Slow speeds -- anyone else having problems?

[LinLin]

My speeds are incredibly slow today. Supposed to be 8 Mbps and a dslzoneUK test just came in at 357 Kbps. Wow.

Anybody else having problems with speed?

LinLin

And another test from Speedtest.net gives this result --

[Rik]

Hi LinLin - see Tim's announcement, one central failed last night, you need to re-boot your router.

[LinLin]

Thanks, Rik.
Where do I find Tim's announcement, and how do I re-boot my router? Sorry, I'm a bit of a techno-dinosaur.

LL

[Glenn]

The announcement is here http://www.idnetters.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=15153.0

To reboot the router, power it off then back on again.

[LinLin]

Ah, that's better.
Thank you!

[Rik]

If only every problem was that easy to solve.

[Fox]

If only every problem was that easy to solve.

If only it was Rick, I have been having problems with ping/download speeds for weeks now (looking at the forums it seems to be quite widespread). I have rebooted several times but it only seems to be a temporary solution.

Ping to idnet 185ms ==> reboot ==> ping goes back down to "normal" levels ==> wait for 15 to 20 mins, ping goes back up

I normally get a good 7 meg d/l but when my ping increases my d/l goes to less than 1 meg (currently 0.77Mbs with a ping to 195ms to a manchester server...I live oop north). I joined IDNet as they advertise themselves as a gamers ISP, currently I would struggle to play pong. Reading the many threads on idnetters regarding this problem it seems as if IDNet has simply run out of capacity. I know they deny this but having run VisualRoute many times over a period of a week the problem seems to be with IDNets servers and not BT

Currently telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net is showing an average reponse time of 162.1ms, and redbus-gw2-go-1-331.idnet.net is an average of 167 ms with a worst time of 241ms (these are all steps my packets take on the way to www.idnet.com)

As I am sure you would agree this is a totally unacceptable service from IDNet. I cannot play on my favourite game servers as I keep getting kicked for high ping. I think I will give them until the end of the month to offer a solution other than rebooting my router every 30 mins, failing that I (and I am sure many others) will simply find an ISP who can provide the service they promise. I am getting totally pissed of with this and IDNets lack of action to solve it. Sorry for the harsh language but my money is too hard earned to waste.

[Rik]

You don't appear to have re-booted from July 7, until now. Has this re-boot cured your problems?

[Fox]

its is slightly better (ping to idnet is now 101ms and telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net is the problem)

[Rik]

How long was the router powered down?

[Baz]

is the re boot only needed if you have slow speeds Rik. If you dont re boot will it right itself.Just checked my router log and had a drop last night

stats look ok  

ADSL Link     Downstream     Upstream
Connection Speed    8128 kbps    448 kbps
Line Attenuation    36.0 db    18.0 db
Noise Margin    7.9 db    23.0 db


but my uptime has dropped but not LAN both were same times before the drop. is that right  

                Up Time
WAN    17:29:34
LAN        268:06:42
WLAN    116:41:09

[Fox]

30 seconds or so, I didn't bother to time it. My average ping currently to idnet after the reboot is 82ms with a max of 208ms.

[Rik]

See your PMs. You are on the unpopulated central right now.

[Fox]

Got the message rick ..... this is from VisualRoute

"This trace was started on 14-Jul-2009 17:40:05. The host 'www.idnet.com' has been found, and is reachable in 8 hops. The TTL value of packets received from it is 59. In general this route offers a good throughput, with hops responding on average within 137ms. However, hop 4 in network 'IDNET core network address allocation' is noticeably slower than others"

Hop 4 is telehouse-gw3-g0-400.idnet.net (212.69.63.243) average RTT 71.5ms max 233ms

[Rik]

From here:

tracert www.idnet.com

Tracing route to www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     1 ms    <1 ms     1 ms  home [192.168.1.254]
  2    26 ms    27 ms    25 ms  telehouse-gw4-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.99]
  3    26 ms    25 ms    25 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]
  4    25 ms    25 ms    25 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    25 ms    25 ms    27 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    25 ms    25 ms    26 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

There doesn't appear to be an inherent problem. 

[Baz]

re boot has made it better for me



Tracing route to www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2    46 ms    45 ms    66 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    46 ms    46 ms    45 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243

  4    46 ms    47 ms    46 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    46 ms    46 ms    48 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    45 ms    46 ms    46 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

[Rik]

You'll have been moved to the uncongested central, Baz, IDNet are stopping new logins on the congested pipe until the network is re-balanced.

[Baz]

will we stop on the uncongested one or get shifted back when its fixed.

[Rik]

You'll stay there until you re-boot after balancing has been completed, at which time the normal 'round robin' approach will be used.

[Fox]

Sorry for the big size but you need to be able to read the info. You can clearly see the poor response time from part of IDNets core network.

[Rik]

The point I'm making, though, is I'm not seeing it here - so the question is, what's causing it for you?

[Fox]

I dont know, I would guess that you are taking a different route through IDNets "plumbing".

[Rik]

It's identical, I think. Try re-booting to safe mode with network support and then run an extended ping, ie ping www.idnet.net -n 100. Your endpoint response is 39ms or so, which is reasonable, the servers give low priority to pings so will produce odd spikes when you run the kind of program you are doing.

[Gary]

The point I'm making, though, is I'm not seeing it here - so the question is, what's causing it for you?

Could it be you are on wbc Rik?

[Rik]

It wouldn't affect things at this point, Gary - plus I also checked on my Max connection.

[Fox]

Ok, I have run a series of extended pings to idnet, my average is 45ms but there are some BIG spikes in there too going over 275ms. I have also repeated my traceroute using VisualRoute but using UDP rather than ICMP and it still shows high latency within IDNets network. To be honest this is getting above my level of technical expertise. Hopefully the forced reboot from yourselves has sorted out the problem but time will tell. Thanks for your help Rik.

[Rik]

Did you drop to safe mode?

[Gary]

It wouldn't affect things at this point, Gary - plus I also checked on my Max connection.

I should have known 

[Rik]

 

[Fox]

Yup, rebooted, pressed f8 and selected safe mode with network support.

[Rik]

Bear in mind that what your program is doing is firing off ping requests at each point along the route. All servers/routers are set to give low priority to pings, so if something is busy, you'll see a spike on it. The end point response time, though, is the one which matters.

Try manually running a tracert and ping with the -n 20 switch, see what you get from that. If you are still seeing spikes, go back into safemode and run netstat -b and cut'n'paste that result with a ping/tracert also from safe mode would you?

[Fox]

C:\Users\Fox>tracert www.idnet.com

Tracing route to www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  mygateway1.ar7 [192.168.1.1]
  2    69 ms   132 ms    43 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    40 ms    39 ms    42 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    40 ms  mygateway1.ar7 [192.168.1.1]  reports: Destination protocol unreac
hable.

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Fox>tracert www.idnet.com

Tracing route to www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  mygateway1.ar7 [192.168.1.1]
  2    41 ms    40 ms    39 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    40 ms    42 ms    40 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    51 ms  mygateway1.ar7 [192.168.1.1]  reports: Destination protocol unreac
hable.


Trace complete.


As you can see the tracert didnt complete but the first attempt shows a spike at the second step

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6002]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\Fox>ping www.idnet.com

Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 39ms, Maximum = 42ms, Average = 40ms

C:\Users\Fox>ping www.idnet.com

Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=256ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=308ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=221ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 175ms, Maximum = 308ms, Average = 240ms

C:\Users\Fox>ping www.idnet.com

Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 40ms, Maximum = 41ms, Average = 40ms

There are 3 ping tests done exactly 30 seconds apart. As you can see the second is horrendous. I have also done a speed test and that seems to be fine (over 6 meg), probably didnt get a spike during it?

[Rik]

I really can't explain that tracert, I just double-checked and it's still fine here. However, 51 ms  mygateway1.ar7 [192.168.1.1]  reports: Destination protocol unreachable, suggests that the trace has turned back to your router. Can you borrow, or do you have, a spare router you can try?

[Fox]

Unfortunately not, I just have my D-Link DSL-G624T (running the latest firmware V3.10)

[Rik]

My loaner is out atm, or I'd send you that. Let support have the tracerts and pings you've posted here and see what they suggest. Did you do a netstat -b, btw?

[Fox]

C:\Windows\system32>netstat -b

Active Connections

  Proto  Local Address          Foreign Address        State
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49171        Fox-PC:49172           ESTABLISHED
[firefox.exe]
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49172        Fox-PC:49171           ESTABLISHED
[firefox.exe]
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49175        Fox-PC:49176           ESTABLISHED
[firefox.exe]
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49176        Fox-PC:49175           ESTABLISHED


sorry had to elevate my permissions to do it, just shows firefox
[firefox.exe]

C:\Windows\system32>

[PuncH]

just to stick my oar in...

C:\Users\JoCa>tracert www.idnet.com

Tracing route to www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

 1     5 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.0.1
 2    15 ms    15 ms    16 ms  telehouse-gw4-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.99]
 3    15 ms    15 ms    17 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

 4    17 ms    16 ms    16 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
 5    17 ms    17 ms    16 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
 6    16 ms    16 ms    16 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\JoCa>

No probs here at all. If something was up with telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net we'd all be seeing it surely?

[Rik]

We would, Jonathan.

[Rik]

C:\Windows\system32>netstat -b

Active Connections

  Proto  Local Address          Foreign Address        State
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49171        Fox-PC:49172           ESTABLISHED
[firefox.exe]
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49172        Fox-PC:49171           ESTABLISHED
[firefox.exe]
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49175        Fox-PC:49176           ESTABLISHED
[firefox.exe]
  TCP    127.0.0.1:49176        Fox-PC:49175           ESTABLISHED


sorry had to elevate my permissions to do it, just shows firefox
[firefox.exe]

C:\Windows\system32>

Why was Firefox running?

[Rik]

Unfortunately not, I just have my D-Link DSL-G624T (running the latest firmware V3.10)

Mmm. Take a look at:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/325122

0x02         2        Protocol Unreachable - generated if the transport protocol
                        designated in a datagram is not supported in the transport layer
                        of the final destination;

That sounds like the router is doing something odd.

[Fox]

Maybe time to get a new router? It is a few years old. I quite like the looks of the Belkin N1 Vision (F5D8632UK4A)

but any other suggestions/comments would be appreciated.

[Sebby]

I'd go for a Netgear DG834Gv4.

[Fox]

That only supports 802.11G and the router has four 10/100mps ports whereas the belkin has wireless N (upto 300mbs) and four gigabyte ports. All my PC's have gigabyte ethernet ports so it makes sense for me to get a router that supports it. But thanks for the suggestion anyway Sebby

[Steve]

I like the idea of the gigabit router although I would be happy to buy just the router without the modem as most adsl routers will work in modem mode only and I've a few of those lying about The wireless N bit I remain to be convinced I have 2 access points one g and one N connecting at 54mbs and 270 mbs ,the speed difference between the two I don't think is terribly noticeable especially if the g signal strength is good. The Belkin N1 vision gets a mixed bag of reviews on Amazon .

I have personally considered the Apple airport extreme which would need a separate adsl modem,it is a 1Gb router and has dual wireless at 2.5GHz and 5GHz which has its uses for reducing interference and increasing throughput on a mixed wireless network. The downside is no UPNP, people also mention the lack of a SPI firewall but I believe a lot people using Windows are running software firewalls anyway.

[Gary]

The N1 looks the business but is low in features and as Steve has said has very mixed reviews, there are better routers out there. I would myself go with a SPI firewall with Intrusion prevention and Denial of service protection and use a software firewall to just see whats going in and out of your pc.

[Sebby]

Indeed - I think it's just a looker.

[Wooloff]

I've noticed a lot of posts over the last couple of weeks in which people are asking about slow speeds. They all seem to have similar issues as I do, router stats are fine and very poor throughput.

Is this IDNet's problem or mine? I've email support a few times now, each time being asked to reset the router or being told that my poor speeds are BT's fault because of one thing or another and to give it a day or so. Surely, with so many people with the same problem it can't just be me? As I have said in other posts, I've tried another router and done the powering down trick plenty of times. I've changed nothing in my set-up to cause the problem and I've have been suffering with poor speeds for a month now.

I can't even use Skyplayer to watch the cricket as even on low quality my connection can't keep up with it. 

est1 comprises of Best Effort Test:  -provides background information.
    Your DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
    IP profile for your line is - 7150 kbps
    Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 360 kbps

It's not something I want to do, but would moving away from IDNet help? At the moment I'm paying £25 a month for broadband and that's not cheap. In the past I have not minded this as the service as always been very good but now I'm tempted to ask for my MAC.

Any recommendations as for other things I can try or indeed other ISP's?

Thanks in advance.

[Rik]

We're seeing a handful of cases where people with good profiles are getting very poor speeds. My own theory, and it's just that, is that BT are allowing VPs to become congested as they concentrate on WBC. For myself, I've noticed no loss of speed on either Max or WBC.

If you've spoken to support and they can't resolve it, and you've tried powering off the router for 2+ minutes (to ensure you don't reconnect to the pipe that became congested after a BT failure last week), then there's very little else I can think of to suggest, sorry.

If I were moving, my shortlist would be AAISP, Zen and Newnet.

[Sebby]

Or better still, LLU.

[Wooloff]

Thanks for the fast answers

I to think it's a congestion issue, as in the mornings the speed is fine, but any time past 10ish in the morning and it's slow as hell again.

Can I ask what WBC is? I've seen it mentioned a lot on here but I don't know what it is. Could it be something that may help me with my problem?

I'll take a look at the ISP you guys have mentioned, thanks again.

[Sebby]

WBC is BT's new ADSL2+ product (stands for Wholesale Broadband Connect), offering speeds up to 24Mb.

[Rik]

WBC is BT's version of ADSL2+, with the potential for speeds of up to 24Mbps, though in reality, 20M seems to be a more likely practical maximum. If your exchange is enabled, you will be informed when you log in to your account page at IDNet.

[Simon]

Someone will correct me if this is wrong, but would it be worth asking IDNet to switch people with this problem to a different central, ie, from GW6 to GW5, or whatever?

[Rik]

Apparently, they've switched to using a round robin system to avoid having to do that manually. 

[Wooloff]

WBC is BT's version of ADSL2+, with the potential for speeds of up to 24Mbps, though in reality, 20M seems to be a more likely practical maximum. If your exchange is enabled, you will be informed when you log in to your account page at IDNet.

My exchanged is enabled for ADSL2+

I think I will try upgrading my account to that and see how it goes first before moving away.

Thanks again guys

Any router recommendations for ADSL2+?

[Rik]

Can you post your current stats?

[Simon]

Rik, but the login stays the same?

[Rik]

Rik, but the login stays the same?

It does. That's actually the realm, it's not directly connected to which central you use, demonstrated by the fact that it's retained when you move to WBC.

[Wooloff]

By router stats do you mean these?

Data rate   
8128     448
       
Noise margin   
8.8     22.0
           
Output power   
19.8     11.9
           
Attenuation   
22.5     15.0

[Rik]

Stick with the router you are using, unless it's a Draytek. You have a max sync with some noise headroom to spare, you should benefit from a significant speed increase. (Though do have a read of this thread...)

[Wooloff]

It's a fairly old Belkin F5D7633-4. Although it does say that it's ADSL2+ compatible.

[Rik]

Try it for starters and change if you need to then. Router advice with WBC is a bit less clear cut atm, just as it was when Max launched. The Netgear 834 is the safest bet so far, but I'm using a 2-Wire 2700.