dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
254
share rss forum feed


SW

@sbcglobal.net

Slow Internet speed/ mismatched IP address

In Broward County, Florida my internet service went out about 2 AM Tuesday morning. An AT&T rep in the Philippines I was able to reach about 20 minutes later said there were some outages in the Southeast and service should be restored in 6 to 8 hours; he also suggested I unplug my modem for over 10 seconds to reset it after service is restored. When I awoke later in the afternoon I checked the Internet and I had service, but I did reset my modem--I don't know if that helped, hurt, or had no effect, but streaming videos, on YouTube for example, would not run smoothly and kept stopping. I have up to 12 mbs but Speedtest.net showed only about 7 MBS. After being on hold for about a half an hour I spoke to another rep in the Philippines who spent a lot of time with me and early on discovered that my wireless gateway IP address as shown in my computer did not match what she had. She gave me the correct one and I went to the online site for it and saw my technical data, most of which I don't understand. She changed the broadcast channel of my gateway from the default setting of 1 progressively up to 11, the strongest, and it increased the mps to about 10.5; why the Wi-Fi signal strength would do that I don't know, but I'd just as soon not have any more powerful radio signals in my home that I need to, and if I had near 12 mps before with the minimum strength signal, why do I need the strongest one now, especially since it doesn't need to reach that far. Hopefully when this outage problem is cleared in a couple days I should be able to return to the lower strength wi-Fi signal and still get 10 or 11 mps. Another thought, could the slow streaming speed be due to the servers on the sending website being affected by this outage also? Couple months ago when is similar thing happened I got a message that it was a problem with formatting of my local area server, whatever that is. Could that be a problem now?



Selenia
I love Debian
Premium
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR
kudos:2

2 edits

That rep is an idiot. The transmit power does not change by channel. The frequency gets slightly higher or lower(along the 60 MHz wide 2.4GHz band). Changing channels will not fry your brain. The channel does not have more power, just likely less congestion than the other channel. In fact, all else being equal, higher frequency=poorer wall penetration. Just look at the issues Clearwire users have with that(using the 2.3 GHz band) vs other wireless carriers(most of which use lower frequencies between 700MHz and 1900MHz). I have APs on different channels along my property and the one on channel 1 actually carries the farthest(about 1000 feet) due to lesser congestion, antenna orientation, and type(this one was intended to blast down the street from the attic to let me walk around with my smartphone and laptop while the others balance load between APs and skirt around nasty walls for wifi signals, as well as using the less congested 5GHz band on devices that support it). Most routers transmit at 30-70mW, which is very low. I would stay away from electricity, cell phones, microwaves, the sun, cars, etc if you are going to buy into this FUD. According to wikipedia »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wi-Fi#Safety wifi exposure for a year is about the same radiation(non-ionizing btw, which is way different from harmful "ionizing" radiation, and has not been proven to do any harm) as being on a cell phone call for 20 minutes. Better throw out that cell phone!!! Stay out of range of radio and TV stations while you're at it Not intending to make fun of you. Just make your fear sound ridiculous as it is so you can sleep easier btw that figure sounds correct as a cell phone emits an average of 150mW right next to your head, instead of several feet away.

PS-Your computer's IP address not matching your public one is called NAT(Network Address Translation), which makes a router a router. No malfunction here, except for the rep. Again, I reiterate, that rep is an idiot!
--
A fool thinks they know everything.

A wise person knows enough to know they couldn't possibly know everything.

There are zealots for every OS, like every religion. They do not represent the majority of users for either.



SW

@sbcglobal.net

I agree that rep in the Philippines was an idiot, but at least AT&T chooses better English speakers than other companies--it's the content of what she says that's at fault. I've only been online for about half a year so there's a learning curve for me; in fact I got my first cell phone about five years ago, and I'm 64. I only use the cell phone couple times a week and now I usually have it on Bluetooth in the car through the speakers. Of course alternative doctors warn against keeping the cell phone in your pocket==reduced fertility and all, but I have plenty of virility to spare (I suppose I should put an LOL here but I can't bring myself to do such things). I moved to this area 3 1/2 years ago and checked out such things as cell phone towers (there's one a mile away), etc., and of course who knows what eddys of electromagnetic radiation are swirling throughout the house because of electrical wiring. I did move the cordless phone base unit away from my bedroom dresser (a few feet from my head) to the other side of the house just to be on the safe side after learning that it puts out a continuous signal (an At&T person originally told me three years ago that the signal only came on when the phone rang or was in use--again, AT&T misinformation). I like to know the truth about these things, but a much more concrete problem is the damage caused by the medical establishment, especially prescription drugs that kill 125,000 people year from side effects and adverse reactions and disable millions more. In in my case worrying about nebulous radiation is like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. I see there is no shortage of conspiracy theorists regarding other aspects of the Internet, from the NSA to third-party trackers to Internet fairness debates. There's a very good movie, a satirical comedy from the 1960s entitled The Presidents Analyst starring James Coburn and a large ensemble cast. Coburn plays the title character who is at first intrigued at being called to to become president's (psycho)analyst, but is soon burdened by what is revealed to him (but not to the audience). He then becomes a target for all manner of international spy agencies who want what's in his head and our own domestic spy agencies who want to either kill him or protect him, all climbing over each other and taking each other out to get to him. Someone with an overarching birdseye view is watching all this mayhem take place, the ultimate villain of the movie--guess who that turns out to be; an entity that plans to implant transmitter chips in the brains of newborns so that the world's population can communicate with each other by thought and be charged for, and I assume monitored and controlled by, this communication. Yes, it's The Phone Company. Of course there was no Internet back then, but it would be, in effect, the analog of the brain implant communication chips envisioned in the movie, and Internet providers, search engine companies, market research companies, marketing companies, and the government all seem to be vying for control.