Brutal latency/ping Recently

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
Shahin6470
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 9

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

Oh man. I thought that was only my house. Nothing is worst than 2-3 am internet outage. I been getting it over the past couple weeks. 

-G-
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 2,036

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently


@Shahin6470 wrote:

Ping statistics for 172.217.164.228: Packets: Sent = 4313, Received = 4189, Lost = 124 (2% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 5ms, Maximum = 339ms, Average = 21ms


I don't find those numbers surprising these days.  I have seen it better and I have seen it worse.  If you can replicate those numbers with your computer directly connected to the Rogers gateway, then that is not great.

 

124 times that my internet got disconnected. And Ping reaching 339?? How can I prove to Rogers Tech Support that?


That "124" is packet loss, not your Internet disconnecting.  Packet loss can happen due to load, or even if have QoS enabled on a network device and some network traffic gets dropped intentionally.

 

With network latency being all over the map, that's the topic at the heart of the thread.  When too much traffic gets backed up at the local node, that too can result in packet loss.

 

Pinging an Internet host repeatedly will give you an indication of general network health along a particular path, and any network devices on that path can contribute to latency and packet loss.

 

Pinging your local modem/gateway should produce consistently low latency and no packet loss.  If you see problems with this test, you have local (LAN/WiFi) problems that you need to address before reporting "network problems" to Rogers.

 

If you have no local issues, pinging your CMTS router (ideally while simultaneously performing other ping tests) will show whether the local node is causing latency and/or packet loss.

 

Not sure what else to do with Rogers Internet. Hear me out on this cause this has been a 6-8 months back and forth argument with Rogers Tech Support. Someone is not understanding whats happening here. And Rogers tech support don't follow up to see if everything is fine after couple days. Maybe I can get my message across from here

 

How can I prove to Rogers Tech Support that? I can't use VPN, I cant use Video Conferencing, and I cant play video games. Please someone help me before I lose my mind.


I can't really say what could have started happening 6-8 months ago for you.  Most of the people here started seeing a degradation in their Internet service starting at the beginning of this year.

 

I ran a short ping test while I was typing this with the following results:

 

--- 172.217.164.228 ping statistics ---
600 packets transmitted, 600 received, 0% packet loss, time 599827ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 8.619/14.891/59.903/6.693 ms

 

I don't see the the same extremes that you do, but I also did not perform this test at a peak time of day.  Regardless, the RTTs are not consistent... and the pings to my CMTS router show much higher latency, which is also indicative that it is under load and likely causing the jitter that we are seeing.

 

--- CMTS Router ping statistics ---
600 packets transmitted, 600 received, 0% packet loss, time 599807ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 5.596/37.410/194.882/27.102 ms

 

Right now, these network conditions are not breaking Ignite TV but they are a royal pain for gamers and for anybody working from home using a remote desktop.

 

I don't know what to say or what we can expect them to say but Rogers is in a pickle.  If they confirm that network conditions are less than ideal, customers will demand compensation and that will cost them money, and possibly customers, and upset their shareholders.  If Rogers dispatches tech after tech for problems that are beyond their ability to fix, it will cost them money and irritate their customers as well.  They need to implement a fix, now, and that too could cost significant money, especially if it delays other projects.  Right now, they are not saying anything... and some customers are at their breaking point.  Hopefully this will get fixed soon.



Marando
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 19

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

@-G-  Agreed!

Shahin6470
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 9

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

Bridge Mode: Disable

tracert -4 www.google.com

Tracing route to www.google.com [172.217.1.4]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  -
  2    30 ms    13 ms    30 ms  -
  3    29 ms    21 ms    42 ms  -
  4    17 ms    21 ms    12 ms  -
  5    16 ms    20 ms    12 ms  -
  6    19 ms    19 ms    21 ms  -
  7    72 ms   104 ms    24 ms  -
  8    18 ms    18 ms    17 ms  -
  9    15 ms    17 ms    13 ms  -

 

Results for my CMTS:

Ping statistics for -:
    Packets: Sent = 3600, Received = 3496, Lost = 104 (2% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 5ms, Maximum = 602ms, Average = 25ms

 I understand that people are in a much worse condition then I am, but stuff I do are sensitive. Even that 1 sec of being disconnected makes everything crash. 

IndexLock StatusFrequencySNRPower LevelModulation
Downstream
Channel Bonding Value
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
 
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
693 MHz
279 MHz
849 MHz
855 MHz
861 MHz
579 MHz
585 MHz
591 MHz
597 MHz
603 MHz
609 MHz
615 MHz
621 MHz
633 MHz
639 MHz
645 MHz
651 MHz
657 MHz
663 MHz
669 MHz
675 MHz
681 MHz
687 MHz
699 MHz
705 MHz
711 MHz
717 MHz
723 MHz
825 MHz
831 MHz
837 MHz
843 MHz
350 MHz
275600000
37.8 dB
42.2 dB
40.7 dB
40.4 dB
40.3 dB
42.9 dB
42.8 dB
42.4 dB
42.5 dB
42.2 dB
41.9 dB
41.7 dB
41.6 dB
40.8 dB
40.6 dB
40.4 dB
40.1 dB
39.7 dB
39.1 dB
38.8 dB
36.8 dB
37.9 dB
37.7 dB
37.9 dB
38.3 dB
38.4 dB
38.6 dB
39.1 dB
41.3 dB
41.1 dB
41.1 dB
41.0 dB
0.0 dB
NA
-10.7 dBmV
-2.6 dBmV
-4.9 dBmV
-5.1 dBmV
-5.5 dBmV
-4.0 dBmV
-4.3 dBmV
-4.7 dBmV
-4.6 dBmV
-5.0 dBmV
-5.6 dBmV
-5.9 dBmV
-6.2 dBmV
-7.2 dBmV
-7.5 dBmV
-7.7 dBmV
-8.1 dBmV
-8.6 dBmV
-9.2 dBmV
-9.7 dBmV
-10.2 dBmV
-10.7 dBmV
-10.5 dBmV
-10.4 dBmV
-9.8 dBmV
-9.7 dBmV
-9.3 dBmV
-8.7 dBmV
-4.3 dBmV
-4.3 dBmV
-4.4 dBmV
-4.4 dBmV
-2.5 dBmV
NA
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
256 QAM
OFDM
OFDM
IndexLock StatusFrequencySymbol RatePower LevelModulationChannel Type
Upstream
Channel Bonding Value
1
2
3
4
Locked
Locked
Locked
Locked
22 MHz
25 MHz
30 MHz
36 MHz
2560
2560
5120
5120
41.3 dBmV
41.8 dBmV
42.3 dBmV
42.3 dBmV
QAM
QAM
QAM
QAM
TDMA_AND_ATDMA
TDMA_AND_ATDMA
ATDMA
ATDMA
super_robot
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 64

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

@-G- 

 

"I don't know what to say or what we can expect them to say but Rogers is in a pickle.  If they confirm that network conditions are less than ideal, customers will demand compensation and that will cost them money, and possibly customers, and upset their shareholders.  If Rogers dispatches tech after tech for problems that are beyond their ability to fix, it will cost them money and irritate their customers as well.  They need to implement a fix, now, and that too could cost significant money, especially if it delays other projects.  Right now, they are not saying anything... and some customers are at their breaking point.  Hopefully this will get fixed soon."

 

 

 

You nailed it.

 

What I find most mind boggling is that it's happening with Rogers... one of the two main ISP. 

 

I'd expect these delays, lack of information or ability to fix things if I was dealing with a reseller... It's really concerning.

chemical1
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 22

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

This is pathetic.  Fix the problem.  Call in and just get the run around, everything is fine here, checked your neighborhood no issues modem fine signals good bla bla.  I am online gaming and the admin is questioning me why my ping is jumping around like mad.  I say Canadian internet.

 

FIX THIS !

herrshaun
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 71

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

So refresh my memory. If we do a traceroute to say, google.com, note the hops, ping them all individually and they're all giving back high pings, is this indicative of a problem further up the chain, or closer to us?

super_robot
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 64

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

Anyone else seeing tighter average latency?

 

I feel like the low's aren't as low but overall the ping times are more grouped up.

 

My lowest to google is no longer 10ms but rather 30ms but my highs are no longer 100ms+ but ~50ms.

 

Minimum = 29ms, Maximum = 52ms, Average = 35ms

 

 

Almost as if some speed was traded for consistency. 

t27c
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 31

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

For the last week it’s been pretty good for me. I have the odd ping at 60ms but for the most part it’s low and steady. Could just use a little more consistency although I will definitely take it considering my internet has been unplayable for the past 5 months with awful ping times. Now it’s at least playable and not rage inducing
super_robot
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 64

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

andddddddddddd we're back with the high latency and packet loss

 

 

Packets: Sent = 214, Received = 213, Lost = 1 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 31ms, Maximum = 168ms, Average = 56ms

 

 

Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=102ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=120ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=116ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=51
Reply from 172.217.7.195: bytes=32 time=72ms TTL=51

 

Make your pick for which hop will be troublesome...

 

Tracing route to www.google.ca [172.217.7.195]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 * * * Request timed out.
2 27 ms 38 ms 29 ms ***.***.***.***
3 35 ms 87 ms 22 ms 8082-dgw02.etob.rmgt.net.rogers.com [67.231.220.37]
4 57 ms 15 ms 163 ms 0-15-0-6-cgw01.bloor.rmgt.net.rogers.com [209.148.232.141]
5 93 ms 38 ms 17 ms 209.148.235.30

 

Tracing route to www.google.ca [172.217.7.195]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 * * * Request timed out.
2 72 ms 24 ms 28 ms ***.***.***.***
3 17 ms 25 ms 22 ms 8082-dgw02.etob.rmgt.net.rogers.com [67.231.220.37]
4 14 ms 17 ms 13 ms 0-15-0-6-cgw01.bloor.rmgt.net.rogers.com [209.148.232.141]
5 93 ms 18 ms 16 ms 209.148.235.30

 

 

Tracing route to www.google.ca [172.217.7.195]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms <1 ms INTEL_CE_LINUX [192.168.0.1]
2 108 ms 25 ms 17 ms ***.***.***.***
3 24 ms 22 ms 15 ms 8082-dgw02.etob.rmgt.net.rogers.com [67.231.220.37]
4 24 ms 16 ms 14 ms 0-15-0-6-cgw01.bloor.rmgt.net.rogers.com [209.148.232.141]
5 19 ms 23 ms 14 ms 209.148.235.30