CODA-4582 - Open Issues for Investigation

[RogersDave]

*** This post was last edited May 2, 2017 ***

Good morning Community,

As I mentioned in a post two days ago, we have received the next firmware 2.0.10.20 from Hitron. We are currently running initial testing on this version and will push it out to participants in the firmware trial program as soon as it passes initial testing.

However, while running these tests, we discovered abnormal behavior with ICMP and are awaiting feedback from Hitron today to asses how this will be addressed. As soon as I this is confirmed, I’ll update the change log with the correct version information and start pushing it out.

In parallel, we are still working on the following high priority items. In some cases below, I requested affected customers to reach out to me via private message. If you do so, please include your modem MAC address in the subject line (even if we exchange messages daily) as there are a lot of you reaching out to me daily 🙂

UDP Packet Loss

The investigation for what has been reported as UDP packet loss is still ongoing. We have deployed a probe at one fellow forum member on both a CODA-4582 and a CGNM-3552 to collect additional data. We are actively working with Hitron and Intel on the results observed.

Based on what we know so far, in most instances UDP packet loss is coupled with higher uplink usage in the area. Although the impact is noticeable in specific logs (League of Legends), the root cause for the perceivable impact (while playing) is likely related to bufferbloat (see next issue).

Bufferbloat

When comparing the performance of a CODA-4582 to a CGNM-3552 in the same network conditions, the CODA-4582 consistently reports higher bufferbloat when tested on DSLReports.

Update April 12: The solution for this problem will come in two folds. It will require a change in software which will possibly be included in 2.0.10.27 but more likely in 2.0.10.28 and a change in network configuration.

The network configuration change is not compatible with the current firmware so this change will only come after a vast majority of the modems are running the new code. We are however looking at a way to make the change only for specific modems to support testing in the community.

Update April 22: This problem seems resolved in firmware 2.0.10.27

5 GHz WiFi Low range for channels 36 to 48

Lower WiFi channels on the modem have a much smaller range. This is due in part to the limit imposed by Industry Canada to maximum transmit power.

Furthermore, the current automatic channel selection (auto mode) tends to select the lower channels when in similar load conditions.

Workaround: manually select higher channels (149-153-157-161)

Update April 22: The channel selection algorithm has been improved in firmware 2.0.10.27

Loss of OFDM Channel Lock

Under some RF conditions, the modem fails to lock properly on the OFDM channel. This typically result in variable performance.

Update April 12: This problem is resolved in 2.0.10.26T2

List of connected device does not get fully populated

This is a known issue that has been tracked since firmware 2.0.10.13. We are making improvements at every firmware but it is not a perfect system.

The situation is worst after a reboot or firmware upgrade as the list gets reset and must be repopulated as devices renew their DHCP lease.

NAT Loopback not working for wired clients

When setting up port forwarding to an internal server, it is possible for a client on WiFi to reach the server using the external IP/port. If the client is on a wired interface, it doesn't work.

Update April 12: This problem is resolved in 2.0.10.26T2 (not confirmed)

LAN Counters not working

Some customers reported that LAN counters (especially in bridge mode) are reporting inaccurate values.

This problem has been reported to Hitron for investigation.

Unexpected modem reboot

Some customers reported their modem reboots unexpectedly. We have also seen this behavior in our lab.

Update April 12: This problem is resolved in 2.0.10.26T2

Missing SC-QAM Channels

After a reboot, some modems are missing SC-QAM channels. A fix has been implemented in 2.0.10.26T2 to address this behavior but it has not corrected all scenarios.

Investigation continues with Hitron.

WiFi Survey

The WiFi Survey functionality in firmware 2.0.10.26T2 (and possibly before) reports incorrect SSID names.

Guest Network

When connecting to the Guest Network, an error message is displayed "only allow DHCP client to use this wireless".  This has been reported in firmware 2.0.10.26T2.

Update April 22: This issue has been resolved in firmware 2.0.10.27

Update May 2: It seems this issue is not fully resolved and still experienced by some users

---

Future Planned Improvements

The following are items that we are working on in parallel of the above.

• Improvement in WiFi speeds
• Improvement in latency / bufferbloat

Dave

*Edited Labels*

[tonytoronto]

---

@JohnBeaudin wrote:

Hello Community, 

I have very good news to share, since I received the D3.1 update, I have been trying to reproduce the UDP issue with CSGO ( usually it was super easy it was doing it on any server at any time).

Now guess what? I can't reproduce it, 0% packet loss at all time Ping is stable my 3 tests

NY: 61 ms stable 0,02ms var (Time 1:30 AM Atlantic time)

Chicago: 47ms stable 0,001-0,002 ms (Time 11:00 AM Atlantic Time)

Chicago: 47ms stable 0,001-0,002 ms (Time 11:30 AM Atlantic Time)

Tests were done in CSGO, because it was in that game that it was the worst, my ping usually fluctuate between 50-75 in a matter of 2-3 minutes and keep going all way until I am done.

So now seeing a ping so stable is a FIRST on Rogers for me.

---

  Thats good news.

  I was on 3.1 and was horrible, hopefully some changes being done background. would be nice to jump on the 4582 again, wi-fi bit better than the 3552.

[JohnBeaudin]

@tonytoronto

I've done further testing, played for hours, and the UDP is still noticeable but not nearly as much as on D3.0

I know that the curent beta firmware .26T2 on D3.1 is stable enough.

The UDP issue should be sorted out soon, so you might want to wait until it's fixed and then make the switch, if you want to play safe.

[Triple_Helix]

Try this HTML5 speed test: https://sourceforge.net/speedtest/

[JohnBeaudin]

Here's my results.

50 ms

DW 304  mbs

Up 32 .7 mbs

Packet loss 0%

On .26T2 D3.1 (250/20 package)

[Telek]

---

@Triple_Helix wrote:

Try this HTML5 speed test: https://sourceforge.net/speedtest/

---

75mbit upstream, huh?

[Telek]

yuh-huh. Somehow sourceforce manages to squeeze 44% more out of my network card than it's rated for 😄

[Markpa21]

Heres an update  we had tech come today and literally spend 5mins, did bother to test the signals just did a speed test. 

Wifi - its better now at  5g 436dl 32up 13ms ping.

2.4 140dl 30up and 12msping. Why is there such a big drop on 2.4?

Do these signals look okay? ive read in post here they should be close 0 , port 29 and 30 are 12 ,and 10,

do these look normal?

Downstream Overview

Port ID	Frequency (MHz)	Modulation	Signal strength (dBmV)	Channel ID	Signal noise ratio (dB)
1	591000000	256QAM	-2.500	7	40.366
2	561000000	256QAM	-2.500	2	40.946
3	567000000	256QAM	-2.700	3	40.946
4	573000000	256QAM	-2.500	4	40.366
5	579000000	256QAM	-2.800	5	40.946
6	585000000	256QAM	-2.500	6	40.946
7	555000000	256QAM	-2.600	1	40.946
8	597000000	256QAM	-2.400	8	40.946
9	603000000	256QAM	-2.800	9	40.946
10	609000000	256QAM	-2.900	10	40.946
11	615000000	256QAM	-3.300	11	40.946
12	621000000	256QAM	-2.800	12	40.366
13	633000000	256QAM	-2.700	13	40.366
14	639000000	256QAM	-3.100	14	40.366
15	645000000	256QAM	-3.200	15	40.366
16	651000000	256QAM	-3.200	16	40.366
17	657000000	256QAM	-3.300	17	40.366
18	663000000	256QAM	-3.200	18	40.366
19	669000000	256QAM	-3.100	19	40.946
20	675000000	256QAM	-3.000	20	40.946
21	681000000	256QAM	-3.100	21	40.366
22	687000000	256QAM	-3.800	22	40.366
23	693000000	256QAM	-4.400	23	38.983
24	699000000	256QAM	-5.000	24	38.983
25	705000000	256QAM	-5.600	25	40.366
26	711000000	256QAM	-6.000	26	38.983
27	717000000	256QAM	-5.900	27	38.983
28	723000000	256QAM	-6.500	28	38.605
29	825000000	256QAM	-12.300	29	34.926
30	831000000	256QAM	-10.600	30	36.387
32	843000000	256QAM	-9.000	32	37.636

Upstream Overview

Port ID	Frequency (MHz)	Modulation	Signal strength (dBmV)	Channel ID	Bandwidth
1	38596000	ATDMA - 64QAM	43.000	6	3200000
2	30596000	ATDMA - 64QAM	39.750	4	6400000
3	23700000	ATDMA - 64QAM	39.250	5	6400000

[Telek]

---

@Markpa21 wrote:

Heres an update  we had tech come today and literally spend 5mins, did bother to test the signals just did a speed test. 

Wifi - its better now at  5g 436dl 32up 13ms ping.

2.4 140dl 30up and 12msping. Why is there such a big drop on 2.4?

Do these signals look okay? ive read in post here they should be close 0 , port 29 and 30 are 12 ,and 10,

do these look normal?

Downstream Overview

Port ID	Frequency (MHz)	Modulation	Signal strength (dBmV)	Channel ID	Signal noise ratio (dB)
1	591000000	256QAM	-2.500	7	40.366
11	615000000	256QAM	-3.300	11	40.946
21	681000000	256QAM	-3.100	21	40.366
23	693000000	256QAM	-4.400	23	38.983
24	699000000	256QAM	-5.000	24	38.983
25	705000000	256QAM	-5.600	25	40.366
26	711000000	256QAM	-6.000	26	38.983
27	717000000	256QAM	-5.900	27	38.983
28	723000000	256QAM	-6.500	28	38.605
29	825000000	256QAM	-12.300	29	34.926
30	831000000	256QAM	-10.600	30	36.387
32	843000000	256QAM	-9.000	32	37.636

---

5ghz is not only a bigger band, with more capacity, but likely a lot less congestion as well. It was designed to be much faster overall than 2.4ghz.  Those speed differences are expected.

 Yeah you've definitely got some issues there -- quite possible cabling.

-10 to +10 is the normal accepted range, with 0 being the target.

I think they say that -12 is "ok" now, but considering that everything else is in the -3 range, you've definitely got an issue.

Are you using an amplifier anywhere? Old cabling perhaps?

Check again with your modem as close to the input cable as possible without any splitters and amplifiers.

[roy86]

does using a amplifier harm the modem? I have one in the basement and my coda is upstairs

[Telek]

---

@roy86 wrote:

does using a amplifier harm the modem? I have one in the basement and my coda is upstairs

---

No, provided that it's a good amplifier. Some of them are bad, and although I doubt they'd harm the modem, they may cause speed problems.

[Datalink]

@roy86 was the amp installed by a Rogers tech?  One problem with amps is that they can mask or hide cable signal issues. 

[roy86]

it appears so, although the previous owner would have dealt with the tech. The modem does not work upstairs without the amplifier being on. 

Amplifier is antronix voip residential amplifier.

[Telek]

---

@roy86 wrote:

it appears so, although the previous owner would have dealt with the tech. The modem does not work upstairs without the amplifier being on. 

Amplifier is antronix voip residential amplifier.

---

If you can, setup the modem in the basement directly on the incoming line, and look at the signal stats.

This will tell you if the problem is inside your house, or because of the incoming line.

If you call Rogers to investigate, and they figure out that it's your fault, you get a nice bill.

Also make sure that your amplifier doesn't have any open ports on it -- all unused ports need a terminator on them, otherwise they act like an antenna.

[roy86]

great idea @Telek will compare the signal stats. Here is the current one with the modem upstairs.  Im on the ignite 100u plan and speeds are always great. I use the internet fairly heavily everyday and the modem is on bridge mode.  No problems except that its very annoying that it reboots randomly everyday in the middle of either web browsing or video streaming.  This happened with the previous Hitron Citron CGN3 modem as well to the point it got so annoying that i had to replace it with the CODA one.

Downstream Overview

Port ID	Frequency (MHz)	Modulation	Signal strength (dBmV)	Channel ID	Signal noise ratio (dB)
1	615000000	256QAM	-2.900	11	40.366
2	561000000	256QAM	-1.600	2	40.366
3	567000000	256QAM	-1.900	3	40.366
4	573000000	256QAM	-2.600	4	40.946
5	579000000	256QAM	-2.900	5	40.366
7	591000000	256QAM	-3.100	7	38.983
10	609000000	256QAM	-2.800	10	40.366
11	555000000	256QAM	-2.200	1	40.366
12	621000000	256QAM	-2.400	12	40.366
13	633000000	256QAM	-2.100	13	35.780
14	639000000	256QAM	-2.000	14	38.983
15	645000000	256QAM	-2.300	15	40.366
16	651000000	256QAM	-2.600	16	37.356
17	657000000	256QAM	-2.500	17	38.983
18	663000000	256QAM	-1.800	18	40.946
19	669000000	256QAM	-1.800	19	40.366
20	675000000	256QAM	-2.000	20	40.366
21	681000000	256QAM	-2.400	21	40.946
22	687000000	256QAM	-2.900	22	40.366
23	693000000	256QAM	-3.300	23	40.366
24	699000000	256QAM	-3.200	24	40.366
25	705000000	256QAM	-3.200	25	40.366
26	711000000	256QAM	-3.600	26	40.366
27	717000000	256QAM	-3.900	27	40.366
28	723000000	256QAM	-3.800	28	38.983
29	825000000	256QAM	-3.700	29	40.366
30	831000000	256QAM	-4.200	30	38.983
31	837000000	256QAM	-4.400	31	38.983
32	843000000	256QAM	-5.000	32	38.983

OFDM Downstream Overview

Receiver	FFT type	Subcarr 0 Frequency(MHz)	PLC locked	NCP locked	MDC1 locked	PLC power(dBmv)
0	NA	NA	NO	NO	NO	NA
1	NA	NA	NO	NO	NO	NA

Upstream Overview

Port ID	Frequency (MHz)	Modulation	Signal strength (dBmV)	Channel ID	Bandwidth
1	23700000	ATDMA - 64QAM	39.750	2	6400000
2	38596000	ATDMA - 64QAM	43.750	3	3200000
3	30596000	ATDMA - 64QAM	40.000	1	6400000

OFDM/OFDMA Overview

Channel Index	State	lin Digital Att	Digital Att	BW (sc's*fft)	Report Power	Report Power1_6	FFT Size
0	DISABLED	0.5000	0.0000	0.0000	-inf	-1.0000	4K
1	DISABLED	0.5000	0.0000	0.0000	-inf	-1.0000	4K

yes i guess it was done by the tech since the unused ports have terminators on them.

[Datalink]

Can you have a close look at the amp and determine if one of the ports is marked VOIP, which is an non-amplified port.  The internet cable should be plugged into that port as the amplification that results from using the other ports can result in packet loss.  Your comment above implies that the modem is plugged into an amplified port.

You should call tech support and ask if your CMTS is running DOCSIS 3.1.  Right now your modem is running DOCSIS 3.0, and you are missing channels, which isn't good.  At the moment the DOCSIS 3.1 frequency and power data presented on that page isn't correct, so, even if it was there, it wouldn't be of any use.  With missing channels in the DOCSIS 3.0 band, I wonder what the frequency band for DOCSIS 3.1 actually looks like.  Perhaps tech support could tell you as a general interest point. 

[roy86]

@Datalink wow yes there is.  It says -4.5db on it. I was actually thinking VOIP meant for the VOIP home phone modem rogers has.  Will try it with that and see. Thanks !

Yes I noticed a few channels are missing. Will do.

[Datalink]

Ok, please have a look at my additional remarks above.  With the modem plugged into the VOIP port, your signal levels will take a hit, but thats ok.  With the cable still connected to that VOIP port, call tech support and ask the CSR to run a signal check on your modem and advise him or her, that when the modem is connected to an amplified port, you are missing DOCSIS 3.0 channels.  Connected to the VOIP port, and still missing channels, that signal check should fail automatically.  The end result should be a conversation to get a tech out to your home to see what the problem is, most likely a cable and/or connector issue where one or both require replacement.  At the end of the day, the internet modem or VOIP phone should be connected to that VOIP port, and the signal levels should be around 0 dBmV, possibly down around -2/-3 dBmV.  

[JohnBeaudin]

@RogersDave

I have done further testing yesterday, played for 4 hours non stop ( CSGO)

Ping is stable between 42-50ms , I really like the improvement from 62-78ms( with small spike over 80ms over time).

So for now it seems like it's more than just a fluke but stable in the 42-50ms, hopefully future firmware won't bring me back in the old laggy zone! Never felt so good for years.

Have you been able to collect some logs for the UDP issue?

[traghipp]

I have Rogers home phone and I believe it's screwed into the VOIP connection on the splitter. If I connect my Rogers modem to the VOIP connection and use another input for the phone will it affect my home phone service?

[RyzenFX]

Hey community, I know many of you are concerned on what the progress is with the UDP issue so I have some information to share with you guys.

As of now, there still isn't much progress with the UDP issue because Rogers and Hitron engineers aren't able to replicate the issue. HOWEVER, today I got an on-site visit and I was set-up with a device that allows Hitron engineers to collect logs from my modem while I am gaming. Hopefully, this should help them find the problem and fix the problem quickly. 

RyzenFX

[lethalsniper]

would this also be for the Xbox one udp issues or just pc ? @RyzenFX