Lordy I'm Lost.... - Page 3

Salu · 20-04-2004, 13:32

Also make sure that if you are using an Ethernet connection (as opposed to USB) that your drivers are uptodate. I had a similar problem with a Realtek 8139 (i think) that was cured by the latest drivers...in XP.

Flip · 20-04-2004, 17:13

thanks for the reply guys...my anger has now subsided to one of clam distain...sort of:

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:48:44 UTC
1st 128K took 1657 ms = 79102 Bytes/sec = approx 658 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1234 ms = 106217 Bytes/sec = approx 884 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 1313 ms = 99826 Bytes/sec = approx 831 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 1156 ms = 113384 Bytes/sec = approx 943 kbits/sec

That's not using a proxy given to me by tech...but the birmingham one I have automatically...

I shall of course take a couple more snapshots using various proxies...though with the greatest respect, no matter how fast my proxy I will not get the proper in game pings.

From the source server

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:52:32 UTC
1st 128K took 1844 ms = 71080 Bytes/sec = approx 591 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1500 ms = 87381 Bytes/sec = approx 727 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 1187 ms = 110423 Bytes/sec = approx 919 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 1250 ms = 104858 Bytes/sec = approx 872 kbits/sec

We have just adaware6'd / spybot search and destroyed manual scanned for viruses uing our trend uptodate software.... also scanned using rav online (excellent) ... also housecall...you could say this is getting boring for you guys...sorry bout that...and apologies to tech for getting angry...a mix of bad day and samo samo from son just flipped me over the edge.

this is test using proxy suggested by tech:

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:55:34 UTC
1st 128K took 1156 ms = 113384 Bytes/sec = approx 943 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1906 ms = 68768 Bytes/sec = approx 572 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 1313 ms = 99826 Bytes/sec = approx 831 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 1453 ms = 90208 Bytes/sec = approx 751 kbits/sec

slightly better....but no help for online gaming...

as for the duplex settings...it was down to your fantastic site rdhw that I have been able to hold my own with tech (mostly) I have followed your advice to the letter....it just seems this last couple of months things have gotten far worse.

btw...i have rolled back my realtek driver and installed the up to date one...a few time believe me!

I still don't like having my sacm attached to my set top box...for some reason they are loathe to give me what i see as a proper connection...:pp

I have taken the no swearing at ntl oath and will abide by that.

I shall take a few snapshots and then send it all to head office...thanks for the address btw...

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 16:13:06 UTC
1st 128K took 1187 ms = 110423 Bytes/sec = approx 919 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1219 ms = 107524 Bytes/sec = approx 895 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 1297 ms = 101058 Bytes/sec = approx 841 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 1953 ms = 67113 Bytes/sec = approx 558 kbits/sec

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 16:13:34 UTC
1st 128K took 1391 ms = 94229 Bytes/sec = approx 784 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 3203 ms = 40922 Bytes/sec = approx 340 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 1312 ms = 99902 Bytes/sec = approx 831 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 1078 ms = 121588 Bytes/sec = approx 1012 kbits/sec

This make sense to anyone brainy?

Cheers!

rdhw · 20-04-2004, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flip

I still don't like having my sacm attached to my set top box.

You have the 1Mbps service through an STB?? Hmmmm.... Or do you mean that you have an SACM (stand-alone cable modem, not STB) which is wired rather close beside your STB?

Some franchise areas offer an SACM for the 1Mbps service, if requested. Are you in one of those areas?

Have you ever had your PC checked out for network settings such as RWIN and MTU? You might like to try the Tweak Test at http://www.broadbandreports.com/tweaks and then post the URL of the results page here. When it asks for the connection type, say "normal".

**Paul** · 20-04-2004, 18:04

Just one small point - these tests via different proxy servers will not indicate how online gaming will perform - as gaming does not involve the use of the proxy servers.

Flip · 20-04-2004, 18:59

Just to clear it up.

I have 1mb connection.

It comes from green box outside my house (25yrds away) goes into my set top box....then into the next room to a cable modem.

In other words sacm is connected via the stb...I've never been happy with that arrangement though numerous techs have said it's fine.

who am I to argue?

All I know is you can see from the above readings that pinging to a game server is an impossibility...

speed of d/load or how quick i get to google isn't my major problem - though obviously paying for that you expect it!

my problem as I keep saying is my sons ability at online gaming - UK player - he has NOT been able to play online with a decent ping for weeks.

His obvious distress affects me and certainly my judgement when I'm trying to reason with certain techs who seem to treat me liek an imbecile...no excuse for losing my rag last night I know...but this is affecting my sanity and the harmony of my family.

we eat sleep and drink bloody pings and if I wasn't a dad who gave a hoot (no swearing!) I doubt I'd get so passionate about this.

I say again...how can ntl practically ignore/dismiss that the service they are providing to very many people is abismal and pretty close to breach of contract....

Flip · 20-04-2004, 19:10

Three hours later...

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 18:07:47 UTC
1st 128K took 3968 ms = 33032 Bytes/sec = approx 275 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1954 ms = 67079 Bytes/sec = approx 558 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 2078 ms = 63076 Bytes/sec = approx 525 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 2234 ms = 58671 Bytes/sec = approx 488 kbits/sec

from source server

Tue, 20 Apr 2004 18:09:14 UTC
1st 128K took 2016 ms = 65016 Bytes/sec = approx 541 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 4047 ms = 32387 Bytes/sec = approx 269 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 2094 ms = 62594 Bytes/sec = approx 521 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 2735 ms = 47924 Bytes/sec = approx 399 kbits/sec

Anyone from tech who may be in the room please tell me again it's soemthing on my pc

paulyoung666 · 20-04-2004, 19:17

have you thought about the ofcom route

**Paul** · 20-04-2004, 19:58

Does it get worse each evening ?

If it does then, to me, it suggests a bit of oversubscription on the UBR.

paulyoung666 · 20-04-2004, 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pem

Does it get worse each evening ?

If it does then, to me, it suggests a bit of oversubscription on the UBR.

i was thinking along similar lines , how about a docs diag session to rule it out

Chris W · 20-04-2004, 20:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pem

Does it get worse each evening ?

If it does then, to me, it suggests a bit of oversubscription on the UBR.

The PM that i sent to Flip, confirmed that UBR channel utilisation is very high, 85% to be precise, so this is the source of the problem.

I have spoken to the appropriate people about this, so it will be sorted out when they do weekly maintenance on the UBR. As i explained to Flip i don't know when this will be, so advised him to check the planned maintenance on the server status page.

I don't know why Flip is continuing this thread, he knows that the problem is, and knows what is going to be done about it. In the mean time, no amount of messing around with his pc/ network card/ modem etc is actually going to make any difference.

Flip, please give ntl an opportunity to do something about this, i know that it has been going on for a while, but i just ask for a little more patience and it should get sorted!

**Paul** · 20-04-2004, 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by monkeybreath

The PM that i sent to Flip, confirmed that UBR channel utilisation is very high, 85% to be precise, so this is the source of the problem.

I have spoken to the appropriate people about this, so it will be sorted out when they do weekly maintenance on the UBR. As i explained to Flip i don't know when this will be, so advised him to check the planned maintenance on the server status page.

I don't know why Flip is continuing this thread, he knows that the problem is, and knows what is going to be done about it. In the mean time, no amount of messing around with his pc/ network card/ modem etc is actually going to make any difference.

Thanks MB - all is now clear.

Flip - the problem has been diagnosed and the solution is in hand - might I suggest that you stop keep posting about it and now give NTL time to action the fix in the next planned slot.

paulyoung666 · 20-04-2004, 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pem

Thanks MB - all is now clear.

Flip - the problem has been diagnosed and the solution is in hand - might I suggest that you stop keep posting about it and now give NTL time to action the fix in the next planned slot.

well at least there is an answer now

Flip · 20-04-2004, 20:55

stop posting...lordy now i've upset you lot aswelll.

consider this a locked thread....:o :pp

btw they rebalanced early hours of this morning...

THREAD LOCKED.....

paulyoung666 · 20-04-2004, 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flip

stop posting...lordy now i've upset you lot aswelll.

consider this a locked thread....:o :pp

btw they rebalanced early hours of this morning...

THREAD LOCKED.....

no its not , have you gone down the docsdiag route , at least if you do this then you have some ammo to throw at them

Salu · 20-04-2004, 21:28

CLosed?