Time for a stop sell on McNicoll POI? - TekSavvy

Author	All Replies
lucidt join:2010-12-05	reply to Webslingerac Re: Time for a stop sell on McNicoll POI? something has to be done about this, this is getting ridiculous. I am paying for a 28/1 and this is what i am getting.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-26 22:07:49 ·
A A join:2013-02-14 3 edits	reply to Webslingerac Wed 27 7:00pm 730 800 - I was getting some wildly varied results from the TS server, anywhere from 7mb to 14 to 17. So I tested with Nexicom, 915
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-27 19:07:01 ·
A A join:2013-02-14	reply to Webslingerac With above, please make sure to test different servers to ensure an accurate average of speeds.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-27 20:16:53 ·
Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON 4 edits	said by A A: With above, please make sure to test different servers to ensure an accurate average of speeds. Your results do indicate a problem, in particular, after 9 p.m., which coincides with what I'm seeing as well (and I always test on multiple servers). 10:06 p.m. Teksavvy: 10:14 p.m. Nexicom: Beanfield: Sweet sweet packet loss on the way to speedtest.teksavvy.com \|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------\| \| WinMTR statistics \| \| Host - Loss % \| Sent \| Recv \| Best \| Avrg \| Wrst \| Last \| \|------------------------------------------------\|------\|------\|------\|------\|------\|------\| \| \| 10.126.167.1 - 0 \| 76 \| 76 \| 8 \| 11 \| 20 \| 11 \| \| 24.156.149.133 - 2 \| 72 \| 71 \| 0 \| 14 \| 34 \| 15 \| \| mcnicoll1.cable.teksavvy.com - 3 \| 68 \| 66 \| 0 \| 17 \| 87 \| 16 \| \| 24-52-255-41.cable.teksavvy.com - 5 \| 64 \| 61 \| 0 \| 16 \| 70 \| 12 \| \| 2120.ae0.agg01.tor.packetflow.ca - 7 \| 60 \| 56 \| 0 \| 23 \| 188 \| 13 \| \| speedtest.teksavvy.com - 5 \| 64 \| 61 \| 0 \| 15 \| 25 \| 12 \| \|________________________________________________\|______\|______\|______\|______\|______\|______\| WinMTR v0.92 GPL V2 by Appnor MSP - Fully Managed Hosting & Cloud Provider 2% packet loss on the second hop at 24.156.149.133. Whois 24.156.149.133 NetRange: 24.156.128.0 - 24.156.159.255 CIDR: 24.156.128.0/19 OriginAS: NetName: INUKSHUK-2 NetHandle: NET-24-156-128-0-1 Parent: NET-24-0-0-0-0 NetType: Direct Allocation RegDate: 2008-02-25 Updated: 2012-02-24 Ref: »whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-24-156-128-0-1 OrgName: Rogers Cable Communications Inc. OrgId: RCC-105 Address: One Mount Pleasant City: Toronto StateProv: ON PostalCode: M4Y-2Y5 Country: CA RegDate: 2006-11-13 Updated: 2011-06-22 Ref: »whois.arin.net/rest/org/RCC-105 OrgTechHandle: IPMAN-ARIN OrgTechName: IP MANAGE OrgTechPhone: +1-416-935-4729 OrgTechEmail: ipmanage@rogers.wave.ca OrgTechRef: »whois.arin.net/rest/poc/IPMAN-ARIN OrgAbuseHandle: RHI9-ARIN OrgAbuseName: Rogers High-Speed Internet OrgAbusePhone: +1-416-935-4729 OrgAbuseEmail: abuse@rogers.com OrgAbuseRef: »whois.arin.net/rest/poc/RHI9-ARIN
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-27 22:11:01 ·
c2roth Premium join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable	reply to Webslingerac Wow sorry to see such crappy speeds. I lived in Toronto last year and was on the McNicoll POI as well. I'll need to perform some speedtests tonight to see if KW POI has similar issues or not. Can someone from TSI respond because it certainly looks like speeds are not right.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-28 08:46:35 ·
Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON 4 edits	Teksavvy: 9:47 p.m. 9:51 p.m. Beanfield: 9:58 p.m. Nexicom: I'm seeing packet loss every night on mcnicoll3.cable.teksavvy.com Tonight it's 9% 2% packet loss on mcnicoll1.cable.teksavvy.com Ping/traceroute to us.download.nvidia.com \|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------\| \| WinMTR statistics \| \| Host - Loss % \| Sent \| Recv \| Best \| Avrg \| Wrst \| Last \| \|------------------------------------------------\|------\|------\|------\|------\|------\|------\| \| \| 10.126.167.1 - 0 \| 77 \| 77 \| 9 \| 11 \| 19 \| 14 \| \| 24.156.149.133 - 0 \| 77 \| 77 \| 10 \| 16 \| 36 \| 15 \| \| mcnicoll1.cable.teksavvy.com - 2 \| 73 \| 72 \| 9 \| 14 \| 101 \| 18 \| \| mcnicoll3.cable.teksavvy.com - 9 \| 58 \| 53 \| 11 \| 18 \| 70 \| 15 \| \| gw-akamai.torontointernetxchange.net - 3 \| 69 \| 67 \| 11 \| 18 \| 85 \| 13 \| \|a72-247-244-250.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com - 3 \| 69 \| 67 \| 11 \| 17 \| 29 \| 14 \| \|a184-84-239-8.deploy.akamaitechnologies.com - 3 \| 69 \| 67 \| 13 \| 19 \| 34 \| 25 \| \|________________________________________________\|______\|______\|______\|______\|______\|______\| WinMTR v0.92 GPL V2 by Appnor MSP - Fully Managed Hosting & Cloud Provider
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-28 21:59:16 ·
YangerD join:2010-10-19 Scarborough, ON	Please get this fixed! I'm getting slow speeds all the time now! We ain't getting what were paying for.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-02-28 23:48:48 ·
HKPolice join:2002-08-09 Scarborough, ON	reply to Webslingerac I don't know why you guys are still complaining. NOTHING can be done about POI congestion until TSI switches everything to aggregated sometime late this year or early next. Rogers is not offering any more link installs on the legacy POI system anymore AFAIK. Even if it was offered, it's a waste of money from TSI's standpoint since it'll all be switched over to aggregated within a year so either way, NO POIs will be upgraded until then. The ONLY thing TSI can do to help is to put a stop sell, but it wouldn't help the congestion, only lock it in place. If you can't wait another year for upgrades, then switch to an aggregated ISP. Those are the cold hard FACTS. Either live with it or switch.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-01 01:42:01 ·
c2roth Premium join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON kudos:2 Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable	said by HKPolice: I don't know why you guys are still complaining. NOTHING can be done about POI congestion until TSI switches everything to aggregated sometime late this year or early next. Rogers is not offering any more link installs on the legacy POI system anymore AFAIK. Even if it was offered, it's a waste of money from TSI's standpoint since it'll all be switched over to aggregated within a year so either way, NO POIs will be upgraded until then. The ONLY thing TSI can do to help is to put a stop sell, but it wouldn't help the congestion, only lock it in place. If you can't wait another year for upgrades, then switch to an aggregated ISP. Those are the cold hard FACTS. Either live with it or switch. TPIAs are still allowed to add capacity to dis-aggregated POIs but I do not know on which side of this TekSavvy lands. This ruling (Jan 31 2013) draws a line between those who have three year contracts with RCP and those who have a different contract: 99. In light of the above, the Commission concludes that there is substantial doubt as to the correctness of its decision in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-703 to impose a transition period of two years from the date of that decision for the migration of certain end-users from disaggregated to aggregated POIs. The Commission therefore approves in part CNOC’s request and decides that, for those cases where an independent service provider has signed a three-year contract for transport facilities for a specific disaggregated POI before 15 November 2011, the independent service provider is allowed an additional six months to complete its migration from that disaggregated POI, that is, on or before 15 May 2014. For all other situations, the two-year transition period is maintained. Independent service providers currently interconnecting at an existing disaggregated POI will continue to be allowed to add end-users and POI capacity at that POI during the extended transition period. Source: »www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2013/2013-73.htm Now TSI Marc has made it clear as of yesterday that the push to APOI hasn't stopped and it is direction that TSI is taking for cable on Rogers. The details are still murky but in the case of the McNicoll POI is likely means that the situation won't improve by leaps and bounds. My suggestion would be to power cycle your modem by leaving it off for 10 minutes and then powering it back up.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-01 08:14:23 ·
Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON 1 edit	reply to HKPolice said by HKPolice: I don't know why you guys are still complaining. NOTHING can be done about POI congestion until TSI switches everything to aggregated sometime late this year or early next. Well, actually, Marc indicated in this thread that the switch to aggregated, if the problem is node congestion, will not somehow make the problem go away. Secondly, Marc claims McNicoll has plenty of capacity, and, if that's true the problem is not POI capacity related (and, in turn, everything you just wrote is pointless). Thirdly, Teksavvy needs to know that a problem exists--and where it exists. 24.156.149.133 does drop packets and appears to be owned by Rogers, for example. And, lastly, Teksavvy, to its credit, has contacted me asking for this (type of) information. As such, I'm updating the thread. Regardless, people who are receiving poor service (poor throughput/transfer rates) and paying for it have every right to complain. Otherwise, the situation will certainly never improve.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-01 08:58:31 ·
Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON 1 edit	reply to c2roth said by c2roth: My suggestion would be to power cycle your modem by leaving it off for 10 minutes and then powering it back up. We've already been through this earlier in this thread. Doing so, unfortunately, does not improve anything (related to congestion between 9:15 and 11 p.m). However, I thank you for the suggestion.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-01 08:59:49 ·
c2roth Premium join:2006-04-26 Kitchener, ON kudos:2	No problem. I only shared the thought because it has helped me in the past but this situation looks like it is well past a daily modem restart.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-01 10:56:18 ·
Redviper join:2010-03-22 Scarborough, ON	reply to Webslingerac Just checking in to say that I seem to be experiencing this problem lately as well. Coupled with the streaming video/youtube problem, it's getting kind of frustrating.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-02 11:52:29 ·
Jayar join:2005-01-16 Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable	reply to Webslingerac I think a better question is: Is there anyone not experiencing congestion on McNicoll?. Because Marc says there is more than enough capacity, and if it's not everyone that is affected, then the likely culprit is local node congestion. But then again, there are those whom have neighbors on Rogers that apparently get full speed.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-03 21:40:58 ·
Robleh join:2009-07-14 canada	reply to Webslingerac »www.speedtest.net/result/2548748439.png scarlett poi
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-03 21:42:30 ·

Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON 1 edit	reply to Webslingerac This is completely unrelated to the congestion issue on McNicoll, but now I have no connectivity at all. »rogershelp.com/wireless_button/ivr/ "Service Alert We are currently experiencing technical difficulties with some customers being unable to access the Internet in the Scarborough area. As of March 1 @2:03 PM we do not have an Estimated Time to restore however we are working on the problem and will provide updates regularly."
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-03 22:17:31 ·
Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON	Rogers Scarborough service alert is gone, and I have connectivity back. I doubt anything has improved with congestion on McNicoll between 9:30pm. and 11p.m. though.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-04 14:19:50 ·
Webslingerac join:2004-05-01 Toronto, ON 1 edit	Well, it's still looking pretty ugly. And I'm getting packet loss from 24.156.149.133 and mcnicoll3.cable.teksavvy.com still. Teksavvy: 10:02 p.m. 10:04 p.m. Nexicom: 10:07 p.m. Beanfield: ping/trace to speedtest.net \|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------\| \| WinMTR statistics \| \| Host - Loss% \| Sent \| Recv \| Best \| Avrg \| Wrst \| Last \| \|------------------------------------------------\|------\|------\|------\|------\|------\|------\| \| \| 10.126.167.1 - 0 \| 65 \| 65 \| 8 \| 11 \| 22 \| 17 \| \| 24.156.149.133 - 6 \| 53 \| 50 \| 10 \| 15 \| 37 \| 13 \| \| mcnicoll1.cable.teksavvy.com - 0 \| 65 \| 65 \| 10 \| 16 \| 63 \| 20 \| \| mcnicoll3.cable.teksavvy.com - 4 \| 57 \| 55 \| 11 \| 19 \| 100 \| 17 \| \| 10gigabitethernet4-3.core1.tor1.he.net - 0 \| 65 \| 65 \| 28 \| 36 \| 53 \| 47 \| \| 10gigabitethernet7-3.core1.chi1.he.net - 4 \| 57 \| 55 \| 23 \| 29 \| 40 \| 34 \| \| 10gigabitethernet3-2.core1.den1.he.net - 6 \| 55 \| 52 \| 63 \| 72 \| 83 \| 65 \| \| 10gigabitethernet3-4.core1.sea1.he.net - 0 \| 65 \| 65 \| 94 \| 104 \| 118 \| 112 \| \| six.netriver.net - 4 \| 57 \| 55 \| 74 \| 82 \| 272 \| 81 \| \|static-74-209-160-12.lynnwood.netriver.net - 11 \| 47 \| 42 \| 90 \| 98 \| 196 \| 91 \| \|________________________________________________\|______\|______\|______\|______\|______\|______\| WinMTR v0.92 GPL V2 by Appnor MSP - Fully Managed Hosting & Cloud Provider
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-04 22:14:12 ·
Jayar join:2005-01-16 Reviews: ·TekSavvy Cable	This is with a DCM 476 which just got provisioned today. I've noticed that I'm able to hit 40mb/s with boost, but things fall apart just the same when evening comes. I also constant packetloss, even during non-congested hours. The test were done via a direct connection to the router.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-05 21:47:45 ·
Jayar join:2005-01-16	reply to Webslingerac Can anyone on McNicoll not experiencing congestion or packetloss post their results here?
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-05 22:09:49 ·

O Canada! > Canadian > TekSavvy > Time for a stop sell on McNicoll POI?

Re: Time for a stop sell on McNicoll POI?