Speed Rochdale

[th'engineer]

anyone having similar problems

Fri, 20 May 2005 11:33:24 UTC
1st 128K took 3688 ms = 35540 Bytes/sec = approx 296 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 547 ms = 239620 Bytes/sec = approx 1994 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 562 ms = 233224 Bytes/sec = approx 1940 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 3219 ms = 40718 Bytes/sec = approx 339 kbits/sec


Fri, 20 May 2005 11:40:33 UTC
1st 128K took 563 ms = 232810 Bytes/sec = approx 1937 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 547 ms = 239620 Bytes/sec = approx 1994 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 3109 ms = 42159 Bytes/sec = approx 351 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 3375 ms = 38836 Bytes/sec = approx 323 kbits/sec


1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 86 ms 67 ms 176 ms 10.23.48.1
4 172 ms 11 ms 9 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 74 ms 121 ms 57 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.24
41]
6 226 ms 371 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 18 ms 119 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 16 ms 16 ms 81 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 146 ms 15 ms 19 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 141 ms 176 ms 67 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
race complete.

tracert www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
racing route to www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
ver a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 415 ms * 95 ms 10.23.48.1
4 * 11 ms 11 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.24
41]
6 69 ms 187 ms 354 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 507 ms * 251 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 * * * Request timed out.
9 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
race complete.
tracert www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)

tracing route to www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
ver a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 351 ms 296 ms * 10.23.48.1
4 * * 10 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 125 ms 157 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.24
41]
6 233 ms * 39 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 9 ms 17 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 364 ms 473 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 196 ms 201 ms 301 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
race complete.

[th'engineer]

well have reported it and they have agreed there is a network problem


1 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 5 ms 3 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 264 ms 231 ms 203 ms 10.23.48.1
4 159 ms 67 ms 359 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 * 95 ms 64 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242
.41]
6 256 ms 60 ms 61 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 14 ms 9 ms 10 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 71 ms 65 ms 16 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 15 ms 19 ms 16 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 259 ms 17 ms 15 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]

how do they know this because i can tracert to local ubr in under 10ms therefore its a network problem


1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 9 ms 8 ms 13 ms spc1-roch1-6-0-gw.bagu.broadband.ntl.com [81.100
.143.1]

[Paul]

Looks a bit like like a network problem between your UBR and oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com.

[Ignition]

Not from where I'm sitting it doesn't looks more like an RF noise issue to me:

2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 86 ms 67 ms 176 ms 10.23.48.1

2 5 ms 3 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 264 ms 231 ms 203 ms 10.23.48.1

2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 351 ms 296 ms * 10.23.48.1

2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 415 ms * 95 ms 10.23.48.1

The symptoms seen between CMTS and CAM are symptomatic of the loss between CMTS and modem, the fact you managed 1 out of 5 where the CMTS responded ok doesn't prove an IP network issue.

[th'engineer]

Not from where I'm sitting it doesn't looks more like an RF noise issue to me:

2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 86 ms 67 ms 176 ms 10.23.48.1

2 5 ms 3 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 264 ms 231 ms 203 ms 10.23.48.1

2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 351 ms 296 ms * 10.23.48.1

2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 415 ms * 95 ms 10.23.48.1

The symptoms seen between CMTS and CAM are symptomatic of the loss between CMTS and modem, the fact you managed 1 out of 5 where the CMTS responded ok doesn't prove an IP network issue.

Seeing as i have not got any sense from anyone on this problem will be going up a few levels tommorow to get it sorted.:mad: :tu:

its still bobbins between the rochdale ubr and manc core so will be using all of my charm and personality tommorow :D

Warning Eng on warpath:angel:
__________________

Tracing route to spc1-roch1-6-0-gw.bagu.broadband.ntl.com [81.100.143.1]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 17 ms 10 ms 14 ms spc1-roch1-6-0-gw.bagu.broadband.ntl.com [81.100
.143.1]

Trace complete.

tracert www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/)

Tracing route to www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.2.1
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.0.1
3 9 ms 9 ms 70 ms 10.23.48.1
4 16 ms 13 ms 10 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 123 ms 183 ms 122 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242
.41]
6 * 75 ms 80 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 11 ms 25 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 36 ms 21 ms 107 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]

9 * 158 ms 282 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 372 ms 183 ms 178 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]

Trace complete.

TOTAL BOBBINS OF A SERVICE

[Raistlin]

Seeing as i have not got any sense from anyone on this problem will be going up a few levels tommorow to get it sorted.:mad: :tu:

Now that's a bit harsh.....

[th'engineer]

Now that's a bit harsh.....

Unfortunateley its the only way given them a good few days to sort it since its been reported

this is ridiculous
7 305 ms 339 ms 164 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]

[Raistlin]

Unfortunateley its the only way given them a good few days to sort it since its been reported

this is ridiculous
7 305 ms 339 ms 164 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]

Sorry, thought you were talking about the response you had received here didn't realise you meant the response from NTL. My bad.....

[Florence]

Unfortunateley its the only way given them a good few days to sort it since its been reported

this is ridiculous
7 305 ms 339 ms 164 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]

I tried a few tracerts and didn't seem to get the same man core as you all seem to be working well here today.

Tracing route to www.vispa.co.uk [62.24.228.26]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms 10.11.32.1
2 8 ms 8 ms 10 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-ge-wan51-120.inet.ntl.com [80.5.16
4.81]
3 10 ms 9 ms 13 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242
.53]
4 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms man-bb-a-so-210-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.18]

5 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 212.187.137.1
6 11 ms 25 ms 19 ms 194.168.63.129
7 9 ms 9 ms 8 ms 62.24.228.26

[th'engineer]

thanks kits am trying to get it sorted at this moment in time. Taking into account what Ignition says looks like it could take ages.

I am trying a new approach trying to keep quiet on the edge of the forum but NTL are not helping.
All I am getting is why is the internet always breaking of the kids when i get in from work.

[Bill C]

thanks kits am trying to get it sorted at this moment in time. Taking into account what Ignition says looks like it could take ages.

I am trying a new approach trying to keep quiet on the edge of the forum but NTL are not helping.
All I am getting is why is the internet always breaking of the kids when i get in from work.

So how did you get on when Andy called today ?

[Florence]

would say its sorted what ever was wrong or you have something between you and this 305 ms 339 ms 164 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178] causing the problem.


Tracing route to man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 10.11.32.1
2 15 ms 11 ms 10 ms oldh-t2cam1-b-ge-wan51-120.inet.ntl.com [80.5.16
4.209]
3 10 ms 12 ms 10 ms mant-t2core-b-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242
.181]
4 9 ms 11 ms 8 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]

Trace complete.

[Ignition]

Man-bb is not a router that's going to respond too well to pings, they are very low down on the list of priorities for it for security and other reasons.

Have tested the implicated link and it's performing fine, no work has been done on it as far as I'm aware.

[Bill C]

Man-bb is not a router that's going to respond too well to pings, they are very low down on the list of priorities for it for security and other reasons.

Have tested the implicated link and it's performing fine, no work has been done on it as far as I'm aware.

One of our Engineers visited th'engineer today.

[Ignition]

*nod* local problem to him, thought as much.

[th'engineer]

*nod* local problem to him, thought as much.

Not a local one to me apprently still being worked on been sending a few tracerts as requested

Still a problem between rochdale UBR and manchester core its being investigated

Bill,
Andy saw the problem first hand and also noted that all the equipment here is working correctly .

In fact between here and UBR no problem.

All data streams checked meter on them

Understand its being investigated by someone update tommorow

See how patient i am these days :LOL: :p:
Bet its these UBR configs

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 09:16:45
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 16 ms 57 ms 8 ms 16 ms 9 ms 69 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 146 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 10 ms 28 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 79 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms * oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 11 ms 159 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 14 ms 11 ms 10 ms 128 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 129 ms 13 ms 162 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms 217 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 100 ms 10 ms 132 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 199 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 17 ms 74 ms 16 ms 108 ms 19 ms 15 ms 22 ms 16 ms 176 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 48 ms 16 ms 78 ms 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 22 ms 146 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 194 ms 23 ms 15 ms 51 ms 18 ms 15 ms 17 ms 233 ms 120 ms * www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]

[Bill C]

Not a local one to me apprently still being worked on been sending a few tracerts as requested

Still a problem between rochdale UBR and manchester core its being investigated

Bill,
Andy saw the problem first hand and also noted that all the equipment here is working correctly .

In fact between here and UBR no problem.

All data streams checked meter on them

Understand its being investigated by someone update tommorow

See how patient i am these days :LOL: :p:
Bet its these UBR configs

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 09:16:45
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 16 ms 57 ms 8 ms 16 ms 9 ms 69 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 146 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 10 ms 28 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 79 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms * oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 11 ms 159 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 14 ms 11 ms 10 ms 128 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 129 ms 13 ms 162 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms 217 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 100 ms 10 ms 132 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 199 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 17 ms 74 ms 16 ms 108 ms 19 ms 15 ms 22 ms 16 ms 176 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 48 ms 16 ms 78 ms 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 22 ms 146 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 194 ms 23 ms 15 ms 51 ms 18 ms 15 ms 17 ms 233 ms 120 ms * www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]


Will have to have a chat with Andy tomorrow as that is not what i was told the other day. Plus looking at your trace route i DO think you have a local problem. BTW do you have 2 lots of nat on that connection ? IE 2 routers

[th'engineer]

IE 2 routers

Yes Bill Two routers and firewall on each PC :D

I was under the impression that it was being sorted:angel:

its up and down like a sail:confused:


Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 18:22:31
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 18 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 15 ms 10 ms 10 ms 69 ms 10 ms 9 ms 22 ms 9 ms 72 ms 49 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 18 ms 10 ms 11 ms 38 ms 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms 126 ms 11 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 94 ms 11 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 62 ms 10 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 18 ms 28 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 16 ms 18 ms 16 ms 40 ms 17 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 15 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 19 ms 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]

[Paul]

Two routers ? - why :confused:

[th'engineer]

Two routers ? - why :confused:

why not double security one single port

[Paul]

why not double security one single portWell, because it's completely pointless would be one reason .....

[Bill C]

Yes Bill Two routers and firewall on each PC :D

I was under the impression that it was being sorted:angel:

its up and down like a sail:confused:


Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 18:22:31
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 18 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 15 ms 10 ms 10 ms 69 ms 10 ms 9 ms 22 ms 9 ms 72 ms 49 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 18 ms 10 ms 11 ms 38 ms 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms 126 ms 11 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 94 ms 11 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 62 ms 10 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 18 ms 28 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 16 ms 18 ms 16 ms 40 ms 17 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 15 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 19 ms 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com/) [62.253.162.30]


Looking at those trace routes i still think this is local. Will talk to Andy in the morning.

[th'engineer]

Looking at those trace routes i still think this is local. Will talk to Andy in the morning.

Bill whats the NTL definition of Local :dunce: Local UBR,local manc, local UK,

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 21:23:02
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 11 ms 21 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 15 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 21 ms 10 ms 9 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 12 ms 16 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 47 ms 21 ms 20 ms 17 ms 16 ms 19 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 34 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 16 ms 15 ms 20 ms 18 ms 18 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms * www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]


Same place as other day for problems 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]

[Bill C]

Bill whats the NTL definition of Local :dunce: Local UBR,local manc, local UK,

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 21:23:02
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 11 ms 21 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 15 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 21 ms 10 ms 9 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 12 ms 16 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 47 ms 21 ms 20 ms 17 ms 16 ms 19 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 34 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 16 ms 15 ms 20 ms 18 ms 18 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms * www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]


Same place as other day for problems 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]

Ok

I will stand corrected if i am wrong here. But you should not be worried about routers in the middle. They could be set to not reply to pings. You should be looking at the first and last ping. Local is you to the ubr Which is where i think the problem will be.

Look at the ping plotter result. Now my connection is fine but it might not look it when you look at that.

[Chris W]

Ok

I will stand corrected if i am wrong here. But you should not be worried about routers in the middle. They could be set to not reply to pings. You should be looking at the first and last ping. Local is you to the ubr Which is where i think the problem will be.

correct :tu: ICMP traffic gets the lowest priority and i believe they are configured to reply slowly for security reasons.

[Paul]

Indeed - the tele-ic routers being a prime example of this. Also, you only need to worry if the ping is consistantly bad from a particular hop and beyond. Intermittant large ones in the middle mean very little when you are untimately getting "17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms" from the destination.

[th'engineer]

Can we have some sense on this, the connection was working correctly my equipment has been checked including the NTL Samsung Box.

I can get good tracerts to local UBR, between local UBR and Man core there are high numbers on the tracerts.

It was evident when NTL Eng was here

[Bill C]

Indeed - the tele-ic routers being a prime example of this. Also, you only need to worry if the ping is consistantly bad from a particular hop and beyond. Intermittant large ones in the middle mean very little when you are untimately getting "17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms" from the destination.


This is my point as well. I get the same ping times to Ntlworld.com and there is nothing wrong with my connection.

[th'engineer]

This is my point as well. I get the same ping times to Ntlworld.com and there is nothing wrong with my connection.

But i have a NTL eng that agreed that there was something wrong with my connection .:D

[Stuart]

why not double security one single portWell, because it's completely pointless would be one reason .....

And it's something else to go wrong in future. Multiple firewalls on one connection can lock each other out.


Th'eng it sounds like Ignition is right. The problem appears to start with hop no 3, which (I think) is your cable modem. It's either that or your local UBR.

[th'engineer]

I can tracert to the UBR no problem had the multiple firewall for over 12 months. I have checked it without a firewall routers out of the circuit but its still the same.
1 no connection
2 check router
3 check pc
4 disconnect routers
5 check connection
6 then phone NTL

[th'engineer]

Update
Not sure whats happening had an update yesterday that it might be a level problem.
Might be a stream RF, Might be something else NTL are investigating.
Will update when more information is forthcoming
Thanks to all those involved in trying to sort it out who use cable forum
It is appreciated

[th'engineer]

Update

I understand a few things have been tweaked not sure what, but its improved

pings are now lower and pages load will carry on monitoring it

[jonifen]

I (in Castleton, Rochdale) have also been having slight problems with my connection. Not so much running slow, but if I go on a Q3 server (either empty or full - on 2 diff jolt servers on same IP), I find that every 45-50secs, I get a green line on the lagometer. I have put out a continual ping (ping ip -t) on command prompt and it mirrors the issue there.

I am at work at the moment so cannot provide numbers at the moment. We have been experiencing a small problem on a handful of channels (five is one of them) where we get a shadow effect on the picture. It's rare that it happens nowadays, used to be more common... keep meaning to call NTL, but since I first said "I'm gonna call em next time it happens so they can hopefully see any current issues", its happened less - usually when I'm out and I find out from my partner or the kids when I get home.

Could these 2 issues be related? Reason I ask is that the shadowing doesnt occur when I'm playing online.
Same thing happens on 2 diff PCs, both running XP Pro SP2, connected through a Samsung STB using a Linksys BEFW11S4 router. We have the 2Mb package.

(Reason I post here is because it could be related to speed issues in Rochdale)

[th'engineer]

Castleton might be the same problem


i thought it was sorted until today

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 04/06/2005 13:02:23
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 123 ms 589 ms * 8 ms 257 ms 39 ms 286 ms 339 ms 234 ms 11 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 221 ms 695 ms * 13 ms 226 ms 13 ms 283 ms 310 ms 204 ms 15 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 191 ms * * 13 ms 197 ms 23 ms 349 ms 370 ms 173 ms 382 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 158 ms * * 10 ms 165 ms 10 ms 322 ms * 180 ms 350 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 199 ms * * 11 ms 320 ms 18 ms * * 150 ms 320 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 299 ms * * 82 ms 296 ms 16 ms * * 266 ms 307 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 267 ms * * 50 ms 264 ms 15 ms * * 250 ms 275 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 295 ms * * 22 ms 300 ms 16 ms * * 189 ms 243 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
__________________

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 04/06/2005 13:02:25

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 * 8 ms 257 ms 39 ms 286 ms 339 ms 234 ms 11 ms 2940 ms 3513 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 * 13 ms 226 ms 13 ms 283 ms 310 ms 204 ms 15 ms 2908 ms * oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 * 13 ms 197 ms 23 ms 349 ms 370 ms 173 ms 382 ms 2947 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 * 10 ms 165 ms 10 ms 322 ms * 180 ms 350 ms 2851 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 * 11 ms 320 ms 18 ms * * 150 ms 320 ms 2953 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 * 82 ms 296 ms 16 ms * * 266 ms 307 ms 2930 ms 3659 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 * 50 ms 264 ms 15 ms * * 250 ms 275 ms 2898 ms 3762 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 * 22 ms 300 ms 16 ms * * 189 ms 243 ms 2866 ms 3729 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
__________________

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 04/06/2005 13:07:47

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 435 ms 457 ms 640 ms 76 ms 70 ms 8 ms 313 ms 9 ms 8 ms * [10.23.48.1]
4 478 ms 666 ms 612 ms 98 ms 175 ms 10 ms 283 ms 89 ms 14 ms 28 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 448 ms 636 ms 644 ms 68 ms 145 ms 18 ms 331 ms 59 ms 125 ms 10 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 416 ms 605 ms * 37 ms 113 ms 44 ms 299 ms 100 ms 92 ms 11 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 386 ms 707 ms * 9 ms 85 ms 10 ms 269 ms 70 ms 61 ms 10 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 658 ms 682 ms * 16 ms 132 ms 17 ms 351 ms 45 ms 39 ms 37 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 567 ms 650 ms * 15 ms 101 ms 76 ms 445 ms 17 ms * 17 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 535 ms 856 ms * 22 ms * 44 ms 415 ms 17 ms * 16 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]

[jonifen]

th'eng, where are you getting this information from in the layout you have it in?

I will remember to post up some results from home when I get back... I'm in work again :rolleyes:

[Bill C]

Castleton might be the same problem


i thought it was sorted until today

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com)
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 04/06/2005 13:02:23
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 123 ms 589 ms * 8 ms 257 ms 39 ms 286 ms 339 ms 234 ms 11 ms

Snip




Looking at these traceroutes tells me this is a local issue i suggest you report it, Then someone can come take a look at your levels and the return link to your ubr.

[th'engineer]

Looking at these traceroutes tells me this is a local issue i suggest you report it, Then someone can come take a look at your levels and the return link to your ubr.

Bill thanks for the advice have e-mailed our mutual friend who checked out the levels.
I hope that this is only a temp problem

jonifen i am in castleton near slattocks are you in same area

[jonifen]

jonifen i am in castleton near slattocks are you in same area
not very far away at all, I am just off manchester rd near mayfield rugby club.


--

getting strange pings to the first hop (that the stb?)
my router isnt even mentioned on there... weird

traceroute to www.ntlworld.com (62.253.162.30), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 10.23.0.1 (10.23.0.1) 7.975 ms 9.937 ms 22.446 ms
2 oldh-t2cam1-b-ge99.inet.ntl.com (80.5.164.189) 8.420 ms 8.560 ms 9.926 ms
3 mant-t2core-b-ge-wan81.inet.ntl.com (213.104.242.201) 11.038 ms 10.184 ms 12.461 ms
4 man-bb-b-so-210-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.184.61) 8.768 ms 17.627 ms 8.092 ms
5 win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.138) 62.048 ms 17.247 ms 22.793 ms
6 win-dc-a-v900.inet.ntl.com (62.253.188.162) 20.285 ms 20.947 ms 14.222 ms
7 * * *
8 * * *

it goes on through 9, 10, 11 up to 30 (max hops tested) and they're all starred out.
But, I can get on the site no problems. Same thing happens if I send the traceroute through port 80. bizarre!

[Bill C]

not very far away at all, I am just off manchester rd near mayfield rugby club.


--

getting strange pings to the first hop (that the stb?)
my router isnt even mentioned on there... weird

traceroute to www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.30), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 10.23.0.1 (10.23.0.1) 7.975 ms 9.937 ms 22.446 ms
2 oldh-t2cam1-b-ge99.inet.ntl.com (80.5.164.189) 8.420 ms 8.560 ms 9.926 ms
3 mant-t2core-b-ge-wan81.inet.ntl.com (213.104.242.201) 11.038 ms 10.184 ms 12.461 ms
4 man-bb-b-so-210-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.184.61) 8.768 ms 17.627 ms 8.092 ms
5 win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.138) 62.048 ms 17.247 ms 22.793 ms
6 win-dc-a-v900.inet.ntl.com (62.253.188.162) 20.285 ms 20.947 ms 14.222 ms
7 * * *
8 * * *

it goes on through 9, 10, 11 up to 30 (max hops tested) and they're all starred out.
But, I can get on the site no problems. Same thing happens if I send the traceroute through port 80. bizarre!

That traceroute seems fine to me.

[jonifen]

That traceroute seems fine to me.
Is the first hop not the STB?
If so, surely I would get lower pings than that? If I send continual pings to that IP, they come back extremely varied... possible relation to the "ghosting" we get now and then?

If I rang NTL to report this "ghosting" problem, would I get told to call back when it reoccurs? Reason we're holding back reporting it is for this reason as we have been told other times to do this (when the box was dropping out to black screen and not showing many channels)

[compfreak]

Iâ₠¬ÃƒÆ’¢â€žÂ¢m from Rochdale and live just out side Castleton and over the past 2 †“ 3 weeks ive been having quite bad power levels I have a sacm and a set top box. The only way I can use my cable modem is if disconnect the set-top-box if I leave it on Iâ₠¬ÃƒÆ’¢â€žÂ¢m lucky if I get to use the internet for 10mins before it disconnects,, Iâ₠¬ÃƒÆ’¢â€žÂ¢ve added some of my power readings here from 192.168.100.1 when I have the set-top-box on. I have a mate who has the same problem who lives just a few streets awayââ‚ ¬Ã‚¦

Type : Ambit ETH/USB Combo Cable Modem

Cable modem : Ambit Cable Modem

MAC address : **************

IP address : 192.168.100.1

Downstream Receive Power Level : -5.80 dBmv

Downstream SNR : 44.23 dB

Upstream Transmit Power Level : 61.00 dBmv






Type : Ambit ETH/USB Combo Cable Modem

Cable modem : Ambit Cable Modem

IP address : 192.168.100.1

Downreastm Receive Power Level : -0.05 dBmv



Downstream SNR : 37.15 dB

Upstream Transmit Power Level : 61.00 dBmv






Type : Ambit ETH/USB Combo Cable Modem

Cable modem : Ambit Cable Modem

MAC address : ******************

IP address : 192.168.100.1

Downstream Receive Power Level : -14.92 dBmv

Downstream SNR : 31.73 dB

Upstream Transmit Power Level : 61.00 dBmv

[th'engineer]

compfreak & jonifen the only way NTL can sort your problem out is to report it looking at location it could be something local know that the main cab is in the village centre .
So it could be a problem there if you report it something can be done but you have to have a few people report it before they will look at it.

Please if you have problems in castleton report them

[jonifen]

know that the main cab is in the village centre
I wasn't aware of this... is it near the community centre? If so, the doors have probably been blown off by the kids that hang around there (bringing us onto another thread lol).

I'm in work again today, but am off tomorrow so I'll call NTL up. The account is actually in my partner's name, but I'll report all the problems - if they really need to speak to her though, I'll have to call back when she gets home from work (she normally passes the phone to me anyway).

[*DJB*]

Hey Engineer, you have'nt got that Frontera parked on the cable have you :D


DJB

[th'engineer]

UPDATE


Its still being worked on testing will commence next week

So it is an agreed problem.

If someone needs to update me little problem broke mobo this morning

[Ignition]

UPDATE


Its still being worked on testing will commence next week

So it is an agreed problem.

If someone needs to update me little problem broke mobo this morning

Agreed problem with what?

If you're referring to the links between uBR and CAM or CAM and core that's simply not the case. All links are up and working appropriately, if any were so bad they were causing masses of packet loss they'd be shut down and the resilient capacity allowed to take the strain.

Having spoken with the engineer who came to your house he was completely confused about what you posted here as it had not a lot to do with his diagnosis of your connection which was no fault found.

Anyway, Rochdale <-> Oldham A-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/56 ms

Rochdale <-> Oldham B-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/68 ms

Rochdale <-> Manchester Core A-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/328 ms

Rochdale <-> Manchester Core B-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/3/324 ms

Fault Management Swansea are aware of no IP network issues in the Manchester / Oldham / Rochdale area. They are aware of no increase in call volumes from these areas, they are aware of no area faults in those areas at this time.

You did, as you were previously informed have a local problem. As I don't have your details I can't confirm if this is still the case. At the earliest opportunity I will arrange for the above information to be added to your account to assist with further fault diagnosis.

[Ignition]

Swansea have asked that you call tech support and report this issue to them so that the CATV issue can be resolved. Apologies for this fault. There's no record of you reporting this fault officially at any time, please go ahead with this so that it can be checked out and resolved.

Seriously, if you want things sorted you are better to follow official channels rather than 'escalating' to whichever managers whose mobile numbers you may have, TSB can and do fix many faults every day. Your fault appears like it might be intermittent, I do note you've reported it as being on and off, and fine during a previous 2 day monitoring period. This intermittency could also be what threw the tech who visited you off a little.

I'd suggest 2 things.

1) Remove routers and test without them (engineer did this I understand and it was fine?).
2) If network checks out ok consider asking for a stand alone modem.

Anyway please report this fault officially to tech support at your earliest convenience.

[th'engineer]

Swansea have asked that you call tech support and report this issue to them so that the CATV issue can be resolved. Apologies for this fault. There's no record of you reporting this fault officially at any time, please go ahead with this so that it can be checked out and resolved.



I have a confirmation e-mail from Swansea spoke to a young lady originally also confirmation from swansea Friday, May 20, 2005 3:03 PM.
Which told me to change proxies until it was resolved.
I have forwarded that information to local engineer


1) Remove routers and test without them (engineer did this I understand and it was fine?).

I hate it when you do not get it just right fault was visable during engineers visit he saw the problem .I have run it for a week without routers .

Also the latest is freezing on catv channels so agree it may be local.

I have fed information back yesterday in long phone call with NTL person.

Remember this is a new problem the set up this side of the box has worked perfectly since a samsung was put in up until the week ending Friday, May 20, 2005 .

I even waited a few days for it to sort itself out before reporting it.

Just a suggestion was any work carried out on networks preceeding the problems.

And finally have forwarded you a e-mail at hotmail could you confirm receipt to me if so can pass on other details

[Ignition]

I have a confirmation e-mail from Swansea spoke to a young lady originally also confirmation from swansea Friday, May 20, 2005 3:03 PM.
Which told me to change proxies until it was resolved.
I have forwarded that information to local engineer


I hate it when you do not get it just right fault was visable during engineers visit he saw the problem .I have run it for a week without routers .

Also the latest is freezing on catv channels so agree it may be local.

I have fed information back yesterday in long phone call with NTL person.

Remember this is a new problem the set up this side of the box has worked perfectly since a samsung was put in up until the week ending Friday, May 20, 2005 .

I even waited a few days for it to sort itself out before reporting it.

Just a suggestion was any work carried out on networks preceeding the problems.

And finally have forwarded you a e-mail at hotmail could you confirm receipt to me if so can pass on other details

I've no active Hotmail account, nor do I wish to get involved in this fault in any way beyond this forum. I think you've quite enough people running around after you on this issue as it is. Too many cooks, etc.

[BBKing]

Is there actually a problem here? I've just checked th'eng's box again and it's fine, in fact it's exemplary. Just a bit confused here.

[Ignition]

Is there actually a problem here? I've just checked th'eng's box again and it's fine, in fact it's exemplary. Just a bit confused here.

Not sure, just checked myself as well and is fine. Very, very slight RF variation but shouldn't be affecting service. There's a file sharing app or a game running though, if that has been running without any bandwidth limits or hosting games at any point that would obviously slow browsing to a crawl.

Looks more like a file sharing app to be honest, but could easily be wrong, just to make you aware!

[th'engineer]

What you are experiencing is the service 50% of the time, honestly we ntl engineer and myself thought we had sorted it with the level changes.

But while the ntl engineer was here it played up

I have passed the information as required and thought all the follow up was from the original call to swansea .

must admit bit confused about some comments
__________________

Is there actually a problem here? I've just checked th'eng's box again and it's fine, in fact it's exemplary. Just a bit confused here.

Did you check it recently and get a different view:confused: after the NTL eng had been here.
Also why can it not be found sometimes

[Ignition]

What you are experiencing is the service 50% of the time, honestly we ntl engineer and myself thought we had sorted it with the level changes.

What level changes? How many engineers have visited you? How come you've not mentioned before anything at all about any work being done, all you've mentioned is an engineer visiting who found a fault according to you and according to him all was ok. Then you spend a week claiming core network was the problem and was going to be tested.

What has this to do with levels? If level changes were made how come you never mentioned this before nor until yesterday did you agree it could be a local issue? You're an engineer wouldn't level changes imply an RF fault rather than a core IP one?

Just to refresh your memory the engineer, Andy, who Bill alluded to earlier in this thread made no adjustments at all to your connection. He got to your place, plugged his laptop straight into your CM and ran pingplotter for a while then reported it as being fine. Either you had another engineer at some point or we are living in parallel universes with this forum as the only common point.

I am well confused now, and think I'd best keep out of this one all together. It has more twists and turns than an Agatha Christie novel and is far less clear.

Please inform on here as soon as poss when your connection next goes on the fritz.

[Paul]

Is ADSL available in his area :angel:

[th'engineer]

IGNITION
Think we should keep this out of the forum some things that you are claimimg are incorrect.
I think someone from NTL has passed you some incorrect information.
What you quote as things that have happened is totally wrong

just a question on your figures though is that not similar to my time out problem

Rochdale <-> Manchester Core A-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/328 ms

Rochdale <-> Manchester Core B-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/3/324 ms

[Ignition]

IGNITION
Think we should keep this out of the forum some things that you are claimimg are incorrect.
I think someone from NTL has passed you some incorrect information.
What you quote as things that have happened is totally wrong

just a question on your figures though is that not similar to my time out problem

Rochdale <-> Manchester Core A-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/328 ms

Rochdale <-> Manchester Core B-Leg:

Success rate is 100 percent (10000/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/3/324 ms

If there were an issue with the links I've have said so, rather than posting those as proof there is no issue. If you've had the RF levels adjusted and you and another engineer thought this had solved it I'd have thought you'd be happy that any issue is an HFC/RF one?

Incidentally, your Rochdale uBR has thousands of customers on it and I'd imagine that more than yourself would notice if there were issues on core which would indeed affect every customer on the uBR. Hell an issue with the cores would affect every uBR in that part of Manchester. There's been no abnormal call volume from the area served by your uBR or the North West at all recently.

Heat up Google... the high pings are caused by busy CPU on the cores as they are converging their routing tables and sending out update requests. This doesn't affect normal traffic which doesn't touch the CPU but instead is pumped through the switching fabrics and ASICs, but does show up on ICMP requests which do require CPU attention, and are well down the list of priorities for the CPU.

Rest of it I absolutely agree is well kept out of public forum. I imagine the people reading this from the outside are even more confused by this than I am, and I'm in the Twilight Zone. I've pulled stats on your connection for the past 10 months and it seems fine, excellent uptime and stability. Me well and truly out of this one!!! :D

[th'engineer]

Think its time for me to get a little bolshe on this issue.

First of all have complied with all requests for tests and engineers visits.

I dont want to spend all my time on here it started as a request if anyone was having similar problems.

The connection has never been like it has been recently even when it had no proxies or proxies .

If its a local issue RF like everyone from NTL tells me, why can it not be sorted .

After all you have had a NTL engineer check all the equipment here so if its not the users equipment not the stb what is it act of god:D

[Bill C]

Think its time for me to get a little bolshe on this issue.
First of all have complied with all requests for tests and engineers visits.
I dont want to spend all my time on here it started as a request if anyone was having similar problems.
The connection has never been like it has recently even when it had no proxies or proxies .
If its a local issue RF like everyone from NTL tells me, why can it not be sorted .
After all you have had a NTL engineer check all the equipment here so if its not the users equipment not the stb what is it act of god:D

You have been informed i think that this will be looked at Monday. I will call the Manager and Andy on Monday and ask him what is happening. I will contact you after that. I will try to get up there on Monday as well.

Dont understand what you mean by this

The connection has never been like it has recently even when it had no proxies or proxies .

Are you saying its better or worse ?


BTW

Think its time for me to get a little bolshe on this issue.

Will not get you any further with it :)


Think this thread should be left to cool till Monday when we can get to the bottom of this.

[th'engineer]

Bill
I was suggesting that yesterday but it has been implied that information given to me and witnessed by me is incorrect

I am happy to keep quiet others appear to not be, takes ignitions key out of th'engs back :angel:

[Bill C]

There has been a update to this. But i will leave it to Th'Engineer to tell you.

[th'engineer]

So far so good its working with no disconnects or high pings.
No browsing problems hopefully i can retire to sit on the side of the forum again for a few months hopefully longer.

[Chris W]

So far so good its working with no disconnects or high pings.
No browsing problems hopefully i can retire to sit on the side of the forum again for a few months hopefully longer.

so any information on what the problem was then?

given that this has gone on for 5 pages this might be helpful to anyone else having similar issues to the ones that you have experienced....

I'm disappointed that you indicate you aren't going to contribute to the forum unilt you have problems again... i am sure as someone with extensive technical knowledge you have a lot to offer to other forum members.

[th'engineer]

I'm disappointed that you indicate you aren't going to contribute to the forum unilt you have problems again... i am sure as someone with extensive technical knowledge you have a lot to offer to other forum members.

I will be on the sidelines

[Chris W]

so any information on what the problem was then?


;)

[Florence]

Th'eng you didn't say what they had found was wrong?
What have they fixed?

Don't sit on the sidelines leaving us all in suspense

[th'engineer]

Th'eng you didn't say what they had found was wrong?
What have they fixed?

Don't sit on the sidelines leaving us all in suspense

I have got no idea what was fixed all i know is that it was not my side of the stb. If i manage to find out any info will let you know

[Bill C]

I have got no idea what was fixed all i know is that it was not my side of the stb. If i manage to find out any info will let you know

?

After a long hard look by the local Network Engineers Nothing local was found wrong so there was nothing adjusted.

After a long hard look at the Core Network Nothing was found wrong so there was nothing adjusted.

there is the info

[Paul]

So basically, there was no fault to find ?

[th'engineer]

But it does not preclude any changes that might have happened in the the local area and are not recorded. What amazes me on this is that the problems found got fixed . But we had incorrect information being fed back between NTL personel. Its fixed but am not a happy customer:mad: it might be fixed but can understand why people cancel NTL:rolleyes:

[Chris W]

What amazes me on this is that the problems found got fixed

After a long hard look by the local Network Engineers Nothing local was found wrong so there was nothing adjusted.

After a long hard look at the Core Network Nothing was found wrong so there was nothing adjusted.


??

[Paul]

But it does not preclude any changes that might have happened in the the local area and are not recorded. What amazes me on this is that the problems found got fixed . But we had incorrect information being fed back between NTL personel. Its fixed but am not a happy customer:mad: it might be fixed but can understand why people cancel NTL:rolleyes:What amazes me is your apparent abilty to ignore the facts. No fault was fixed because no fault was found. I imagine all the people who wasted their time on this are are a lot more unhappy then you - how many real faults were delayed while people were chasing your non existant problems (for days according to my sources) ? - and if you are such an unhappy customer then why haven't you cancelled your ntl yet ?

[jonifen]

It appears this fault was mirrored by ping results... I'm sure th'eng could provide ping results now the fault has been fixed if asked nicely.

To the people who are saying no fault was logged: do you honestly believe that communication in such a large company is always perfect in that everything is logged correctly? I know where I work it isnt, nor would I begin to imply that it was... :dozey:

[th'engineer]

Not rising to any bate you all saw the tracerts posted on here and some people from NTL saw it in fault condition .
When using STB manager so that sorts that bull**** out Paul M
Someone fixed but who is the question

As for cancelling only when BT improve:D