dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
22110
share rss forum feed

Morytania

join:2009-11-23
Mesquite, TX

1 edit

Slow Upload Speeds with AT&T U-Verse Max Plus (18 Mbps)?

Hi, all. Long-time reader, first time poster.

Anyway, so I recently switched to AT&T U-verse after having used RoadRunner online (shudder), and so far I have been extraordinarily pleased with the improvement.

However, I have encountered a niggling problem: while my download speeds are wonderful, my upload speeds are low, lower than even RoadRunner online. Here are my speed tests:

Test One:


Test Two:


Ping Test:


Also, here is the system summary from my modem:

DSL Connection Details:
DSL Line (Wire Pair): RJ-11
Protocol: G.993.2
Downstream Rate: 25208 kbps
Upstream Rate: 2040 kbps
Channel: Interleaved
Current Noise Margin: 14.0 dB (Downstream) Not Available
Current Attenuation: 24.0 dB (Downstream) Not Available
Current Output Power: 13.4 dB (Downstream) 0.0 db (Upstream)
DSLAM Vendor Information: Country: {0xFF} Vendor: {CXSY} Specific: {0x242}
Internet Connection Details:
Connection Type: Direct IP (DHCP or Static)
Domain:
Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU): 1500
Gateway Ping: Successful
DNS Communication: Successful
Configuration Server Post: Successful
________________________________________

Now, I am somewhat of a novice when it comes to understanding exactly what those numbers mean, so I am hoping all you helpful people here will help me determine if any of those factors are contributing to my measly 2 Mbps upstream.

Also, I don't know if this is significant, but my house has six U-verse TV boxes, and my computer is connected to the Internet by an Ethernet cable plugged into the back of my U-verse TV box.

Thanks for reading!


ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9
Try testing to other speedtest servers & see what results are

As far as the 2 Mbps Upstream sync rate, that is the typical U-Verse 25/2 user Profile -- 25 Mbps down/2 Mbps up

The 18 Mbps Internet service is 18 Mbps down/1.5 Mbps up

Morytania

join:2009-11-23
Mesquite, TX
Do you have any suggestions as to which other speed test websites will provide useful data? I'm rather new to the networking scene.

danielr83

join:2007-05-25
Fresno, CA


ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9
reply to Morytania
speedtest.net, but pick other servers than just the dallas server

Also, speakeasy.net/speedtest is a good one


ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to Morytania
said by Morytania:

Also, I don't know if this is significant...and my computer is connected to the Internet by an Ethernet cable plugged into the back of my U-verse TV box.
I missed that little bit before...

It is neither recommended nor supported to use the U-Verse STBes as HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridges

Try testing with an Ethernet cable plugged straight into the RG/Modem, instead of the STB.

Recommended alternatives would include: Using WiFi Wireless for this computer, running an ethernet cable from this computer back to the RG/Modem, using Ethernet over AC Power adapters, or getting a stand-alone HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridge

TebTeb

join:2009-01-28
Columbus, OH
reply to Morytania
I have tested that method before and it did cut my upload speed by half no matter where I tested my speed.

Morytania

join:2009-11-23
Mesquite, TX
reply to ILpt4U
said by ILpt4U:

said by Morytania:

Also, I don't know if this is significant...and my computer is connected to the Internet by an Ethernet cable plugged into the back of my U-verse TV box.
I missed that little bit before...

It is neither recommended nor supported to use the U-Verse STBes as HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridges

Try testing with an Ethernet cable plugged straight into the RG/Modem, instead of the STB.

Recommended alternatives would include: Using WiFi Wireless for this computer, running an ethernet cable from this computer back to the RG/Modem, using Ethernet over AC Power adapters, or getting a stand-alone HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridge
I thought it was intended that it be used that way. :x

Still, it functions pretty well despite the slow upload speeds. Unfortunately, the only other alternative is that I either use an Ethernet bridge (which kills my speeds) or run a few hundred feet of CAT6 cable through my home (which would be rather expensive). Sadly, wireless is not an option as the modem is much too far away from my computer and there are others on the other side of the house who use it there.

Also, I did a few more speed tests, and I got pretty much the same results no matter which server or site I tested it on. It's always about 17.3 Mbps down and .78 Mbps up.

I wish I had a better way to connect to my modem on the other side of the house, but right now I think I will have to stick with plugging it into the back of my U-verse box. It's just a shame I can't do anything about the upload speeds.


ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

1 edit
You might consider either a stand-alone HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridge, or Ethernet over AC Power links.

The Actiontec HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge can be found for ~$75, and a pair of Ethernet over AC Power adapters are in a similar price range...

Another thing to note: Using the STBes as an HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge takes away bandwidth from the IPTV service among the STBes, and could cause pixellating & freezing problems with either and/or both Live and/or Recorded TV

Also, if you ever have to power-cycle that receiver, make sure you disconnect that Ethernet link to the computer before, otherwise the box will never reboot, and you'll get the beloved "Red X of Death". This also includes box restarts from power outages, and upgrade reboots

There are reasons why it is not recommend nor supported to use a STB as an HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge

Morytania

join:2009-11-23
Mesquite, TX
said by ILpt4U:

You might consider either a stand-alone HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridge, or Ethernet over AC Power links.

The Actiontec HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge can be found for ~$75, and a pair of Ethernet over AC Power adapters are in a similar price range...

Another thing to note: Using the STBes as an HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge takes away bandwidth from the IPTV service among the STBes, and could cause pixellating & freezing problems with either and/or both Live and/or Recorded TV

Also, if you ever have to power-cycle that receiver, make sure you disconnect that Ethernet link to the computer before, otherwise the box will never reboot, and you'll get the beloved "Red X of Death". This also includes box restarts from power outages, and upgrade reboots

There are reasons why it is not recommend nor supported to use a STB as an HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge
I'd never heard of an HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge before, but after a little research, I think I've gotten the gist of how it works. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does it function similarly to an Ethernet bridge, where two are necessary to form the bridge, and one additional one for each new thing to put on the network? Also, in my house we have an unused 'B' coaxial line from way back when we had "A" cable and "B" cable. Will it work if I put my Internet on the "B" and leave the TV on the "A" (I'm just conjecturing here).

Oh, and one more thing: Are you saying that if I have my computer hooked into the back of the U-verse cable box and all the sudden there is a short power outage, the cable box will be ruined when it starts back up? Just wanted to be sure I wasn't misunderstanding you.


ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
»www.actiontec.com/products/datas···heet.pdf

Usually with HPNA to Ethernet Bridges, you need 2, one on each end. However, in the case of U-Verse, you only need 1, as the RG is already sending out HPNA over Coax. So you need an HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridge on the other side.

If using the Actiontec bridge, for example, you could take the HPNA/Coax line that is feeding your STB right now, and connect that to the HPNA In of the Actiontec bridge. The Bridge has 2 Ethernet ports. Use 1 port to connect back to the ethernet port of the STB, and use the 2nd port to connect to your PC

It is not that the box will be ruined, it is just you will have to disconnect the ethernet cord that is connected to your PC, and power cycle your box again

Morytania

join:2009-11-23
Mesquite, TX
said by ILpt4U:

»www.actiontec.com/products/datas···heet.pdf

Usually with HPNA to Ethernet Bridges, you need 2, one on each end. However, in the case of U-Verse, you only need 1, as the RG is already sending out HPNA over Coax. So you need an HPNA-to-Ethernet Bridge on the other side.

If using the Actiontec bridge, for example, you could take the HPNA/Coax line that is feeding your STB right now, and connect that to the HPNA In of the Actiontec bridge. The Bridge has 2 Ethernet ports. Use 1 port to connect back to the ethernet port of the STB, and use the 2nd port to connect to your PC

It is not that the box will be ruined, it is just you will have to disconnect the ethernet cord that is connected to your PC, and power cycle your box again
Will using the bridge at my box result in additional pixelation, out of curiosity? I just figured if both my TV and my computer are drawing on the same resources, there might be a bit of a strain.

Anyway, I just want to say thanks for the additional info! I will definitely look more into this, ILpt4U. Your help is very much appreciated.

kcfong2

join:2009-12-16
Danville, CA
reply to ILpt4U
Interesting read on the use of Actiontec HPNA and the Uverse RG. Good to see that you confirmed they are compatible.

One question comes to mind however... you mention that using the ethernet port on the back of the STB "takes away bandwidth" ...

Won't the HPNA bridge from Actiontec create the same bandwidth load?


TheDuck

join:2003-06-22
Eastlake, OH
reply to Morytania
All you need is an ethernet switch. Put the cable from the RG in the wan port and plug your STB, PC's, game boxes,etc in the switch ports.


ILpt4U
Premium
join:2006-11-12
Lisle, IL
kudos:9
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to kcfong2
said by kcfong2:

Interesting read on the use of Actiontec HPNA and the Uverse RG. Good to see that you confirmed they are compatible.

One question comes to mind however... you mention that using the ethernet port on the back of the STB "takes away bandwidth" ...

Won't the HPNA bridge from Actiontec create the same bandwidth load?
That is a good question. And my answer is no. It is not so much the load on the HPNA network itself, it is the fact that when you daisy-chain off of a STB, that is one HPNA link that is running thru the STB -- uses STB processing power as well as bandwidth

The HPNA bridge will establish 2 separate HPNA nodes for each device (which gives each bandwidth), and then also there is no Processing power taken away from the STB that usually goes to making pretty TV pictures diverted to running an HPNA-to-Ethernet bridge

kcfong2

join:2009-12-16
Danville, CA
Thanks for the explanation. I presumed that the STB would have acted like a switch and simply passed the packets through. I didn't realize that the STB would add any of its own overhead to the packet routing. Makes sense though. I ordered two Actiontecs (HCB1000 I believe) from Amazon. I'll have it setup and tested by Friday, but based on what I've read in this thread, it sounds like it will be an "uneventful" success.