Unstable ping on gw5

Rik · Jul 14, 2009, 11:01:50

The cure seems to be working, then.

Simon · Jul 14, 2009, 11:13:44

So it would appear.

Steve · Jul 14, 2009, 13:39:35

I wondered what was up

on .net

Reboot latency still up but that's due to me using a homeplug to an additional wireless access point

karlak · Jul 14, 2009, 14:28:24

Hmmm,

Still no good for me

- this was after a "soft" reboot and then a power cyle of the router

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test: -provides background information.
Your DSL connection rate: 7072 kbps(DOWN-STREAM), 448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
IP profile for your line is - 5000 kbps
Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 947 kbps

PINGs up to 170ms from a usual 35 ms (ping bbc.co.uk)

Rik · Jul 14, 2009, 15:20:59

Let support know.

karser · Jul 14, 2009, 16:35:01

Well I dont know what happened last night but right now I'm happy, finally it seems to be back to normal, & I just pray it stays like this from now on, for a very long time. I will run it again for the next few nights to check on it tho.

[attachment deleted by admin]

Rik · Jul 14, 2009, 16:46:06

A central failed for a few minutes.

MarkE · Jul 14, 2009, 17:11:41

No dice here with router rebooting and resync etc pings are from multiplay.co.uk and are through the proverbial latency roof..

Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=172ms TTL=124
Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=115ms TTL=124
Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=168ms TTL=124
Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=124

Ping statistics for 85.236.96.22:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 115ms, Maximum = 172ms, Average = 149ms

Glenn · Jul 14, 2009, 17:12:56

Give support a call before they close Mark, they may be able to fix the issue

quandam · Jul 14, 2009, 17:56:01

Update. Ref my earlier posts, after following Riks advice to reboot the router after diabolical speeds/pings etc things immediately went back to normal. However, I am more than disappointed with the reply received at 3.55pm today from support as a reply to my request for advice, this reply is reminiscent of the 'average' reply received from sub standard ISP's. It took support almost a day and a half to reply when in the meantime (midniight'ish) one of the centrals went on the fritz and IDNet issued advice to reboot the router and things would be back on track as they indeed were.

Some 16 hours after this central problem arose I received this advice from support:

"BT are not reporting any issues within your exchange relating to
contention. in order to locate the cause of the issue, please can you
connect your router and filter to the test socket found behind the
faceplate of the master BT socket and retest from this point. If the
fault continues, please try testing the connection with an alternate
modem or router in place for comparison."

The 'advice' smacks of a script monkey's piece of advice and a pre scripted reply to keep the punter 'happy' and in effect, 'pass the buck'. I do hope that IDNet are not adopting the 'Hokey Cokey' form of technical advice, i.e "you put the blue lead in, take the yellow lead out and then shake it all about" for this is the slippery slope to a customer lack of confidence.

I appreciate that they had reported the central problem and reported it on IDnetters but my gripe is with the content of the email 16 hours after the event.

Rik · Jul 14, 2009, 17:57:52

I understand, Q. They have been extra busy and are one short this week, so you may have been boiler-plated.

Simon · Jul 14, 2009, 21:54:42

Boiler-plated?

karlak · Jul 14, 2009, 22:11:43

Quote from: karlak on Jul 14, 2009, 14:28:24
Hmmm,

Still no good for me - this was after a "soft" reboot and then a power cyle of the router

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test: -provides background information.
Your DSL connection rate: 7072 kbps(DOWN-STREAM), 448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
IP profile for your line is - 5000 kbps
Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 947 kbps

PINGs up to 170ms from a usual 35 ms (ping bbc.co.uk)

Got it sorted quite soon after - I had rebooted the router, but was then advised to leave it switvhed off for upto 15 minutes by support - Did this and it was then back to normal

. It seems some routers do not "forget" their previous connection settings with a quick reboot.

Simon · Jul 14, 2009, 22:22:58

I think it's more that it takes that long for the connection to free itself from the tangled web that is BT.

Ray · Jul 14, 2009, 22:52:08

Quote from: Simon on Jul 14, 2009, 21:54:42
Boiler-plated?

Just for you, Simon here

Simon · Jul 14, 2009, 23:07:25

Thanks Ray. Can't see it on my phone, agd just off to bed, so will look tomorrow.

Rik · Jul 15, 2009, 09:40:39

Quote from: Simon on Jul 14, 2009, 21:54:42
Boiler-plated?

Stock reply.

Rik · Jul 15, 2009, 09:41:41

Quote from: karlak on Jul 14, 2009, 22:11:43
Got it sorted quite soon after - I had rebooted the router, but was then advised to leave it switvhed off for upto 15 minutes by support - Did this and it was then back to normal . It seems some routers do not "forget" their previous connection settings with a quick reboot.

It's not the router but the BT equipment which is set to 'remember' a connection for a short period, to save re-validation for 'blip' outages.

Simon · Jul 15, 2009, 09:54:53

Quote from: Rik on Jul 15, 2009, 09:40:39
Stock reply.

Another one for the Rictionary.

Rik · Jul 15, 2009, 09:56:14

It's a widely used term. The technique was very common with legal work, where they would stitch various stock paragraphs together to draw up a contract or will, say.

bobleslie · Jul 15, 2009, 19:09:57

We often refer to 'boiler-plating' as a 'copy and paste job'.

Rik · Jul 16, 2009, 10:15:53

No sense of history, Bob.

bobleslie · Jul 16, 2009, 11:55:03

I served my apprenticeship with G.E.C.

Rik · Jul 16, 2009, 12:00:19

You can't get more hysterical than that.

bobleslie · Jul 16, 2009, 12:03:12