[merged] BB problems in Stafford & Swindon

[dave1379]

hi is their a bb problem in the staford area as a lot of sites this one included take for ever to load ? iam on a 1mb connection and the only way i can help this problem is to change my proxy server to cache1-nott.server.ntli.net
which is a lot faster but i feel i shouldnt have to .i have reset the modem but to no joy
thanks

[mrm1]

Got the same problem here in Swindon as well to night. Changed my proxy and now all is well.


As you say, you shouldnt need to keep changing proxeys to keep your connection "alive"

[dave1379]

i agree mate ,i play a lot of xbox live and you cant change the proxy on that so it affects game play some time .

[barcode]

Still slow in Stafford tonight as well. Can't see any known problems posted on the ntl website either (after it finally loaded!). How exactly do you change your proxy settings btw? I can't stand it much longer - it's doing my head in....!

[paulyoung666]

Still slow in Stafford tonight as well. Can't see any known problems posted on the ntl website either (after it finally loaded!). How exactly do you change your proxy settings btw? I can't stand it much longer - it's doing my head in....!



hi and :welcome: to the site , go to tools , internet options , connections , lan settings , tick use a proxy server and put 62.254.128.4 in the box and use port 8080 , try this and see how you get on :)

[doolie]

well thats just bypassed two days of browsing problems i'm having here in Rugby, ta! :)

[paulyoung666]

well thats just bypassed two days of browsing problems i'm having here in Rugby, ta! :)


is that a result :D :D :D :D

[Plonking]

hi i have mentioned this in another post elsewhere but am having trouble in the southampton area tonight - is there something similar i could do to try and fix it?

[mrm1]

hi i have mentioned this in another post elsewhere but am having trouble in the southampton area tonight - is there something similar i could do to try and fix it?


There is a full list of proxys Here (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.d.h.walker/cmtips/trancache.html#ntl)

[barcode]

That's definitely a result paulyoung666! Much better. Thanks.

[Domwilko]

Since some engineering work in the Swindon area over the weekend (according to the NTL World website) I've been experiencing appauling packet loss, which is resulting in intermittant Internet connectivity.

I've just been running a constant ping test to www.google.com (http://www.google.com/) (216.239.59.104), which is usually a good reliable source to check latency and I'm getting up to 22% packet loss!!

Here is a copy of the tail end of the trace:

Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=300ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=241
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=241
Reply from 216.239.59.104: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=241
Ping statistics for 216.239.59.104:
Packets: Sent = 3106, Received = 2396, Lost = 710 (22% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 300ms, Average = 28ms
Control-C
^C
C:\>

As you can see, it doesn't look pretty!!!

Does anyone know of any problems in the Swindon area? Last time I had a problem like this, after much badgering, an NTL engineer finally attended my home and measured the signal strength on my cable connection, only to find it was way too high! A 15dB attenuator finally fixed the fault. I don't imagine this is the same problem, so I'd like to know if anyone else in the Swindon area is experiencing the same problem.

Cheers,

[paulyoung666]

There is a full list of proxys Here (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.d.h.walker/cmtips/trancache.html#ntl)


good point , it is just a shame that ppl are still having to do the proxy shuffle :mad: :Yikes: :mad: :Yikes: :mad:

[Domwilko]

Can confirm Swindon 'default' proxy is very unreliable tonight. Just change to Bristol proxy and browsing a little better, but still got really bad packet loss. (see my other post)

[threadbare]

i agree mate ,i play a lot of xbox live and you cant change the proxy on that so it affects game play some time .proxies shouldn't affect xbox live at all. as the proxies only intercept web http traffic ie port 80 and 8080

[Plonking]

lol i ended up giving up! i phoned technical support, went thru about five menu things, only to hear that my area may suffer from intermittently poor or loss of connectivity problems at the moment! i wish i had been told in advance!

[Gareth]

Yeah, Swindon sucks tonight. Had to change mine too. Better now, but annoying...plus NTL don't seem to be aware of the problem yet.

[Paul]

Do you get the same to other sites (like ntlworld.com) ? Can you do a tracert (esp one when it fails) ?

[MikeyB]

Hi Domwilko,

I'm in Swindon on 600K, and just tried the same ping as you to google, let it run for about 2 mins, and not 1 packet lost.
My ping times slighty quicker than yours, mostly 27/28ms, higest was 67ms

[Domwilko]

Do you get the same to other sites (like ntlworld.com) ? Can you do a tracert (esp one when it fails) ?
Pem,

Thanks for your reply. I have tried pings to various diverse sites, all with the same result. I generally use Google as I have learnt through experience that it is fairly reliable with regards to reachability.

I was intending to do a traceroute during a 'failure' period, but I got distracted doing other things! :) I'm fortunate enough to have two Internet connections at home, one NTL cable modem and one via Telewest ADSL, so I just flipped over on to the Telewest link. :D

I have to admit that things have improved over the last hour or so, however, if the service is the same tomorrow, then I'll run a traceroute and post a follow-up.

[Paul]

Pem,

Thanks for your reply. I have tried pings to various diverse sites, all with the same result. I generally use Google as I have learnt through experience that it is fairly reliable with regards to reachability.

I was intending to do a traceroute during a 'failure' period, but I got distracted doing other things! :) I'm fortunate enough to have two Internet connections at home, one NTL cable modem and one via Telewest ADSL, so I just flipped over on to the Telewest link. :D

I have to admit that things have improved over the last hour or so, however, if the service is the same tomorrow, then I'll run a traceroute and post a follow-up.

The reason asked about ntlworld.com was because you don't leave NTL's network for that site - unlike google or most other sites. I wanted to clarify if maybe it was a route out of the NTL core network that was giving a problem. :)

[Domwilko]

Pem,

Top tip! :tu: I wasn't aware of that. I'm still getting packet loss to Google (see ping results below). I'll run two ping traces, one to Google and one to NTLWorld concurrently and see what the results are.

Google results:
Ping statistics for 216.239.59.99:
Packets: Sent = 1688, Received = 1546, Lost = 142 (8% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 30ms, Maximum = 250ms, Average = 32ms

I did try and do a traceroute during the last bout of failures, but none of the 'failures' were long enough to be conclusive.

[Domwilko]

OK, just got some more interesting traces, all of which were taken concurrently:

Ping to Google
Ping statistics for 216.239.59.104:
Packets: Sent = 842, Received = 685, Lost = 157 (18% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 30ms, Maximum = 310ms, Average = 30ms

Ping to NTLWorld
Ping statistics for 62.253.162.30:
Packets: Sent = 845, Received = 684, Lost = 161 (19% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 10ms, Maximum = 371ms, Average = 18ms

Ping to NTLWorld from Cisco Router (connects direclty to Cable Modem
Sending 10000, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 62.253.162.30, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 99 percent (9907/10000), round-trip min/avg/max = 12/18/368 ms

Traceroute during 'failure' period
(Note: The first two hops are Cisco routers in my test lab)
C:\>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 10 ms <10 ms 10 ms 10.200.150.36
2 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10.100.200.10
3 * * * Request timed out.
4 * * * Request timed out.
5 * 20 ms 20 ms brhm-t2core-b-pos51.inet.ntl.com [213.106.231.16
9]
6 20 ms 10 ms 20 ms bir-bb-b-so-710-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.149]
7 20 ms 20 ms 30 ms win-bb-a-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.142]
8 30 ms 20 ms 20 ms win-dc-a-v900.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.162]
9 20 ms 20 ms 20 ms www.ntlworld.com (http://www.ntlworld.com) [62.253.162.30]
Trace complete.

From this I would conclude that I'm experiencing drop-outs to the NTL default gateway router from my cable modem. These are exactly the same symptoms I was experiencing when the NTL engineer needed to fit a 15dB attenuator to my Cable Modem. Is it possible that NTL have upped the RF signal level again in my area, which is upsetting my Cable Modem again???

Out of interest, I removed the attenuator to see what difference it made to the results and the connectivity got worse.

I guess I need to give tech support a ring at this point. I just hope I don't have to go through the whole "we don't support Cisco routers" thing! (which have worked perfectly well for over 2 years) :) and "have you tried rebooting your Cable Modem".....

PEM - Any theories/feeback??

Cheers,

[Paul]

Yes I would ring TS and report it.
I am not a CM expert - but if they have done some work recently then I guess it's possible you have been moved on to another UBR and that may have had an effect ? - just guessing - I will leave it to the forum CM bods to comment - we have one or two knocking about somewhere. :)

[Domwilko]

Cheers PEM,


I'll give TS a call tomorrow as I think the CM team knock off at about 6 o'clock??