Never using Rogers again

Need Help?

That's what we're here for! The goal of the Rogers Community is to help you find answers on everything Rogers. Can't find what you're looking for? Just ask!
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
Highlighted
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 18

Never using Rogers again

My experience with Rogers has been one letdown after another. Allow me to elaborate.

I am currently living in the student village next to York University. When I moved in, I was told that there was a Rogers account already tied to the house, and that if I wanted my own internet or cable service, I would need to jump through some hoops with Rogers in order to get it.

I did just that: called Rogers, set up a time and date, and away we went. When the day came the tech arrived two hours before he was scheduled, said that he couldn't install the second line, and left. I told him to send another tech at the originally scheduled time, which came and went, with no additional tech. I had to call Rogers in order to set up another appointment and oddly enough when I called they said "Sir, you missed your first appointment." to which I replied, "Ummm no I didn't, he came two hours before he was supposed to."

The next day a second tech came (maybe the only positive thing is their response time to get stuff installed) and installed the second line with no problems. He hooked up my modem, tested it, and then left. In my joy, I hopped on my favorite game and at that point my joy turned to pure, untamed rage. Anything from 300 - 2k pings to any server imaginable, in any game imaginable. Even pings to rogers.ca would be crazy, idling around 200-300 and spiking to over 1000, even some dropped packets in there.

Tracerts would reveal one of two things: anywhere from 5-10% packet loss, or major delays at the first hop (the CMTS). Which leads me to some conclusions which I will outline later.

So, I go looking for solutions. I check places like this forum, which all report the same issues (huge lag in all Blizzard games for example). I check the Battle.net forums, which amazingly enough, all report the same issues. This doesn't just happen in games either folks. They throttle EVERYTHING, yes even your precious youtube, and more recently, reports of Skype as well.

To summarize, I have paid well over $150.00 bucks for my first month of what Rogers would call "High Speed Express Internet" and received nothing more than an additional hole in the side of the house, a near useless internet connection, and possibly an ulcer from all the nerd-rage that accompanies the lag.

For those who would like to speculate on the cause of these issues, here is what I have come across in my weeks of searching for an answer:

1) Overloaded fiber hubs. Neglecting any bad cables going through the house, this is most likely where the core issue lies. Rogers has far to few of these hubs in well populated areas, such as the York University area. They continually accept more customers and overload their already horribly bogged down hubs. Every new customer hooked up to these hubs will degrade everyone else's connection. Solution? Build more fiber hubs and balance the loads.

2) Major throttling during peak hours (around 4/5 PM until 10/11 PM). This goes hand-in-hand with the first point. Rogers is refusing to install more fiber hubs in highly populated areas. So instead of alleviating congestion at these nodes by creating new ones and offloading users, they simply throttle EVERYTHING that goes through the current hubs. This is their solution to having overloaded hubs - degrade EVERYONES performance so they can squeeze more and more people onto a choked network.

So why does Rogers do this? Because they DO NOT CARE. For every person who cancels a Rogers service, there is another poorly misinformed individual who will sign up. They will then receive the same poor service, and either choose to stick with it because they themselves do not care, or the cycle will start over and they will cancel. I find it utterly hilarious that on the Rogers Support page, and I quote, "Improving our customers' experience is an important priority for Rogers". Utterly laughable considering issues like this have been around for months and all Rogers has to say is "There is no issue, you are all crazy. You pay bill now?"

Solution? Go with a different ISP and don't look back. With pings like I have been seeing the past few weeks, it may be more efficient to send my data via smoke signals then by my "Express" internet package from Rogers.

 

EDIT

 

This is a tracert from another users post. Mine follow very closely from this as well.

 

Tracing route to google.com [74.125.225.17]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms     2 ms  phub.net.cable.rogers.com [192.168.0.1]
  2   495 ms   417 ms   453 ms  10.37.224.1
  3   358 ms   305 ms   351 ms  69.63.243.245
  4   676 ms   246 ms   126 ms  69.63.249.1
  5   213 ms   234 ms   233 ms  gw01.mtmc.phub.net.cable.rogers.com [66.185.81.1
37]
  6     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  7   841 ms   430 ms   601 ms  216.239.47.114
  8   458 ms   601 ms   603 ms  216.239.46.160
  9   515 ms   668 ms   657 ms  64.233.174.173
 10   798 ms   913 ms   853 ms  74.125.225.17

Trace complete.

 

/rolleyes

 

 

***edited labels***

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 33

Re: Never using Rogers again

You were asking for community technical help on your overloaded cable... I can help out psychologically perhaps by pointing out it is not only wired connections being over subscribed. A friend in the country east of Newmarket went with the Rocket cell based router/hub and initially it worked well enough. His street has about 100 higher end homes, but they have poor telephone wires, no cable at all and must beg or plead for internet access at any speed.

 

Well, he tells his friends and neighbours what a nice service he finally has. Guess what? Now all his neighbours sign up... and tada! the cell service gets so bogged downh he cannot even use Google. Dead, no response, nothing.  

 

So he tries for service calls, gets nothing better. Puts in a better antenna, no better.

 

After many days of frustration and multiple Rogers contacts he gets one honest tech who admits the cell is simply overloaded all the time due to over subscription. He is allwoed to cancel at no ECF, he does and goes Telus.. working fine! SSSSHHHHHH!!!!

 

So, even throttling cannot help an over subscribed cell tower, there is only one there.

 

Now you feel better?? At least you can get a cable in!! ;-)

I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 176

Re: Never using Rogers again

The point is it should NEVER be that overloaded.  Rogers should be adding more equipment to reduce this congestion, and instead they're buying DPI machines which don't even freakin work properly.

 

Too cheap to fix the congestion properly, too lazy to fix the DPI issues.  You're screwed either way with Rogers.

I've Been Here Awhile
Posts: 2

Re: Never using Rogers again

I'm just about at my wits end with Rogers internet.  This has been happening for about a year now.  I'm in southwestern Ontario near London which if you think about it shouldn't be a high traffic area.  I contacted the Tech Support tonight and was told to powercycle my modem, which I did.  It didn't make a difference because my speed was still 5mbps or under.  I pay for Extreme which should be as high as 15mbps. 

 

Does anyone know of a good, reliable ISP in the London area? I'm ready to switch once again. 

 

Fed up.

Community Manager (Retired) RogersErin
Community Manager (Retired)
Posts: 690

Re: Never using Rogers again

@conjor

 

Hi there,

 

Please send details of your issue, along with your full name, phone number where you can be reached and email address to forumsupport@rci.rogers.com.

 

Thank you

 

  

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 56

Re: Never using Rogers again

RogersErin,

 

In all due respect, all the information you need is already in this thread.  Why do you keep posting that pointless, empty question?  This is the biggest problem with Rogers tech support.  They aren't knowledgable enough to be able to ask valid questions.  Anything outside the realm of a script on their page, and they're lost.  Or they're intentionally told to play ignorant (like the tech that insisted with me that I wasn't being throttled).  Honestly, enough is enough.  All the data you need is on these boards.  It is a widespread problem, with customers across the country using your service.  If you  can provide any meaningful information, please do so...else, why bother even asking?

 

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 18

Re: Never using Rogers again

Hows this for some more information. These tracerts are to some WoW servers taken at approx 8:00 PM local time (Toronto). Very surprised these ones didn't contain dropped packets, since half of the time they do.

 

It is clear from even just these two examples that the problem it at the first hub. It isn't AT&T's problem. It isn't Blizzards problem. It is a ROGERS problem. Stop oversubscribing your nodes. End of story.

 

Fix it.

 

Tracing route to 206.17.111.92 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms     3 ms     1 ms  ConjorsWRTBase [192.168.10.1]
  2   185 ms   321 ms    65 ms  10.118.176.1
  3   154 ms   290 ms   360 ms  69.63.254.37
  4   416 ms    10 ms    10 ms  69.63.249.109
  5   128 ms   172 ms   203 ms  69.63.248.194
  6   199 ms    73 ms   207 ms  TenGigabitEthernet9-2.ar7.NYC1.gblx.net [64.208.169.149]
  7    64 ms   221 ms    77 ms  192.205.37.137
  8    57 ms   276 ms   268 ms  cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.81.70]
  9   224 ms    56 ms   173 ms  cr1.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.31.126]
 10    84 ms   162 ms   176 ms  gar5.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.145.29]
 11   108 ms   167 ms   143 ms  12-122-254-14.attens.net [12.122.254.14]
 12     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 13     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 14     *        *        *     Request timed out.

... goes on like that for a while

Tracing route to 12.129.222.184 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  ConjorsWRTBase [192.168.10.1]
  2   156 ms   142 ms   291 ms  10.118.176.1
  3    37 ms   240 ms    41 ms  69.63.254.37
  4   516 ms    20 ms   195 ms  69.63.249.109
  5    55 ms    64 ms   118 ms  69.63.248.194
  6   339 ms   119 ms    80 ms  TenGigabitEthernet9-2.ar7.NYC1.gblx.net [64.208.169.149]
  7   263 ms   238 ms   321 ms  192.205.37.93
  8   154 ms   392 ms   353 ms  cr2.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.190]
  9   394 ms   360 ms   162 ms  cr84.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.249]
 10   109 ms   114 ms   363 ms  gar5.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.129.25]
 11   202 ms   216 ms   197 ms  12.122.255.74
 12   133 ms   137 ms   194 ms  12.129.193.246
 13     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 14     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 15     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 16     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 17     *        *        *     Request timed out.

 

... goes on like that for a while

 

And before you say "they are blocking tracert packets which is why you are seeing packet loss", I shall reply, "duh....".

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 18

Re: Never using Rogers again

I am going to post some more information here which I have been updating on the DSL reports thread.

 

Modem signal levels and information:

Receive Power Level
-5.0 dBmV

Transmit Power Level
41.7 dBmV

 

Downstream Status
Operational

Channel ID
14

Downstream Frequency
633000000 Hz

Modulation
256QAM

Bit Rate
10400000 bits/sec

Power Level
-5.5 dBmV

Signal to Noise Ratio
38.6 dB

 

Tracert's taken during peak hours to a WoW login server and a World server (Skywall)

 

Tracing route to 206.17.111.92 over a maximum of 30 hops

 

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTRoom [192.169.10.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTBase [192.168.10.1]
3 208 ms 15 ms 134 ms 10.118.176.1
4 71 ms 26 ms 11 ms 69.63.254.37
5 63 ms 21 ms 18 ms 69.63.249.109
6 509 ms 218 ms 146 ms 69.63.248.194
7 106 ms 279 ms 105 ms TenGigabitEthernet9-2.ar7.NYC1.gblx.net [64.208.169.149]
8 170 ms 147 ms 141 ms 192.205.37.137
9 188 ms 206 ms 47 ms cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.81.70]
10 291 ms 67 ms 179 ms cr1.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.31.126]
11 114 ms 261 ms 177 ms gar5.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.145.29]
12 86 ms 49 ms 476 ms 12-122-254-14.attens.net [12.122.254.14]
13 * * * Request timed out.

... goes on like that because they block ICMP echos

 

Tracing route to 12.129.222.184 over a maximum of 30 hops

 

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTRoom [192.169.10.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTBase [192.168.10.1]
3 168 ms 241 ms 17 ms 10.118.176.1
4 91 ms 23 ms 19 ms 69.63.254.37
5 61 ms 20 ms 19 ms 69.63.249.109
6 507 ms 223 ms 145 ms 69.63.248.194
7 114 ms 279 ms 106 ms TenGigabitEthernet9-2.ar7.NYC1.gblx.net [64.208.169.149]
8 257 ms 143 ms 143 ms 192.205.37.93
9 181 ms 208 ms 138 ms cr1.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.18]
10 270 ms 238 ms 283 ms cr83.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.109]
11 200 ms 173 ms 230 ms gar5.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.128.25]
12 439 ms * 139 ms 12.122.255.74
13 450 ms 166 ms 339 ms 12.129.193.246
14 * * * Request timed out.

... goes on like that because they block ICMP echos

 

Same tracert's taken at around 8:00 AM this morning

 

Tracing route to 12.129.222.184 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTRoom [192.169.10.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTBase [192.168.10.1]
3 37 ms 94 ms 9 ms 10.118.176.1
4 87 ms 15 ms 36 ms 69.63.254.37
5 14 ms 43 ms 40 ms 69.63.249.109
6 50 ms 45 ms 36 ms 69.63.248.194
7 36 ms 80 ms 53 ms TenGigabitEthernet9-2.ar7.NYC1.gblx.net [64.208.169.149]
8 120 ms 128 ms 107 ms 192.205.37.93
9 145 ms 120 ms 109 ms cr1.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.18]
10 120 ms 118 ms 124 ms cr83.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.109]
11 131 ms 108 ms 103 ms gar5.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.129.25]
12 121 ms 117 ms 110 ms 12.122.255.74
13 119 ms 118 ms 156 ms 12.129.193.246
14 * * * Request timed out.

Tracing route to 206.17.111.92 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTRoom [192.169.10.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms ConjorsWRTBase [192.168.10.1]
3 15 ms 20 ms 14 ms 10.118.176.1
4 84 ms 13 ms 37 ms 69.63.254.37
5 15 ms 39 ms 38 ms 69.63.249.109
6 59 ms 45 ms 36 ms 69.63.248.194
7 54 ms 79 ms 54 ms TenGigabitEthernet9-2.ar7.NYC1.gblx.net [64.208.169.149]
8 45 ms 28 ms 31 ms 192.205.37.137
9 36 ms 45 ms 41 ms cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.81.70]
10 109 ms 54 ms 45 ms cr1.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.31.126]
11 39 ms 51 ms 50 ms gar5.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.145.29]
12 35 ms 51 ms 36 ms 12-122-254-14.attens.net [12.122.254.14]
13 * * * Request timed out.

I'm Here A Lot
Posts: 5

Re: Never using Rogers again

@Conjor: You showed up that your modem could communicate at a 10.4 Mb/s rate, right? If this is so, why in the world are you subscribing to Extreme Package of 15Mb/s when you are supposed to be subscribed for the Express-Normal of 10Mb/s., huh?

 

Besides, you should be using the Scientific Atlanta-2100 branded modem. It is a Cisco company division distributed modem for use on the Rogers' hardware Servers and Optical Wiring of your local broadband service's provided network.

 

You will need a way better and bigger modem than the above mentioned for the Extreme Package of 15Mb/s.

 

In the outer limits of the suburbs, only the Internet broadband Basic service can be in use. Up to 5Mb/s. Maximum. Still having a 2 to 3Mb/s connection ain't bad, compared to DSL Dial-up through AOL of about 64Kb/s.

 

Was I, of any, possible help, here? Well, I really, do hope so. Smiley Wink


I'm a Reliable Contributor
Posts: 176

Re: Never using Rogers again

@LJP

Conjor stated he was paying for the EXPRESS package, which is 10/512.  NOT the Extreme which requires a DOCSIS 3.0 modem.  Also, people can use whatever modems they want provided Rogers supports them. 

 

I myself was using a Motorola SB5100 which my husband purchased years ago before switching to Teksavvy, and going with the Motorola SB6120.

 

I highly doubt you were of any help, to anyone in this thread.

 

Especially since this thread's from a month ago, and because we know the cause of Conjor's issues.

Topic Stats
  • 15 replies
  • 4441 views
  • 3 Likes
  • 9 in conversation