dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1778
share rss forum feed


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2

Rogers Higher Uploads: May never get here

On my Cisco Docsis 3 modem Express tier I've noticed over the past couple months that I'll have 4 powered upload channels for a couple weeks followed by 1 powered upstream channel for another 2 weeks or so then back to 4 again.

Problem is: When there's 1 powered upload channel speeds are at or above .512mbps but when there's 4 upstream channels the speeds are waaay down. Starts out in the .300mbps range and gradually increases to about .505mbps halfway through a 30MB upload.

The 8 powered download channels work great sometime, up to 28mbps but at other periods they dog out in the 9 to 14mbps range for hours. Don't make sense considering my pings are great and my line quality "A".

Never had a speed problem with my Cisco Docsis 2 modem connection period.

All in all I don't think Rogers has a handle on this Docsis 3 thing yet and by the progress they are making it could be a long haul till we ever see 8x4 channel bonded downloads/uploads at a realiable higher rate of speed.

I honestly don't believe Rogers has the technical expertise or resources to put the higher upstream speeds in place over the entire network footprint...

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
That usually means they need a node split.. They've been doing a ton of that in Toronto.. It seems like half of Toronto is being ripped up right now. They have so many crews, they're using a company under contract with Cogeco to complete their upgrades.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


dumba

@rogers.com
reply to elitefx
"I honestly don't believe Rogers has the technical expertise or resources to put the higher upstream speeds in place over the entire network footprint..."

I always loves these comments. Apparently the "expert knows better". As stated in the second message, Rogers is doing massive upgrades all over. You will just have to wait. It doesnt mean they don't know what they are doing.

I guess you know how to manage a multi billion dollar network. You should go show them how to do it right.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
said by dumba :

"I honestly don't believe Rogers has the technical expertise or resources to put the higher upstream speeds in place over the entire network footprint..."

I always loves these comments. Apparently the "expert knows better". As stated in the second message, Rogers is doing massive upgrades all over. You will just have to wait. It doesnt mean they don't know what they are doing.

I guess you know how to manage a multi billion dollar network. You should go show them how to do it right.

Err... These massive upgrades are being done now because they couldn't put it off any longer, because pretty much their entire network fell over dead last fall from increasing speeds for their tiers. Rogers is horrible at managing their network, but this upgrade is required to remove throttling to get the CRTC off their backs.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
reply to dumba
said by dumba :

I guess you know how to manage a multi billion dollar network. You should go show them how to do it right.

Always love these wise ass replies.

Rogers is selling a service. I'm paying for it. Problem: Rogers can't deliver what I'm paying for. I've been paying for so called network upgrades for 10 years. And what do I get? The same as 50 other threads in this forum. Problem after problem with Rogers Internet.

And wait? What the hell am I waiting for? Rogers sure don't wait when they want their money. And last I recall they're not giving us any kind of rebate or discount for all this "waiting" we're supposed to be doing while they're trying to figure out how to get a Docsis 3 network operational while everybody else is developing Docsis 3.1............

yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:4
said by elitefx:

said by dumba :

I guess you know how to manage a multi billion dollar network. You should go show them how to do it right.

Always love these wise ass replies.

Rogers is selling a service. I'm paying for it. Problem: Rogers can't deliver what I'm paying for. I've been paying for so called network upgrades for 10 years. And what do I get? The same as 50 other threads in this forum. Problem after problem with Rogers Internet.

And wait? What the hell am I waiting for? Rogers sure don't wait when they want their money. And last I recall they're not giving us any kind of rebate or discount for all this "waiting" we're supposed to be doing while they're trying to figure out how to get a Docsis 3 network operational while everybody else is developing Docsis 3.1............

Why don't you just give yourself a rebate by cancelling if you're so dissatisfied?


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
said by yyzlhr:

Why don't you just give yourself a rebate by cancelling if you're so dissatisfied?

The threads not about me. This forum is not about me. IT'S ABOUT ROGERS. Learn to follow a friggin topic.

Do you not think, for one second, if there was a viable broadband alternative to Rogers network that hundreds of thousands of us would be there already? And don't give me that BS that there are alternatives because there aren't any.

Now go try to piss off someone else.................

yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:4
said by elitefx:

said by yyzlhr:

Why don't you just give yourself a rebate by cancelling if you're so dissatisfied?

The threads not about me. This forum is not about me. IT'S ABOUT ROGERS. Learn to follow a friggin topic.

Do you not think, for one second, if there was a viable broadband alternative to Rogers network that hundreds of thousands of us would be there already? And don't give me that BS that there are alternatives because there aren't any.

Now go try to piss off someone else.................

You concluded in your opening post with your opinion on Rogers ability to upgrade their network. You did not ask for advice nor did you ask for any sort of explanation pertaining to your problem, so you made this thread about you. Therefore, don't get angry when people question your opinions on an open forum.

Sanek

join:2006-08-10
Kanata, ON
reply to elitefx
With 1 upstream channel @ QAM64, I max out my upload at 1 Mbit (as expected), however with 4 bonded upstream channels @ QAM64, my upload fluctuates around 0.5-0.75 Mbit.

This is with Teksavvy though, but not a big difference in this particular case.

JAC70

join:2008-10-20
canada
reply to elitefx
said by elitefx:

Do you not think, for one second, if there was a viable broadband alternative to Rogers network that hundreds of thousands of us would be there already? And don't give me that BS that there are alternatives because there aren't any.

Now g try to piss off someone else.................

You obviously don't hate Rogers enough to switch to a DSL provider, so we're left assume you just like making noise.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
reply to Sanek
said by Sanek:

With 1 upstream channel @ QAM64, I max out my upload at 1 Mbit (as expected), however with 4 bonded upstream channels @ QAM64, my upload fluctuates around 0.5-0.75 Mbit.

This is with Teksavvy though, but not a big difference in this particular case.

Fair enough...

Now have a look at this.







With that are you honestly going to tell me that rogers can't even provide "0.5-0.75 Mbit" upload. Please, spare me the argument!

I suggest you let rogers at least finish all the upgrades and then start criticizing them if they still can't provide this 1 Mbit you speak of.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
said by technocar2:

I suggest you let rogers at least finish all the upgrades and then start criticizing them if they still can't provide this 1 Mbit you speak of.

We're not challenging your technical expertise BUT I think the way a lot of us see it is that network upgrades shouldn't be necessary for Rogers to deliver consistant currently advertised upload speeds that have been in place for the past couple years that were easily achieved on Docsis 2.....the problems began when Rogers mandated/tried to implement Docsis 3.

IMHO Rogers places far too much emphasis on downstream speeds. It's a smokescreen to hide the network's failure to adequately provide consistent upstream capabilities.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
said by elitefx:

said by technocar2:

I suggest you let rogers at least finish all the upgrades and then start criticizing them if they still can't provide this 1 Mbit you speak of.

We're not challenging your technical expertise BUT I think the way a lot of us see it is that network upgrades shouldn't be necessary for Rogers to deliver consistant currently advertised upload speeds that have been in place for the past couple years that were easily achieved on Docsis 2.....the problems began when Rogers mandated/tried to implement Docsis 3.

Yes the old upload speeds were achievable on dossis 2 but the new upload speeds are not possible on docsis 2 on rogers network. Therefore the need for docsis 3.0 (channel bonding) came on the upstream side as well. All I'm saying is let rogers first finish the upgrading of HFC nodes before to jump to conclusions on rogers ability to provide advertised speed.

One thing you have realize is that rogers is doing upgrades based trial and error. Reason being not all areas can support 64QAM while others can. Rogers would love to have 64QAM in all areas but they too realize that some areas will be stuck with 16QAM, in either case advertised speeds will still be achievable but 64QAM is better for sure if it runs reliably. You can see people here have already posted new uploads speed on 16 QAM and are the advertised speed.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
said by technocar2:

Yes the old upload speeds were achievable on dossis 2 but the new upload speeds are not possible on docsis 2 on rogers network.

He's not talking about the new, increased upload speeds that very few people can get. He's talking about the currently advertised upload speeds on most tiers - which are still the exact same as the old upload speeds - 0.256-2 Mbit.

Also... dude. Shrink your images.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
reply to elitefx
Regardless of what the speeds are, if 64QAM is unstable then everyone on the node will have problems be it a docsis 2 or docsis 3 modem. The node/equipment are not going to give special treatment to people with old upload speeds even if rogers wanted this they couldn't do it. Honestly, you should be thankful that rogers at least tried 64QAM. Obviously they will switch it back to 16QAM or they might just clean up the lines to make 64QAM work. In all cases rogers is trying to improve their network yet I'm still hearing negative comments from people. What do you want them to do?

I hate rogers on many issues as much as the next guy, but this "issue" of upgrading, I have to say you guys are criticizing rogers for absolutely no reason. If he is getting slow speeds then that's the price people have to pay in order to make network improvement and once those are completed everything will be back to normal, in fact even better than normal. I said it before, its trial and error and their system cannot give special treatment to people with old upload speed, that's just how it works, its a shared resource (ie. the HFC node).

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
said by technocar2:

The node/equipment are not going to give special treatment to people with old upload speeds

Again, for most of their network the "old" upload speeds are still the "current" upload speeds. There's nothing to give special treatment to.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2

1 edit
said by bt:

said by technocar2:

The node/equipment are not going to give special treatment to people with old upload speeds

Again, for most of their network the "old" upload speeds are still the "current" upload speeds. There's nothing to give special treatment to.

Read my post again. By special treatment I meant keep those old/current speeds on 16QAM and still test out 64QAM on a few people. That is not possible, hence, no special treatment for anyone. Everyone has to suffer in order to determine the best configuration for the node.

Edit: Regardless of how you look at it, you guys are bad-mouthing rogers whilst they are in the process of making improvements to the network. That's pretty low on you guys regardless of how evil rogers is as a corporation!

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
said by technocar2:

Regardless of how you look at it, you guys are bad-mouthing rogers whilst they are in the process of making improvements to the network. That's pretty low on you guys regardless of how evil rogers is as a corporation!

I'm not badmouthing Rogers at all.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
You weren't directly badmouthing rogers (elitefx was doing that) but you were supporting elightfx's post where he said he is getting slow speed. When clearly I said the issue here is 16QAM vs 64QAM and the # of channels, this slow speed is a result of instability as per the trial and error that rogers is doing with different configurations. It works perfectly in some places while others it does not, that's what rogers is trying to figure out. Its not simple flip of a switch.

Hell, this whole thread is an attempt by elitefx to badmouth rogers because he doesn't like the speed he is getting while rogers is working in his area. I was in the same boat as him, but rogers did what they had to do and look at the result; did I come here and start talking $hit about rogers when they were working in my area. Then you come along here defending the OP by saying he is talking about the current speed when its not even a speed issue; its the implementation of the upstream channels that's the issue. Please, look at the real point in question, do you want rogers to select the best possible config for an area that can be supported or do you want rogers to jump the gun and give everyone 16QAM even if 64QAM will work for different areas?

I would pick the former but apparently you guys would rather have rogers pick the latter, thank god rogers didn't do that.

And honestly elightfx doesn't even know what he is talking about, read what he says "network upgrades shouldn't be necessary for Rogers to deliver consistant currently advertised upload speeds that have been in place for the past couple years that were easily achieved on Docsis 2." This fellow doesn't understand the fact that new and old upload speeds share one (1) HFC node. To provide higher upload throughput, that node needs to be upgraded, therefore, old and new upload speeds will be reduced if the upgrades required for the new speeds are unstable; essentially everyone gets slow speed if the node is unstable. Doesn't matter if one is on docsis 2 or 3 modem or what internet plan he has. You came here defending a fellow who hasn't a slightest clue as to what rogers is trying to do. He just wants his bang for the buck and that's it, oh and also badmouth rogers on an internet forum as if rogers doesn't get enough of that already.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:2
said by technocar2:

He just wants his bang for the buck and that's it, oh and also badmouth rogers on an internet forum as if rogers doesn't get enough of that already.

Don't hold back, you're on a roll.....

I have to admit, I respect the fact you take a position and speak your mind. Your point is well taken.........

Hooter

join:2009-08-17
Scarborough, ON

1 recommendation

reply to technocar2
Regardless of everything else said on here, I would just be happy if Rogers would provide a decent D3 modem instead of the garbage they are now pawning off on their customers! You can go after each all you want and talk about the Rogers network and upgrades they may be doing but all I want is a f---ing decent stand alone D3 modem.

technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
said by Hooter:

Regardless of everything else said on here, I would just be happy if Rogers would provide a decent D3 modem instead of the garbage they are now pawning off on their customers! You can go after each all you want and talk about the Rogers network and upgrades they may be doing but all I want is a f---ing decent stand alone D3 modem.

lol...thread hijack.

Anyway on the combo modem issue I definitely criticize rogers like there is no tomorrow. They should have the decency to offer normal modems but that's rogers for you eh?

Hooter

join:2009-08-17
Scarborough, ON
The issue of D2 and D3 modems has been raised in this thread. So I do not really consider that I am hijacking the thread!


J E F F
Whatta Ya Think About Dat?
Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Rogers Portable ..
reply to elitefx
I'd be a-okay with crappy speeds if this damned company spent some money on the Blue Jays. On topic of Rogers, are they in bad as a financial shape that some claim? Like, they're making profit but they have a crap load of debt.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein


mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
said by J E F F:

On topic of Rogers, are they in bad as a financial shape that some claim? Like, they're making profit but they have a crap load of debt.

Making money and how much debt one carries are MUTUALLY exclusive.

You can make a boatload of money AND You can have a BOATLOAD of DEBT .... the relationship is important from the following perspective:

How PERSISTENT is the CASH FLOW positive and can THAT cash flow service the DEBT without damaging operations.

What is dangerous is when DEBT levels cannot be sustained due to eroding profit margins and declining cash flow. [this one sentence has a lot of stuff I will not go into because I do not want to spend the time educating you on how BUSINESS works].

SO far Rogers seems to be able to sustain their VERY heavy debt levels due to their very positive cash flow and strong profit margins that are consistent. When profit margins start to slip and show persistent weakness THE LENDERS become very nervous and tighten their conditions on how the company operates.
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business