US Telco Support > Frontier Communications > [Internet] For anyone seeing speed issues...

reply to Smith6612

Re: [Internet] For anyone seeing speed issues...

Looks like you are seeing congestion during the evening/night too, besides unusually high first hop counts. I hope Frontier gets that fixed and also lowers that first hop count, as it's not something I'd consider ideal for broadband at all.

reply to Smith6612
Good Morning Smith6612.
Just a quick follow-up posting with the results from my latest & repeat ping test performed at 8AM this morning.
Clearly my initial ping "without load" was around 55MS and then changed to the 170 / 180 MS range while downloading the 100 MB file before returning to "normal"

Significantly for me and evidence that your theory about congestion being my local problem is that yesterday the kids all returned to school and my speedtest results showed my normal 2.87 DL speed all day and into the evening.
Thanks for everything, I really do appreciate the help and education. Billy B.

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Pinging 10.37.1.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=174ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=174ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=185ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=184ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=182ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=174ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=174ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=173ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=182ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=182ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=179ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=177ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=174ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=126
Reply from 10.37.1.1: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=126

Ping statistics for 10.37.1.1:
Packets: Sent = 103, Received = 103, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 54ms, Maximum = 185ms, Average = 137ms
Control-C
^C

Your first hop latency is still rather high for a FastPath line, but I'm glad to hear the speed has returned. I'm hoping Frontier is bringing in more bandwidth and figuring out the best way to route things however. A high speed line doesn't mean anything if first hop latency is higher than 15ms on FastPath.

reply to Smith6612
Do you want me to do another test? I'm still dreading to call there again i know i should've the first day after they replaced the modem and it didn't work right, but i also think it's useless sometimes too heh.

Up to you if you wish to run another one.

reply to Smith6612
Good Morning Smith6612 and thanks for your imput once again but which prompts another Q.
I have always had a ping of about 55MS to my first hop and a DL Speed of 2.88 during the 4 1/2 years that I have had Vz / Frontier DSL. Does the fact that I am located 2.2 miles down "copper" from a Remote Terminal and another 4 miles along a FIOS cable to the DSLAM in our local town play into that ping stat? Thanks in advance.

reply to Smith6612
Unfortunately I solved my problem the hard way, comcast installer was here yesterday. While I loved my directv, I had to go with a bundled service with CC to get a decent price. Though Frontier was nice enough to credit me for my problems....I really hope they get their act together, but as I use my connection for work (VPN) I don't have the luxury of waiting for them to figure it out

I wish I was in a comcast, or any other cable company who gives a damn's service area right about now too. This is worse than Cable internet in 1998!

reply to Billy B

Pings

reply to Smith6612
Smith6612: Thanks for all that info and stats. I have never seen any latency below 50 let alone anywhere close to yours. A friend of mine who lives over the Mtn. and who recently got VZ 3MB/768 DSL
out of an "upgraded" RT gets "37" at a distance of less than 1 mile down 10 year old copper. It's taking a month to get any local Phone Repr. Guy to show up out here because of staffing issues "post Frontier M&A" so I am going to "grin and bear it" for now.

reply to Smith6612
Well if posting the test thing would somehow magically fix my connection that would be fine and dandy!

It has once again been disconnecting and so here I am once again in these forums looking for solutions.

Hmm, I still have not called, been busy of late. Will call them on a Monday perhaps so they will have plenty of days to show up. The phone lines have even started going out again or full of clicks/interference and on it the receiver's volume is low, but i believe my voice carries through to others clearly on it at least.

The sound being low seems to be sort've random, but the clicks are constant and especially audible when i'm having disconnects.

See about getting the noise on the phone line solved. DSL should improve once that is fixed up. The phone going out may or may not be related or pointing to a circuit trouble at all.

Appreciate your thoroughness at investigating these matters, Smith!

I am a former Verizon DSL customer moved over to Frontier (and a newbie member of DSLreports, although I've used the tests for over a year).
System: WinXP on a Dell XPS.
Wired connection: Westell 6100G bridged to Linksys Wireless-G Router WRT54GSV4
Plan: 7MB downloand/700K upload.
Usual average download speed prior to switchover: 6-6.5MB.

Began noticing significant spotty speed Aug. 30, 2010. Have not called Frontier as yet.
Aug. 30 Speed test downloads of 1MB or lower at 6pm, increasing to 6MB by midnight. Uploads consistently 600-700K.
Small improvement on early evening speed tests as week wore on, but Netflix movie streaming on XBox 360 inconsistent: bumped from HD to SD to occasional loss of signal (last checked Thursday Sept. 2.)
This evening (9-3-2010) speed test downloads ranging from 6MB to 2MB 6-7:30pm. Uploads consistently 600-700K.

Speed test prior to tracert (7:40pm):
2694 download
824 upload
Speed test immediately after tracert:
2152
718

Speed test again at 8pm (prior to posting this report):
6366
762
Now to the actual tracert:
tracert log begun at about 7:41pm. Tracert below is typical of results I received during trial runs yesterday. Note timeouts and inconsistant ping results. No idea why.

Begin log:

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>tracert google.com

Tracing route to google.com [74.125.95.106]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 * * * Request timed out.
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 * * * Request timed out.
4 * * * Request timed out.
5 * * * Request timed out.
6 * * * Request timed out.
7 * * * Request timed out.
8 * * * Request timed out.
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 * * * Request timed out.
11 * * * Request timed out.
12 * 42 ms * iw-in-f106.1e100.net [74.125.95.106]
13 * * 42 ms iw-in-f106.1e100.net [74.125.95.106]

Trace complete.

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 74.125.95.106

Pinging 74.125.95.106 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 74.125.95.106: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=52
Reply from 74.125.95.106: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=52
Reply from 74.125.95.106: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=52
Request timed out.

Ping statistics for 74.125.95.106:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 3, Lost = 1 (25% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 42ms, Maximum = 43ms, Average = 42ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>ping 74.125.95.106

Pinging 74.125.95.106 with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 74.125.95.106: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=52

Ping statistics for 74.125.95.106:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 1, Lost = 3 (75% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 42ms, Maximum = 42ms, Average = 42ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Steve>

End log

Forgot to add:
Location: Chesterton, Indiana (near Chicago, Ill,)

reply to Smith6612
Smith,

I am a former Verizon Customer in the Eastern Panhandle of WV. I LOVED my Verizon DSL. I always had a great connection, got around 2.8 down and 780 up on Speedtest.net and always was able to game online with low latency. I almost always connected to games with less than 50ms of latency.

Not the case since I was hijacked to Frontier. It took them over a week to even get me online following the switch over. All of my internal networking has stayed the same but now I normally connect to games with at least 70 to 80ms and sometimes 100ms of latency no matter what I do. My normal internet surfing seems ok, downloads are good too, but streaming video stutters a bit and gaming is almost impossible (compared to the old service). I hope you can offer some advice. Below are my test results.

Thanks,
Dave

reply to stephen62
Looks like you are suffering from congestion, as indicative of the packet loss in your pings. I don't know what is up with the trace route, as normally when I see traces such as that it's generally a firewall messing things up. If you have time, give Frontier a call and let them know you are seeing congestion on their end of the network. Don't let them bump your speeds down of course .

@dbs179: Looks like you're seeing some some occasional congestion as well, despite your speeds being good as the trace route is showing some latency spikes at times, along with your pings. The pingtest.net test showing jitter (which is caused by congestion for the most part) is showing what is going on with your games as well. You are however on FastPath which is good. You were on Ethernet while running those tests I am assuming, correct?

Smith,

I was on a hardwired ethernet connection. I try to stay away from wireless unless I absolutely have too. Thanks for the insight. I'll just live with it for now I guess. I hope to get rid of Frontier as soon as possible.

Thanks,
Dave

reply to Smith6612
Thanks for the confirmation about congestion. I'd already ruled out line noise and modem problems, so I can confidently inform Frontier that it's their problem. In talking with friends and others on Verizon/Frontier here in the Chesterton and Valparaiso, Indiana area, the story has been about the same: inconsistent speeds and occasional loss of connection and all after the switch from Verizon to Frontier. In my case, for example: I watched an entire 13 part TV series on Netflix streaming on XBox 360 in June with only rare losses of HD quality (only once or twice). Watching one episode of the same series on Sept. 2, HD cut down to SD 3 or 4 times and signal was lost completely at least twice. I hope its just an unfortunate aspect of the Verizon/Frontier changeover that will eventually be taken care of in a week or three ...
Anyway, thanks again. Now back to re-bridging my Westell to the Linksys router.

reply to dbs179
Not a problem to both of you guys. dbs179, it's interesting to note that your address is now an NC Network address instead of a Verizon address. Looks like they are changing things slowly for many people with the DSL side.