
Yeah, i'm in Los angeles, and i'm getting some horrible speed

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:45:34 ·


Zoglog

@rr.com

Just a side note has anyone else noticed this happening constantly? It's been like this for 2 weeks now on and off.

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:46:38 ·


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2

yea it did the same sh** last week

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:55:43 ·

Techie714

join:2005-08-02
Anaheim, CA

reply to Anonymous_

Re: [TWC] Heavy Packet loss HIGH PING! 500byte/s to 5KB speed

Same problem here in Anaheim, CA. I get about 1 meg down & I'm getting some bad packet loss as well.
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:57:12 ·


racer9876
Defender Of The Universe
Premium
join:2000-07-03
Rosamond, CA
Reviews:
·Antelecom
·AT&T DSL Service

reply to Zoglog

Re: [TWC] Hevey Packet loss HIGH PING! 500byte/s to 5KB speed

Yeah my memory seems to indicate this is a cyclic pattern to this. About 3-4 weeks we go through this statewide network problem. Either the regional network is run by a bunch of idiots (30%), they are doing massive upgrades to increase capacity (5%), or they are installing monitoring equipment and keep fubaring it up (65%). My money is installing new monitoring equipment and they try to pass it off as "network upgrades".
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:57:30 ·

Techie714

join:2005-08-02
Anaheim, CA

reply to Anonymous_

Re: [TWC] Heavy Packet loss HIGH PING! 500byte/s to 5KB speed

Has anyone called in yet? I guess I will.
to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:59:30 ·


Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
1 edit

reply to Techie714
att is faster!

i am getting 2/384 with the open AP!

to forum · permalink · 2008-07-21 21:59:49 ·
Forums > US Cable Support > Road Runner
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6

Thursday, 31-May 00:40:36 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics