Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
 ·Iowa Network Servi..
| Upload issue?
Seems like I've noticed an upload issue tonight. I was browsing E-Bay and noticed that pages weren't loading as "smooth" as before. Trace routes look okay, download looks okay as well.
I ran the java speed test here and it confirmed an upload issue.
2003-05-04 23:07:01 EST:
Your upload speed : 44913 bps, or 44 kbps.
Your upstream result was very slow! .. not good
So to build my case, I ran the upload test from a different server/location:
»miranda.ctd.anl.gov:7123/
It resulted in:
running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 32.51Kb/s
After that, I did an FTP file transfer to one of my servers and got the following:
68.91Kb/s
Seems like an upload issue. I've had this problem off and on, but Mediacom has been uninterested in helping me about any upload speed concerns in the past.
I know those aren't "terrible" but it's half of the advertised upload (which I normally get the full upload). 128Kb/s is low enough. |
|
Skipdawg
The Original
Premium,ExMod 2001-03
join:2001-04-19
The Void | Hopefully the right eyes will read this Monday.
For you do look to have a valid issue there.
--
Proud US Navy Vet. |
|
Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
·Iowa Network Servi..
edited
| reply to Turbocpe
Just to add to this, not long after I made the above post, I was unable to browse any websites. My modem never showed to lose sync. After about 15 minutes, I was able to connect to websites again, although pages weren't loading that great.
I then ran a few more speed tests at that time, using the above mentioned checkers, and the results were showing an upload of about 18-28 kb/s. Again, the download side was fine and so was ping responses.
I checked my modem's diagnostic page, and the SNR level was fine, as was the received/transmitted power levels.
This isn't the first upload issue I've had in Des Moines. It comes and goes. It does frustrate me thinking of the last time I had that low of an upload speed, and Mediacom refused to help, stating that they don't make any speed guarantees. Be that as it may, an upload of 18-28 kb/s is *not* fine. Mediacom sure can raise my blood pressure at times 
Is it possible there is another davidjk (a heavy uploader)  that's in my area and that's killing the upload pipe? Perhaps someone has an uncapped modem?
[text was edited by author 2003-05-05 05:00:06] |
|
DJ
Premium
join:2001-06-13
Columbus, GA
 ·Knology
| said by Turbocpe  :
Is it possible there is another davidjk (a heavy uploader) that's in my area and that's killing the upload pipe? Perhaps someone has an uncapped modem?
:[ I sure hope there's not another one of me near you!
Here's some FYI...your node should be able to pass on about 6Mbps upstream, so it's nearly impossible for an uncapped modem to eat all of that up. Modems can generally upload at a maximum of 1.5Mbps, at least that's all I've personally witnessed them do while uncapped. Speed wise, it takes an abnormally LARGE number of subscribers maxing out their uploads simultaneously so there's not enough to supply 128kbps to everybody.
An easy way to see if your node's upstream (or CMTS port) is clogged is to do a tracert. If that's the case, then your latency should be truly horrendous with uploads of 18-44kbps. That could also explain why webpages weren't loading correctly.
Keep us updated! Hopefully the fine techs here, like Blackend, BAINCH, or Quad Eleven can help you out some more.
--
Techno, trance, house, hardcore, gabber, jungle, drum 'n' bass...and everything else in between. Old school electro...oh yeah. |
|
BAINCH
Premium,VIP
join:2003-04-02
Middletown, NY | reply to Turbocpe
Turbocpe,
I need to know your town and MacID to investigate further.
PS. You mentioned "half the advertised upload." I'm curious, what advertisment are you speaking of? |
|
Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
·Iowa Network Servi..
edited
| reply to Turbocpe
Thanks for the info.
I have had the cable service before Mediacom took over. I guess 1500/128 is the number that sticks in my mind. I realize it now says "up to" but I honestly don't recall it always being that way.
This isn't aimed at you BAINCH since you've been a good assist here, but how can Mediacom make a customer believe that 18-28 kb/s upload is "okay"? Not only is that dial-up territory, it would seem that there *is* a problem somewhere since those upload speeds aren't considered normal by other users and other broadband ISPs. I don't always hit the upload cap when things appear "normal", but since it's usually close, I would expect anything less to be a sign of a possible problem? I don't think it's unreasonable to get frustrated when Mediacom informed me last time that they make no guarantees of upload speed, and refused to offer any help when I had this same issue (very low upload). It's things such as that, that give me the bad view of Mediacom that I can't easily forget.
Just FYI, I am not a gamer, nor am I running apps like Kazza. I simply use my connection for web browsing and the occasional FTP to a sever I admin. Regardless, that low of an upload really had an impact on my web browsing last night (load/pause/load/pause), which prompted me to further investigate, which showed what I suspected.
I'll PM you the info when I am back at home tonight, BIANCH.
Thanks.
[text was edited by author 2003-05-05 14:26:44] |
|
BAINCH
Premium,VIP
join:2003-04-02
Middletown, NY
| Turbocpe,
I asked the questions about the marketing material because I don't recall anything with "128k" or even "Up to 128k" in quite some time (and I often see it listed here.)
It is hard to respond to what "normal" users think or what other broadband ISPs offer. I do agree that your reported speed is below par for what I believe Mediacom Online should be. I promise to investigate if given the information requested. |
|
Cisco924
join:2003-05-03
Chillicothe, IL
| Note to BAINCH,
Note in the "Mediacom Online - Fast track to the Internet" brochure that you get at installation. Page 42 - residential service.
* A maximum Upstream rate of 128 kbps.
* A maximum Downstream rate of 1500kbps.
* .... 1 Computer
* .... no servers
* .... seperate chrg for modem lease
* .... 1 dynamic IP
Thanks,
Jeff |
|
chops1221
join:2003-04-26 | 1 computer? Does that mean i can't have 3 computers on my router according to that agreement? |
|
BAINCH
Premium,VIP
join:2003-04-02
Middletown, NY | reply to Cisco924
That I believe is in the Customer and User Agreement and certainly doesn't promise any particular speed. |
|
z9_87
Ill - Ini
Premium
join:2001-09-23
Urbana, IL
clubs:
edited
| reply to chops1221
maybe that's why they don't like routers...to bad.
--
Lag free since 4/30/03!
[text was edited by author 2003-05-06 16:22:30]
[text was edited by author 2003-05-06 16:22:54] |
|
Ron H
join:2002-02-02
Bettendorf, IA
| reply to Turbocpe
I have been noticing very low upload speeds. Like in the 3 to 4kbps range. I did a couple of Line Tests and lastnight I had a failed test. Anyone else in the Cedar Falls/Waterloo area experiencing the same problem?
»/quality/nil/1056560 |
|
the_w0p
join:2002-12-01
Davenport, IA
·Mediacom
|  reply to Turbocpe
BAINCH, I have let my guard down some about Mediacom because I thought maybe we had a friend in the know, but I must admit your reactions to this upload thing are anything but friendly. It actually seems like you are taking a personal affront to those who claim that an upload minimum is part of their covenant. I for one remember distinctly being told that the upload rate was 128 at the minimum and if not mistaken was told it would "NEVER" go any lower!!!
--
the_w0p, MCP |
|
Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
·Iowa Network Servi..
| reply to Turbocpe
I hadn't sent BIACH my info because 1)I forgot and 2)the issue currently isn't present. I didn't want to send him my info and add to his troubles unless my problem is present. He may not be able to do anything unless it's present any way. Although, this problem does seem to occur often enough to warrant it.
Funny you mention handling upload issues. When this issue appeared last year, I had emailed Mediacom's tech and gave similar results as I posted above, I got the following, simple, reply from Mediacom:
"Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about upload speeds."
I was a bit upset, and that was my turning point as to when I started to become unhappy with Mediacom. I thought Mediacom should have alteast made some effort to resolve or look into the issue. It gave me a bad view of Mediacom that has been with me since. |
|
Ron H
join:2002-02-02
Bettendorf, IA
| reply to Turbocpe
I must admit that the quality of the Mediacom service has deteriorated. When it first started up (when @home went bankrupt) it was pretty good. Even up until late last year. Starting in March I have noticed the deterioration of the Mediacom service. I am wondering if Mediacom is suffering growing pains and can't afford to upgrade their network? |
|
BAINCH
Premium,VIP
join:2003-04-02
Middletown, NY | reply to Turbocpe
Turbocpe,
What, can nobody get it right. It is BAINCH. B A I N C H. Six letters people. Ok, rant finished.
Again, send me a town and MacID and I will look into it. |
|
Turbocpe
Premium
join:2001-12-22
IA
edited
| reply to Turbocpe
I do apologize BAINCH. I generally proof read just to make sure, but your username got missed. To me, that username is unique and hard for me to get it correct.
[text was edited by author 2003-05-07 13:13:20] |
|
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| reply to Ron H
said by Ron H :
I must admit that the quality of the Mediacom service has deteriorated. When it first started up (when @home went bankrupt) it was pretty good. Even up until late last year. Starting in March I have noticed the deterioration of the Mediacom service. I am wondering if Mediacom is suffering growing pains and can't afford to upgrade their network?
I don't think it is a matter of afford to upgrade their network so much as it is a matter of being able to affordably upgrade. Last year Mediacom did a huge number of cable plant upgrades which probably meant HSD upgrades (a much smaller market) went to the wayside. Now that something like 90%+ of the Mediacom market is digital, they can spend time and money on HSD upgrades, hence why one market after another is seeing new work.
I would not be surprised if part of BAINCH's job is to prioritize who gets upgraded first  March is pretty recent compared to how long some of the other markets that have had problems. There are probably issues as well of not doing an upgrade until extensive study has been done to predict future needs for the area. The last rounds of predictions under AT&T@Home failed miserably.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
or Go to
»isca.whiteboard.net for more information (and java telnet access) |
|
BAINCH
Premium,VIP
join:2003-04-02
Middletown, NY
| reply to the_w0p
the_w0p,
Was the "128 at the minimum" a verbal or written item? Per chance have a copy?
My point is fairly simple.
1. As a customer you have every right to desire and ask for the highest possible speeds at the lowest possible price.
2. As the service provider I have a right to set my actual speed, expectation, and price.
Where I get confused is when a customer says, "You lied to me, you promised 128k up." Now the system can go 128k and many people do get that. At peak, most people don't (although I really am working hard on that one.) What I don't want is any customer being confused about what we ARE promising. So when I see quotes relating how we promised particular speeds I like to investigate. If a system or person is promising something we don't deliver then it is an issue I wish to correct. |
|
Mustang683
join:2003-03-03
Waukee, IA
edited
| reply to Turbocpe
I went through all of Mediacom's online advertising for thier internet service and the attached images are what i was able to locate.
--
You have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the right to remain silent (I suggest you use it)
[text was edited by author 2003-05-08 08:32:37]
[text was edited by author 2003-05-08 08:32:50] |
|
