dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
18
deepwoods2
join:2011-07-07
Berkeley, CA

deepwoods2 to pflog

Member

to pflog

Re: [Speed] new "Performance Promo" is mostly unusable

Yeah, I did. No one has said anything. It may be simply that they lack any perspective or are not here at worst times, etc. My neighbors are 386/4MB RAM, ex-modem users....there is no place like numb.

As you said, it is some scenario, perhaps unanticipated with the way the spec is implemented, that results in this (apparently poor handling of a failed channel). But I am GUESSING.

I think that is logical. The good news: both tech folks saw it and saw the results and showed me the wonky channel. Something will change - or it won't . But at least I an exonerated from having fabricated a story and, more importantly, IT IS NOT MY PURCHASED MODEM. ha ha ha

NetFixer
From My Cold Dead Hands
Premium Member
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Netgear CM500
Pace 5268AC
TRENDnet TEW-829DRU

2 recommendations

NetFixer

Premium Member

said by deepwoods2:

But at least I an exonerated from having fabricated a story...

I don't think that anyone here even suggested that you had fabricated a story, only that your automatic assumption of congestion was not likely on a DOCSIS 3 16mbps downstream connection with 6 downstream bonded channels.

pflog
Bueller? Bueller?
MVM
join:2001-09-01
El Dorado Hills, CA

pflog

MVM

said by NetFixer:

said by deepwoods2:

But at least I an exonerated from having fabricated a story...

I don't think that anyone here even suggested that you had fabricated a story, only that your automatic assumption of congestion was not likely on a DOCSIS 3 16mbps downstream connection with 6 downstream bonded channels.

Indeed, I meant no disrespect. Congestion just didn't add up! In any event, sounds like the OP is on their way to a solution, hopefully.

Extide
join:2000-06-11
Salt Lake City, UT

Extide to deepwoods2

Member

to deepwoods2
said by deepwoods2:

As you said, it is some scenario, perhaps unanticipated with the way the spec is implemented, that results in this (apparently poor handling of a failed channel). But I am GUESSING.

If this is the case it seems pretty sad. I have seen a few other forum users with an issue on one or two channels, which causes the whole connection to go to crap. It sure would be nice if the modems could handle something like that a bit more gracefully.

It would be interesting to get a look at the signals when your speeds are slow and see if you can see anything odd with one of the channels.