dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3787
share rss forum feed


ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
reply to xymox1

Re: Cox speed upgrade degraded my service

Well, it's up to you to make a decide choice to use the two cable modems that is alternative to the costly of Cox business service or else you'll be going to be with the Cox business service that is SLA.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

2 edits
reply to xymox1

Click for full size
speed, latency and jitter
additional details here what i have with this more detail about speed, latency and jitter on my two connection lines to my single PC.

my jitter is very good about 1ms to 5ms i gets.

Centerton

join:2009-06-13
Bentonville, AR

Can you do this on a video game console?



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

said by Centerton:

Can you do this on a video game console?

He could do this with the video game console be connected to the cable modem but the latency is not guaranteed on the residential service.


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

And I wonder what is happening with buis clients ? *IF* and thats a big *IF* this latency jitter is caused by some aspect of the "upgrade" then it might also be effecting buis clients.

BUT..

If they are using RFC 2544 for the standard testing model for the SLA then jitter is not part of RFC 2544 testing. Plus RFC 2544 is very limited in scope. Y.156sam is far more complete and a better basis for testing against a SLA.

The jitter im seeing might not be subject to the Cox SLA and so they would not need to address it. However Jitter MUST be part of a buis SLA...

OK.. I will go look up the Buis SLA if I can..

quote:
Can you do this on a video game console?
A video game console, and video games in general, require very little bandwidth ( Mb/s ) what they need is low and non-jittery latency. Its really ALL about latency with vid games. A lot of games can be played surprizingly well on DIAL UP surprizinly enough. So a gamer should be looking at latency and jitter. Lower is better.

Load balancing 2 modems requires a router that can do it. Its NOT trival. It also requires a bit of technical know how networking wise. Make sure you understand what all you need and what gear is required before you order 2 accounts from Cox. ALSO understand what load balancing actually does. You cant download 1 file twice as fast, well, unless your torrenting. But normally if its a single connection to something/some site it will not double your speed. »www.ezlan.net/loadbalance.html

With gamaing the way it sends single packets to one server it might not have any effect at all. Also if it gets packets from 2 IP's at once for the same person it might freak out. I would say Steam would be a likely causality. But I dont know that for sure, but I assume a online game server might get a bit weird if it saw gama data for one person coming for 2 IP's..

Just make sure your understand what load balancing is before you proceed.

Plus you need hardware to load balance. The Mikrotik routers can do it, cheaply. »wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Load_Balancing and the products.. »routerboard.com/ among others..

However load balancing is just one more thing to get in the way IMHO. I like simple and direct with as few a processing steps inbetween.

quote:
additional details here what i have with this more detail about speed, latency and jitter on my two connection lines to my single PC.

my jitter is very good about 1ms to 5ms i gets.
ikyuaoki, thats not really good performance for $130. Im paying $89/mo and get this. Its a bit low as its peak internet usage right now. At non peak times I get 175/35



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

I cant actually find any SLA's. I find a zillion references to them, but I cant find them to read...

I did find something impressive tho..

"Standards-Based. Cox has achieved certification from the Metro Ethernet Forum. This assures you that Cox Metro Ethernet services provide reliable, standards-based solutions that align with the industry’s direction for carrier Ethernet services."

So thats fully Y.156sam

Reading all about Cox Buis is impressive. No doubt. I am a buis and have a home office with a LLC I run from it. So I could do a buis account. However the pricing is so much higher then residential its really kinda outrageous. YES it comes a one hella awesome service, but oh man to get 175/35 would be truly stupid expensive just to browse the web and do some small work realted things.

The part I dont understand... How can they provide a different level of service over the same wire on the same DOCSIS channels from the same plant ? Is it provisioned differently ? so maybe my path once it comes from the DMTS is different ? My connection is still based on my wire all the back to the plant. That sure isnt going to change.

You know....

If they cant work out this jitter thing, maybe I will do a slower connection that is buis... But still. I will have to pay ALOT more..



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

1 edit
reply to xymox1

HMMM........

After more research....

I cant find anywhere that Cox Phoenix has a SLA for buis cable modem based service.

Ultra ( which i assume now has gone to 175/35 rather then the 50x5 they list ) is $369/mo with a 1 yr agreement. So its 3.5 times more expensive and I dont see mention of a SLA *ANYWHERE*..

»ww2.cox.com/business/arizona/dat···internet

I do see SLA's in other states, just not Phoenix Az..



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 edit
reply to xymox1

Notice this: load balancing does not double your bandwidth, I configured the windows 7 via the registry editor to add the values to setup the load balancing via the randomize so the router hardware is not required to do a load balancing so however there are linux box does do load balancing for the two connections as well as windows 7 can do that to load balancing if configured proper setup via the registry editor settings.

load balancing is very good to easing the pressure of bandwidth pipe.

i did not say that my jitter 1ms to 5ms is bad.

secondly it is not guaranteed to have a stable latency unless you have to configured your PC to handle a good buffer performance in-housed computer instead of the cable modem buffer.

I configured my PC to have large buffer in the computer memory instead of the cable modem of limited small buffer queued hardware.

that all i am saying this jitter is very good at 1ms to 5ms unless if there's higher jitter values then that means i have a bad computer configuration as most likely be misconfiguration settings.

EDIT: here's the jitter status i gets



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

i dont understand how you can change registery settings to get load balancing. How do you connect 2 modems to one network ? Each modem is going to need to do DHCP. So your running without a router then ? So no NAT and therefore one one computer connected to the modem(s). I just dont see how that could work at all. I *suppose* a computer could do dual NIC's with a modem on each nic. Then sure I *suppose* its possible for win do have some way to load balance.

But thats a very one computer solution. I have more then one device I need connected to my network and need NAT. So the correct way is to use a router that can be setup to do load balancing along with NAT and a firewall, DNS caching server and other things.

Yea I dont understand that at all. Can you provide a link on exactly what your doing. I was unable to find any references to this at all using google.



dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4
reply to xymox1

how about WITHOUT the router in the mix!
--
Despises any post with strings.



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

I assume your talking about the latency ?

As I have mentioned three times in this thread I have verified the issue while connected directly to modem and with a different computer.

I have also now verified the same issue at a friends house not too far from my house and im going to test again today at a work clients house in the Paradise Valley area.

Also as i mentioned in a previous post, I have a chart posted here that shows pinging to the cable modem, thru the router, that shows the issue orginates upstream from the cable modem.

Also the way the problem gets worse slowly peaking at peak internet usage times for Cox cable shows a connection to thier loading of the system rather then any usage i have.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

4 edits
reply to xymox1

I just connected the two modems to the virtual two network group of my computer to provide the aggregate the load balancing group.

if you want to have the virtual group over the two ethernet network cards be connected, you may want to edit the registry editor settings:

navigate it through the hives: Computer ---> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE ---> SYSTEM ---> CurrentControlSet ---> services ---> NetBT ---> Paramenters.

if there is no value both Randomadapter and SingleResponse keys entries existed then add RandomAdapter and modify it to 1 value, add SingleResponse and modify it to 1 value.

if you are done with configuring the load balance setup then it will prompt requires you to reboot your PC.

Also, here's the link about creating the load balancing network adapter if you have two ethernet cards or more in the one system computer console.

http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/detail/951/

http://smallvoid.com/article/winnt-network-load.html

here's another note: having enabled the SingleResponse to send just one address for each NIC for WINS qeurying. if the WINS is not required for this configuration, you may want to disable the SingleResponse to 0 value as it will do send all packets across the NIC adapters in bounded group.


ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
reply to xymox1

here's an additional information about jitter i gets:











here's very good jitter results i gets. please ignore the line quality grade.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
reply to xymox1

said by xymox1:

i dont understand how you can change registery settings to get load balancing. How do you connect 2 modems to one network ? Each modem is going to need to do DHCP. So your running without a router then ? So no NAT and therefore one one computer connected to the modem(s). I just dont see how that could work at all. I *suppose* a computer could do dual NIC's with a modem on each nic. Then sure I *suppose* its possible for win do have some way to load balance.

yea, both the two modems do DHCP and i am running without router hardware required and that's it.

there's the advanced security firewall rules is available for windows 7 and above that do some NAT.

it is possible to run the dual NIC in one system computer if you followed the proper load balance setup correctly.


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

Yea Mikrotik had a very fast router where you can do load balancing, NAT and firewall and of course support any number of computers. I think I would do what your doing with a cheap Mikrotik router rather then using the PC directly exposed to the net, even with a microsoft firewall. I prefer a NAT isolation.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 edit
reply to xymox1

with that MS advanced firewall security allows me to specialized the ICMP settings to block both the echo request and echo reply that which it will not response to the extenal hosts outside if i have any reasons to put a block on the echo request and echo reply but there's loss of communications in checking using the ICMP packets for internet error reporting maintainance.

I don't carrying this router hardware. router is not required at all. my PC is directly to the internet over the virtual aggregate group pipe that is works very well.



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

2 edits

2 recommendations

reply to xymox1

But if there is a Microsoft vulnerability, even a scary zero day, then your exposed. Having a Linux based router doing NAT isolates you from ALOT. With IPTables you can do some very impressive adaptive firewall rules well beyond anything built into Win and its Linux based. You can also combine intrusion detection with a firewall.. All this long before any packet reaches a Win machine.

For as little as $60 you can have a Mikrotik router. I would recommend this one ay $99 as its damn powerful and has about every feature. »routerboard.com/RB2011L-IN It runs RouterOS based on Linux. »www.mikrotik.com/software.html

HOWEVER... These routers do require knowing what your doing. They are not for beginners. That said they do come outta the box with a SOHO config. But you should update firmware right outta the box.



ikyuaoki

join:2011-04-12
Wichita, KS
Reviews:
·Cox HSI

1 recommendation

said by xymox1:

HOWEVER... These routers do require knowing what your doing. They are not for beginners. That said they do come outta the box with a SOHO config. But you should update firmware right outta the box.

HUH? I am disagree with you, If i am going to install the linux OS on this computer then I have to configure the settings to start the services like load balancing and iptable to running in background that works that way same thing what router can do. router is not really fast due the limited CPU/RAM utilization performance. the computer comes with much faster CPU/RAM that is better utilization performance than the limited router hardware.


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

The router I sent links for can do at least 440Mb/s so its way faster then using 2 modems and having ultra service on both.

So its WAY faster then your connection even with 2 modems.

Again, it is safer. Having a second physical machine seperating you from the net is better. You could VMWare some stuff I suppose. But thats a lot of work. I would rather offload the CPU cycles required to do the NAT/Firewall/DNS/DHCP to a router rather then have it consume CPU/memory on my main machine.

If you have a spare PC and buy a second NIC then you can do Vyatta. Its free. Then with a fairly cheap PC you can hit full wireline speeds ( 1Gb/s ) and 1 million packets per second. »www.vyatta.org/

But again, a second physical machine is good and will not impact performance if its a powerful router or PC/Vyatta.

For more money you can buy a wireline speed, 1 million packet per second router. This might be faster then your computer can do. Make sure to note the performance specs at the bottom of these pages. »routerboard.com/RB1100AHx2



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

But this is off topic for my thread. I would like if we have this discussion on another thread if we can please.



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

The real router for the money is the Ubiquity Edge Lite.. BUT its BRAND new and just in pre production and the OS is getting worked out. Its based on Vyatta and open source...

Again its not quite in production yet..

But its 1 million pps and 3 Gb/s speeds. Its also a very fast Linux box you can install anything on..

Its what im using now.. But I have a Vyatta box handy.

»www.ubnt.com/edgemax



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

4 edits
reply to xymox1

Im very happy to see that Cox is not participating in this, but im sure soon will be.. It started today.

»www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/25···ght_isp/

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for···ormation

I am letting Cox investigate my latency issues and jitter I have previously posted in this thread. This started when they upgraded speeds to the 175/35 level.

It would be interesting if the throttling ability mentioned above turned out to be related to my issue. To be able to throttle a individual user on Cox in bandwidth ( QoS ) might require adding some sort of extra appliance or device that might introduce latency / jitter. Of course I might be completely wrong too. Being able to implement the throttling required by the 6 strikes system does require individual QoS for each and every ISP subscriber. The way the system works doing walled garden and redirection also requires direct manipulation of any ISP client's connections.



bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5

said by xymox1:

Being able to implement the throttling required by the 6 strikes system does require individual QoS for each and every ISP subscriber.

not really, they could just build a modem configuration with a reduced upstream and downstream bandwidth and apply that to users that have been flagged as copyright violators


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Yea I was thinking that, but they are also talking about a walled garden where it redirects you to a page to accept a notice no matter what page you go to. Then once you accept the notice you gain instant access to the net again. So like a wifi walled garden. So if they are going to be able to do that to any subscriber at random, it means they need to push every subscriber through a device that can do firewall like actions on each and every subscriber I think. And if they are capable of doing that then it seems doing QoS and throttling can all be done on the same device ?

Im not sure if this was possible before, I think the ISP just routed ( layer 2 ) and did not have the technical ability to QoS ( layer 3 ) a specific subscriber ?

Doing a firewall like that on a million subscriber ISP level is pretty serious stuff. I would think this stresses even the best equipment ?

Its one thing to QoS a whole protocol, or block things for your whole network, its a whole other issue to QoS per subscriber.

Does anyone know exactly what gear these ISP's are using to impliment this ? I cant find any specific white papers on how to impliment this on the Cisco site.

I sure am glad not to see Cox in the group of ISP's involved in this. However im sure its just a matter of time.



bbeesley
VIP
join:2003-08-07
Richardson, TX
kudos:5

said by xymox1:

Im not sure if this was possible before, I think the ISP just routed ( layer 2 ) and did not have the technical ability to QoS ( layer 3 ) a specific subscriber ?

It's actually quite simple to just do that with the modem config. They just give you IP space that only goes to the walled garden. I think they do this today via their abuse tracking system


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Ah great point..

Like when you hook up a new modem.

Yea that makes more sense. I was thinking the ISP's would not spend extra money to enforce this new system.

Im glad to hear that.


Vorg
Premium
join:2002-06-18
Tucson, AZ
reply to xymox1

I've been noticing alot of rubber banding in StarTrek online and CBS streaming quality is often worse then a youtube 360 res video.




chrisf8657

join:2002-01-27
Glendale, AZ
reply to xymox1

Which server you use will also affect the Jitter/Ping.
One server gave me 200+ms ping and 37ms of Jitter.



--
~~Chris~~

Need a pro computer tech? See my profile for my website - I offer remote support services!

XS

join:2011-09-02
Gilbert, AZ
reply to xymox1

Did your IP change when you upgraded?I have noticed just getting a different IP can cause latency spikes.