dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1483
share rss forum feed

MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

1 edit

Bloor phub - Terrible connection

I'm posting this for a non-technical friend of mine.

She's got a Mac running 10.6.8 and a Rogers/Cisco modem/router.
She's been complaining of ridiculously slow speeds for nearly a week. She's on the Bloor phub.

Here are some stats from last night - after Rogers support remotely 'tweaked'/updated the modem.

Ping has started…

PING rogers.com (207.245.5xx.xxx): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 207.245.5xx.xxx: icmp_seq=0 ttl=119 time=33.043 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 1
64 bytes from 207.245.5xx.xxx: icmp_seq=2 ttl=119 time=29.032 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 3
Request timeout for icmp_seq 4
Request timeout for icmp_seq 5
64 bytes from 207.245.5xx.xxx: icmp_seq=6 ttl=119 time=29.943 ms
64 bytes from 207.245.5xx.xxx: icmp_seq=7 ttl=119 time=29.932 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 8

--- rogers.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 60.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 29.032/30.488/33.043/1.521 ms



HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21

What are the signal stats from the modem? Thats the first thing you should be looking at.


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

Will get them later today.
Rogers tech swore they were fine.


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to HiVolt

As at about 18:50 today

Model: Cisco DPC3825
Vendor: Cisco
Hardware Revision: 1.0

Serial Number: xxxxxxxxxx
MAC Address: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bootloader Revision: 2.3.0_R3
Current Software Revision: dpc3825-v302r125533-111108a-ROG
Firmware Name: dpc3825-v302r125533-111108a-ROG.bin
Firmware Build Time: Nov 8 18:12:42 2011
Cable Modem Status: Operational
Wireless Network: Enable

Cable Modem State

DOCSIS Downstream Scanning: Completed
DOCSIS Ranging: Completed
DOCSIS DHCP: Completed
DOCSIS TFTP: Completed
DOCSIS Data Reg Complete: Completed
DOCSIS Privacy: Enabled

Downstream Channels

Power Level:
Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1:
0.0 dBmV
37.4 dB

Channel 2:
0.3 dBmV
38.0 dB

Channel 3:
0.2 dBmV
37.9 dB

Channel 4:
0.0 dBmV
37.5 dB

Channel 5:
-0.4 dBmV
36.8 dB

Channel 6:
-0.2 dBmV
37.6 dB

Channel 7:
0.0 dBmV
37.5 dB

Channel 8:
0.0 dBmV
37.1 dB

Upstream Channels

Power Level:
Channel 1:
44.9 dBmV

Channel 2:
45.6 dBmV

Channel 3:
45.1 dBmV

Channel 4:
44.6 dBmV

-------------------------------------------------

Ping has started…

PING rogers.com (207.245.252.27): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 207.245.252.27: icmp_seq=0 ttl=120 time=30.912 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 1
64 bytes from 207.245.252.27: icmp_seq=2 ttl=120 time=29.954 ms
64 bytes from 207.245.252.27: icmp_seq=3 ttl=120 time=30.973 ms
64 bytes from 207.245.252.27: icmp_seq=4 ttl=120 time=31.995 ms
64 bytes from 207.245.252.27: icmp_seq=5 ttl=120 time=30.007 ms
Request timeout for icmp_seq 6
Request timeout for icmp_seq 7
64 bytes from 207.245.252.27: icmp_seq=8 ttl=120 time=31.062 ms

--- rogers.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 40.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 29.954/30.817/31.995/0.693 ms


technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
reply to MaynardKrebs

Signal is fine. But your ping to rogers.com is too high, it should be no more than 10-15 ms. So do a tracert and see what the ping is to the first hop as that might be the cause of high ping and pack loss.


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

The following were done @ around 10am today.
----------------------------------

Rogers.com - elapsed time > 2 minutes when I gave up

Traceroute has started…

traceroute to rogers.com (207.245.252.27), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 * * *
2 67.231.221.241 (67.231.221.241) 29.188 ms 27.846 ms 28.919 ms
3 69.63.252.246 (69.63.252.246) 29.883 ms 30.966 ms 28.222 ms
4 69.63.251.142 (69.63.251.142) 29.409 ms 35.868 ms 27.924 ms
5 ge10-0.gwy2-tor.bb.allstream.net (216.191.65.121) 30.399 ms 28.894 ms
ge10-1.gwy2-tor.bb.allstream.net (216.191.65.129) 27.927 ms
6 10ge4-11.hcap9-tor.bb.allstream.net (199.212.169.202) 28.894 ms 28.907 ms 27.939 ms
7 66-46-129-178.dedicated.allstream.net (66.46.129.178) 28.925 ms 29.911 ms 34.965 ms
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 *

----------------------------------------------------
IBM.com - result after about 1 minute

Traceroute has started…

traceroute to ibm.com (129.42.38.1), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 * * *
2 66.185.90.149 (66.185.90.149) 30.855 ms 27.979 ms 27.993 ms
3 24.156.156.189 (24.156.156.189) 35.955 ms 30.108 ms 46.739 ms
4 64.71.241.110 (64.71.241.110) 42.197 ms 42.976 ms 43.036 ms
5 64.124.196.213 (64.124.196.213) 41.590 ms 43.481 ms 41.024 ms
6 above-uu.iad10.us.above.net (64.125.13.174) 43.041 ms 42.966 ms 42.071 ms
7 0.ge-0-2-0.xt3.stl3.alter.net (152.63.4.46) 71.820 ms 73.384 ms 73.486 ms
8 pos6-0.gw8.stl3.alter.net (152.63.92.37) 72.075 ms 70.884 ms 73.107 ms
9 ibm-gw.customer.alter.net (65.206.180.74) 72.979 ms 72.978 ms 74.050 ms
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 *

--------------------------------------

I swapped the Cisco modem @ a Rogers store this afternoon for a new one, and the results with the new modem were no better.


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

67.231.221.241 looks like York Mills, not Bloor after all


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

1 edit
reply to MaynardKrebs

Now here's a traceroute done via www.iptools.com (on a Teksavvy DSL line) to rogers.com

traceroute to rogers.com (207.245.252.27), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 21.9.344a.static.theplanet.com (74.52.9.33) 1.117 ms 1.596 ms 1.835 ms
2 po201.dsr01.dllstx2.networklayer.com (70.87.254.137) 0.570 ms 0.564 ms 0.553 ms
3 te2-1.dsr01.dllstx3.networklayer.com (70.87.255.65) 0.542 ms 0.770 ms 0.748 ms
4 * * *
5 ae0.bbr01.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com (173.192.18.137) 25.923 ms 25.915 ms 21.901 ms
6 ge6-0.gwy1-chi.allstream.net (206.223.119.3) 26.137 ms 26.169 ms 28.904 ms
7 10ge7-11.hcap9-tor.bb.allstream.net (199.212.169.206) 38.634 ms 39.122 ms 34.937 ms
8 66-46-129-178.dedicated.allstream.net (66.46.129.178) 40.170 ms 39.892 ms 39.600 ms
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *

-------------------------

And here's one done from my laptop on a Teksavvy DSL connection

Tracing route to rogers.com [207.245.252.27]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.1
2 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 206.248.154.104
3 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 2120.ae0.bdr01.tor.packetflow.ca [69.196.136.66]
4 9 ms 9 ms 11 ms peer1.bdr02.tor.packetflow.ca [64.34.236.121]
5 8 ms 11 ms 9 ms 10ge.xe-2-0-0.tor-151f-cor-1.peer1.net [216.187.114.145]
6 9 ms 9 ms 7 ms 216.191.190.105
7 11 ms 11 ms 9 ms 10ge4-11.hcap9-tor.bb.allstream.net [199.212.169.202]
8 9 ms 13 ms 15 ms 66-46-129-178.dedicated.allstream.net [66.46.129.178]
9 12 ms 21 ms 13 ms 66-46-146-52.dedicated.allstream.net [66.46.146.52]
10 76 ms 55 ms 49 ms 207.245.252.27

Trace complete.

There are lots of delays in Allstream's network, both in these traces and in the ones done on the Rogers network.

But Allstream's delays don't account for the horrible 1st hop. My friend is in a condo building, so I'm also wondering if the 1st hop is to some badly behaving equipment in the wiring room in the basement???


technocar2

join:2009-05-29
Brampton, ON
kudos:2
reply to MaynardKrebs

The problem is at the first hope, the HFC node, its clear that its overloaded and thus rogers has blocked ping to it because it will show 25 ms ping where as it should show something like 8 ms.
The following tests were done at ~10 PM.

Tracing route to rogers.com [207.245.252.27]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2     7 ms     8 ms     7 ms  7.2.120.1
  3    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  69.63.254.65
  4    10 ms    11 ms    11 ms  69.63.249.189
  5    10 ms     9 ms    10 ms  69.63.251.150
  6    14 ms    11 ms     8 ms  ge10-0.gwy2-tor.bb.allstream.net [216.191.65.121
]
  7    11 ms    18 ms    12 ms  10ge4-11.hcap9-tor.bb.allstream.net [199.212.169
.202]
  8    11 ms    12 ms    11 ms  66-46-129-178.dedicated.allstream.net [66.46.129
.178]
  9    13 ms    11 ms    11 ms  66-46-146-52.dedicated.allstream.net [66.46.146.
52]
 10    12 ms    13 ms    12 ms  207.245.252.27
 
Trace complete.
 
Tracing route to ibm.com [129.42.38.1]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2     6 ms     8 ms     7 ms  7.2.120.1
  3    11 ms    11 ms    11 ms  24.156.151.97
  4    12 ms    11 ms    11 ms  69.63.249.189
  5    31 ms    27 ms    29 ms  64.71.240.66
  6    24 ms    25 ms    24 ms  xe-2-0-0.er1.lga5.us.above.net [64.124.128.193]
 
  7    25 ms    25 ms    25 ms  0.xe-8-2-0.BR2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [204.255.168.25]
  8    56 ms    55 ms    55 ms  0.so-7-1-0.XT3.STL3.ALTER.NET [152.63.0.6]
  9    56 ms    59 ms    55 ms  POS6-0.GW8.STL3.ALTER.NET [152.63.92.37]
 10    58 ms    57 ms    58 ms  ibm-gw.customer.alter.net [65.206.180.74]
 11     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 12     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 13     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 14     *     ^C
 

Your first hop is my second hop, as you can see yours is blocked where as normally it should show 8 ms. Rogers is hidden what the problem is as the node. Your 2nd hop is my third hop and again I have 11 ms and you have ~30 ms, its very clear your node is in a really bad shape at the moment.


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1

Well, I mean we have to admit this is getting just friggin' ridiculous with Rogers.

Here's this poor guy paying good money for internet and getting diddley squat in return, guys are buying the iPhone 5 and turns out a lot of Rogers so called footprint can't support LTE yet Rogers is advertising the stuff like they're the king of the LTE network and here's us in London with the world's crappiest upload speeds, not even close to what we're paying for and then there's Rogers selling dogcrap PVRs that are driving unsuspecting customers up the wall and to top it all off we have to mention the new Hitron Gateway disaster.

I mean, how long is this going to go on? What Rogers is doing now is just ripping and thieving from everyone.......this is just getting to the point of Criminal Consumer Fraud....


neilb

join:2012-10-07
Toronto, ON
reply to MaynardKrebs

I'm in Toronto and getting similar problems. I'm unable to download any sizeable files. I'm running a variety of mac, linux boxes, windows, boxes. All have the same issues.

My Rogers.com connection is relatively okay but I can't get any downloads from sites such as easynews. The network has been much worse than usual for around a week. I'm using the CISCO modem and a separate wireless bridge.

$ traceroute rogers.comtraceroute to rogers.com (207.245.252.27), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 * * *
2 24.156.150.165 (24.156.150.165) 11.024 ms 12.599 ms 11.814 ms
3 so-4-0-0.gw02.wlfdle.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.82.97) 12.991 ms 11.325 ms 11.793 ms
4 pos-0-0-0.gw02.abcgy.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (24.153.7.118) 49.906 ms 9.336 ms 12.501 ms
5 ge10-1.gwy2-tor.bb.allstream.net (216.191.65.129) 9.958 ms 11.868 ms ge10-0.gwy2-tor.bb.allstream.net (216.191.65.121) 11.428 ms
6 10ge4-11.hcap9-tor.bb.allstream.net (199.212.169.202) 10.142 ms 11.989 ms 12.176 ms
7 66-46-129-178.dedicated.allstream.net (66.46.129.178) 12.822 ms 17.632 ms 11.828 ms
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * *

etc

$ traceroute downloads.easynews.com
traceroute to downloads.easynews.com (66.152.109.61), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 * * *
2 69.63.243.97 (69.63.243.97) 10.602 ms 11.758 ms 7.845 ms
3 69.63.250.21 (69.63.250.21) 10.288 ms 12.386 ms 10.979 ms
4 66.185.83.62 (66.185.83.62) 25.882 ms 25.842 ms 28.119 ms
5 te1-5.mpd01.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.12.89) 29.833 ms 29.970 ms 29.435 ms
6 te0-0-0-6.ccr21.iad02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.221) 30.009 ms 28.778 ms 29.837 ms
7 te0-3-0-5.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.2.49) 29.896 ms te0-1-0-5.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.129) 29.854 ms te0-3-0-1.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.121) 29.185 ms
8 te0-1-0-5.mpd22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.121) 30.483 ms te0-7-0-2.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.25.237) 31.294 ms te0-0-0-2.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.125) 29.773 ms
9 te0-6-0-12.mpd22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.25.149) 30.582 ms 29.707 ms te0-7-0-12.mpd22.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.1) 29.502 ms
10 te3-3.ccr01.jfk01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.1.210) 28.757 ms 29.082 ms te9-8.ccr01.jfk01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.29) 29.364 ms
11 te8-2.ccr01.alb02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.5) 32.091 ms te7-2.ccr01.alb02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.141) 33.536 ms te8-2.ccr01.alb02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.5) 33.076 ms
12 38.104.52.10 (38.104.52.10) 33.975 ms 33.806 ms 38.802 ms
13 vl107.es1b.alb1.tvc-ip.com (66.109.38.33) 32.718 ms 32.495 ms 32.075 ms
14 ge-1-1.es1.alb9.tvc-ip.com (66.109.38.182) 31.682 ms 33.020 ms 31.852 ms
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 *



jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON

those two network are simply blocking/dropping ICMP/UDP responses for some dumb and prehistoric reason. it would be like installing a moate around your house today to prevent someone from breaking in.



Tenebre81

@rogers.com

There is no problem with any of your modems, splitters, etc. As of a few weeks ago, Rogers internet service has just been wonky. Naturally, they will NEVER admit this to you. EVER. They will try and stall you and take you through the usual troubleshooting routines ('power cycle' the modem, get a new modem, etc etc). Anything to avoid the real issue:

Rogers internet just STINKS currently.


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to MaynardKrebs

So I was at my friend's place today and tried a little experiment. She has Wind as her cellular provider, and it's widely acknowledged that Wind's data service isn't the speediest. I turned her Nexus S into a wireless hotspot and streamed the Felix Baumgartner record parachute jump via both the Wind wireless connection and via her Rogers Express connection to her Mac.

Guess which one had no dropouts or video freezes? Come on, you can guess.......

Wind was WAAAY better.

The Rogers connection constantly stalled ..... and timed out. What a POS!!!!


MaynardKrebs
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4

My friend wrote a very nice, but nasty, letter to Rogers complaining about the service. Rogers is ending a "senior" technician to her place later this week to investigate the building.....whatever that means.