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
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 1,670

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently


@borisnet wrote:

Thanks @-G- for the theory - it is interesting and while not confirmed it could make sense as it seems difficult to address.

 

The consistency of the problem I could observe is that:

- it happens everyday although it can be hard to catch if you are doing something else than being online (arguably easier to notice with the pandemic and all the activities online impacted by connectivity outages in a household)

- it clears itself after a few minutes. That is the part that is surprising to me. In your theory, is there anything that could explain the fact that the problem does not last as long as a normal congestion issue

- there will be roughly 4 to 5 short outages (less than 3 min) and then it comes back to normal connectivity


If Rogers is in the process of making DOCSIS-related changes in parts of their network, there are any of a number of things that could be causing the problems that have been reported here.  Something as "simple" as intermittently losing a Primary channel in a Downstream Bonding Group would cause a modem to reboot.  D3.1 Upstream-related changes could also result in interoperability issues and other unforeseen side-effects that might not have been seen during lab testing.  It could be anything, but at least the problem appears to be localized... and I want to stress again that I am in no position to speculate as to what the problem(s) could be because I am not affected and I have no information that I could even use to hazard a guess.  I'm sure that Rogers would have identified the root cause by now and just need some time to get the underlying issues resolved.



I'm Here A Lot
Posts: 7

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

Happened again today at:

-11:52am - interrupted calls for everybody in the house - same behaviour as before.

- 8:06pm and 8:08pm - same symptom as before

 

It would be great if @RogersAndy can confirm whether Rogers as an organization is aware of the problem and what else we can do as customers experiencing outages every day. It was not that bad before this thread started and I would have hoped for quicker resolution if not at least transparent communication around the effort associated with the resolution.

 

I've Been Here Awhile
Posts: 3

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

For almost 4 months now, I've had random latency issues with rogers network (best I can tell),  yet of course my modem signal is fine according to Rogers...   I'm just about at my wits end after replacing some internal network gear, and still having the same problems.   To troubleshoot this I've been monitoring latency using SmokePing and i've had a ping running from the router hitting the WAN ip and then the first hop into Rogers network.  When the issue ocurrs,  the ping to 174.114.80.1 (the first hop for me in Rogers network), spikes to 20-40 seconds for ~20-40 seconds (rendering any zoom meeting basically useless).    I also ping the WAN ip and it's latency is fine, is there anything else I can do to prove to Rogers this is their problem?  From where I sit this has to be from the modem forward.


Note I use the Rogers modem (hitron coda, which is brand new) bridged into a Ubiquity EdgeRouter 4 (which is a very very decent router).   All my tracing is done hard wired into the switch (which has also been replaced), no IP internally exhibits any packet loss whatsoever.

Thanks

I'm Here A Lot
Posts: 7

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

@zuneeExactly the same symptom as you described and same monitoring in place. Started late November. It would be great if Rogers could leverage their community of advanced users and allow us to engage with people working on fixing the issue. 

Without showing intent from their end, it seems like they either do not know what is going on or do not want to work with their customers.

 

 

I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 19

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

Rogers has acknowledged that in many communities the available bandwidth has become saturated due to ongoing pandemic issues with stay-at-home workers and learners.  Traditionally Rogers approach with dealing with customers' complaints where connectivity issues are concerned has been to "roll a truck" and lay a new cable or to change the customers' modems or all of the above.  This is wasteful both in time and materials in cases where they know it's a capacity issue.  I am still paying >$100/month for Internet service that, when it is consistent, is very fast.  It's also the only show in town and I'm stuck with it until Rogers "segments/splits the node" in my community.  This was supposed to be done 6 months ago, and now I've been told that we will have to wait at least 5 more.  It will be almost a year later than promised by the time it is done, and in the meantime Rogers will have collected >$1000 of my money and for a substandard and inconsistent service. 

 

But..... Rogers customer service (and the employees on this forum) has been very good to deal with and they have been honest with the challenges they are having in my area via private messages.  My issue isn't with the customer service team because they have to play the cards they are dealt in the face of customer complaints.  This they have done with patience and calm and I appreciate it.  The issue is with the network engineering and planning within Rogers.  They have taken the somewhat cynical approach of taking our money and hiding behind the excuse of the disease pandemic for their recalcitrance and procrastination in rolling out new infrastructure.  Disease pandemic aside, this is a missed opportunity since it damages the reputation of the brand and causes a lot of churn with their customers as they cast about and try to find a solution with a different vendor which works.  Some of us have the luxury of choice.  Some of us don't.

 

I am a network engineer, and I am inclined to wait (again I don't have a choice, anyway) for the oft-promised network capacity increase to finally take place in my community.  I am frustrated that another vendor's fibre optic Internet solution terminates only .5 km from my house and is only available in a new subdivision.  In the meantime, I am using that other vendor's DSL Internet solution as a backup and have configured my home WiFi such that it automatically switches to the backup solution when Rogers cable internet is having one of its many "moments" over the course of the day. 

I've Been Here Awhile
Posts: 4

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

High Ping rates to upstream gateway. I'm having a problem explaining to Live Chat agent that there is high ping rates with my connection. 

We replaced the modem, but the same issue exists. 

 

The agent seems to think these numbers are normal. 

 

64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=391 ttl=63 time=108 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=392 ttl=63 time=13718 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=393 ttl=63 time=13126 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=394 ttl=63 time=12106 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=395 ttl=63 time=11172 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=396 ttl=63 time=10426 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=397 ttl=63 time=9400 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=398 ttl=63 time=8388 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=399 ttl=63 time=7369 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=400 ttl=63 time=6480 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=401 ttl=63 time=5463 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=402 ttl=63 time=4452 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=403 ttl=63 time=3535 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=404 ttl=63 time=2568 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=405 ttl=63 time=1600 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=406 ttl=63 time=1352 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=407 ttl=63 time=2083 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=408 ttl=63 time=3498 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=409 ttl=63 time=2757 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=410 ttl=63 time=2031 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=411 ttl=63 time=1130 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=412 ttl=63 time=722 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=413 ttl=63 time=3512 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=414 ttl=63 time=5189 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=415 ttl=63 time=4286 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=416 ttl=63 time=5063 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=419 ttl=63 time=5342 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=422 ttl=63 time=14447 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=423 ttl=63 time=13651 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=424 ttl=63 time=14552 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=425 ttl=63 time=13679 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=426 ttl=63 time=12851 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=427 ttl=63 time=11863 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=428 ttl=63 time=10935 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=429 ttl=63 time=9919 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=430 ttl=63 time=8900 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=431 ttl=63 time=7879 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=433 ttl=63 time=5833 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=434 ttl=63 time=4811 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=432 ttl=63 time=6862 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=435 ttl=63 time=3793 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=436 ttl=63 time=2769 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=437 ttl=63 time=1770 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=438 ttl=63 time=750 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=439 ttl=63 time=281 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=440 ttl=63 time=55.1 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=441 ttl=63 time=652 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=442 ttl=63 time=959 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=443 ttl=63 time=225 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=444 ttl=63 time=85.9 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=445 ttl=63 time=37.9 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=446 ttl=63 time=36.9 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=447 ttl=63 time=611 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=448 ttl=63 time=281 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=449 ttl=63 time=1545 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=450 ttl=63 time=683 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=451 ttl=63 time=55.2 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=452 ttl=63 time=49.7 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=453 ttl=63 time=102 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=454 ttl=63 time=9406 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=455 ttl=63 time=8683 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=456 ttl=63 time=7721 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=457 ttl=63 time=6702 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=458 ttl=63 time=5680 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=459 ttl=63 time=4721 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=460 ttl=63 time=3700 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=461 ttl=63 time=2681 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=462 ttl=63 time=1660 ms
64 bytes from 99.249.108.1: icmp_seq=463 ttl=63 time=689 ms

 

 

.....

 

^C
--- 99.249.108.1 ping statistics ---
1456 packets transmitted, 1354 received, 7.00549% packet loss, time 1466356ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 7.617/1648.750/19428.989/2887.074 ms, pipe 19

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 1,670

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently


@darwood wrote:

High Ping rates to upstream gateway. I'm having a problem explaining to Live Chat agent that there is high ping rates with my connection. 

We replaced the modem, but the same issue exists. 

 

The agent seems to think these numbers are normal. 


The fact that your upstream router (and default gateway) is slow in responding to ping requests is noteworthy, but you also need to keep in mind that responding to those ping requests is at the absolute bottom of the router's priority list.

 

When running ping tests to troubleshoot a latency/packet loss problem, I actually run three ping-tests side-by-side simultaneously that are in lock-step with one another: One to a fast server on the Internet (e.g. Google DNS / 8.8.8.8) , another to my local modem/router, and another to the CMTS router, my router's default gateway.  If I get a slow ping response from 8.8.8.8, it's because something, somewhere in the network is introducing latency.  If I also get a fast response from my local router, it confirms the problem is NOT on my local LAN or WiFi and probably not due to a problem with my modem/router.  If I get a similarly slow ping RTT from the CMTS router, it pretty much confirms that the congestion is in my local node.  If I get an even slower ping response from the CMTS router, it confirms congestion in my local node AND confirms that the CMTS router's main processor is VERY busy doing something... and if its routing tables are in flux and the local node/CMTS router is blocked from forwarding packets as a result, then that is what is causing your latency...  and if the latency is severe enough and the traffic loads are high enough, you will also get packet loss.



I'm an Enthusiast
Posts: 976

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

@Datalink Rogers told me don’t continuously ping the node it can get my service suspended is that true ?
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 1,670

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently


@lethalsniper wrote:
@Datalink Rogers told me don’t continuously ping the node it can get my service suspended is that true ?

We (RE's) would not know... this is really a question for the @CommunityHelps  team... but it would not surprise me if Rogers did suspend the account of a customer doing that.  It's kinda pointless to constantly ping the node/CMTS router, unless it is a relatively brief, focused test to correlate with other data... and if the node is overloaded, you would only be putting the node under more duress by hammering the processor with ping requests.



I'm an Enthusiast
Posts: 976

Re: Brutal latency/ping Recently

Who do I ask ? And thanks. I mean @Datalink has many post about it on here so wouldn’t @communityhepls have deleted those post ?