Yup, looks like high latency at servers #5, 22.214.171.124 and #6 126.96.36.199 Thats a job for one of the mods at @CommunityHelps, possibly @RogersCilio or @RogersMoin to forward a report/request to the NOC or the engineering staff to look at the loads on those servers and to determine if the servers are functioning correctly. If that latency is a persistent condition, then there is some issue with the servers. If its only seen at high load times, then some adjustment is required to accommodate the loads, up to and including server upgrades or replacement. A level II tech at tech support would be able to to initiate a problem report as well.
Beyond that, if your data path or gaming path runs thru those servers and you keep seeing high latency thru those servers, keep bugging the mods at @CommunityHelps until the situation is resolved.
If that latency is a persistent condition, then there is some issue with the servers. If its only seen at high load times, then some adjustment is required to accommodate the loads, up to and including server upgrades or replacement.
It's a persistent (and consistent) condition; no matter what time of day I perform a test, my ping result is between 29-31ms. Been like that for about a week and a half now. Guess I'll send a message to @CommunityHelps soon. Thanks for all your help.
@Datalink, thank you very much for your detailed response and step by step procedure. Apparently Rogers technicians fixed some issues in our building. Please find below the feedback from another resident with whom I discussed (a bite of context, our building is still in construction in the upper floors):
"in my case, the fiber connection had a scratch on it....that caused the intermittency with the internet modems - they replaced it. They checked the main fibres coming up from the basement... there's many. They put me and my neighbours on a good feed. Dirt will affect the fibre optics...construction dust/dirt can its not uncommon in new buildings. They've referred back to Rogers Maint to repair others they've identified ....so if you still have issues do report I feel for these guys.... I can only imagine the wires and cables to service this building."
On my side I performed all the tests you recommend me do. Please find below the results:
MDU - CMTS:
Please let me know what do you think of these results? What are the key actions I need to do? Whom do I need to contact and how?
Thanks in advance for your response and your help.
@lexignot, ok, interesting plots. Here’s a quick synopsis, as I see it:
IPV4: not too bad, looks like the response time is 0.44 ms with a couple of occasional spikes. No packet loss which is good. I usually run this for an hour, but, do it at a much higher rate and record it with Wireshark instead of Pingplot as Pingplot would average the results.
IPV6: 4.37 ms average. Higher than it should be, most likely due to the spikes on the plot. No packet loss which is good. That average should be very close to the IPV4 results. Just depends on whether or not you have any spikes on the plot.
MDU – CMTS: The average looks ok at 13.76 ms. This will typically range between 8 to 13 ms. There isn’t any packet loss from the MDU/CMTS on line #2, which is good. If you have issues, this is the figure to look at. One recommendation, right click on the column title bar and select the Error column for display. Drag that column to sit beside the Packet Loss % column. That Error column will show the number of errors, or number of instances of packet loss. That’s another data item that allows you to keep you understand how many instances of packet loss have occurred over a period of time. Ideally, from a wired pc to the MDU/CMTS, you shouldn't see any packet loss, however, that’s not practical. There will always be some amount of packet loss which from my own testing usually runs less than 0.1 %
On this plot you can see the indicated packet loss from the modem on line #1. Since you’ve just proved that there is no packet loss from the modem in the first run, disregard this indication. That’s a Pingplotter / modem timing issue. Same goes for the crazy latency spikes from the MDU/CMTS. Once again, that’s a timing issue between the modem and Pingplotter. Those spikes make troubleshooting latency issue more challenging, which is why you have to go to the next target which is the DNS, looking to confirm or dispel the latency indications.
DNS: Not too bad. 11.15 ms average with one larger spike. No signs of the latency spikes seen from the MDU/CMTS. If there was a real issue with transit thru the modem, you would see that in this plot as well. That was a problem with the CGN3xxxx modems, however, Intel has finally been addressing that latency. Don’t know if Intel has been totally successful in that regard. The 4582 doesn’t have that same problem.
Other DNS targets:
IPV4 Secure: 188.8.131.52
IPV6 Secure: 2620:fe::fe
IPV4 Unsecure: 184.108.40.206
IPV6 Unsecure: 2620:fe::10
Note: Will Quad9 filter content?
No. Quad9 will not provide a censoring component and will limit its actions solely to the blocking of malicious domains around phishing, malware, and exploit kit domains.
Secure = blocked malicious domains
Unsecure = no blocking offered (same as Rogers DNS basically)
Just to note, when you run any of those tests at high rates (very low intervals under 0.05 seconds, you can see latency spikes show up simply due to traffic associated with the operating system. Ideally this would be done with proper test equipment where you can control the type and amount of superfluous traffic from the transmitting device. Those latency spikes causes one to wonder what caused the latency spike and you can spend an inordinate amount of time stepping thru a plot and its data, looking for internal traffic sources. As an example, Logicon has a Windows application for its keyboards and mice which calls home, causing a spike in the plot, and, ..... there are a lot of programs which can call home at the most inopportune time in a test.
Overall it looks like you're doing much better than before.
Happy New Year!
I am writing because I have an issue again in my famous condo in the 10 York St condo in Toronto. Apparently the Rogers's technicians are used to come to our building. A bite of context, the building is still under construction and since I have been in the condo every 2 months I have an issue with my internet connection. The fibres or any other materials must have been damaged again...
It clearly shows that it does not come from the modem or my unit but from the installations before my unit. There is a high ping and packet loss, everything is there. It has been like that for more than 2 months now...! It's impossible to work from home because I am disconnected from the VPN of my company every 5 min, impossible to perform a call via Skype, watch a video in streaming etc... I can't continue in a such situation and you clearly understand that I will have to switch to another Internet provider unfortunately if no long term solutions are implemented...
Request to Rogers:
Could you please really pay attention to the situation and take care of our issues in that building. As I mentioned every month we have issues with our internet connection... We need seasoned technicians to fix the issue as soon as possible with long term solutions please! Stop asking us to do useless approaches or send an inappropriate technician...
Thanks in advance for your understanding and support.
Hey @lexignot, happy new year!
Given the consistency of these occurrences, your frustration is more than warranted at this point. Packet loss or any level of service interruption for that matter can be incredibly disruptive. Though the results you provided aren't conclusive in itself of an issue I'd be more than happy to take a look into what you're experiencing. I'll be able to identify if maintenance is required to get involved, or if it is more of a localized issue. Seeing that there's construction going on within the building, issues can definitely occur, but we'll see to it that they're resolved as quickly as possible.
To do so, it starts with first identifying the problem. Feel free to send us a PM @CommunityHelps and we'll be happy to review.
For more information on how our Private Messaging system works, please CLICK HERE.
Connection only good if we don't use it
My name is Matt, I am posting this under my girl friend's account as I am the more tech savvy one, although networking is not my strong point. Hoping this is just a simple issue like a bad cable or something.
We just switched from a competitor over to Roger's Ignite Gigabit for a considerably better price. There was no issue with the competitor but that was using CAT5 to reach the modem etc. When we signed up for Roger's it was a self-setup and we simply plugged our HITRON Coda 4582U into an old coaxial cable connection from 5+ years ago and we were ready to go. We don't have a television package or anything and simply stream shows to our various TVs and play the occasional video game.
Unfortunately our internet only seems to perform well when no one is using it.
With the modem set in bridge mod, wired to a single desktop machine doing nothing, this is the result I get in a ping/trace test:
Then, the same test done while downloading a file at 10-25mbs (or essentially doing anything on the network):
These tests were performed 9 AM Sunday morning in my attempt to omit any "peak hours" congestion. Again this is a single desktop machine wired straight into the Coda 4582U modem set in bridge mode.
While trying to play Battlefield with a 1217 ping has really taught me the value of thinking ahead, it is not the experience I am going for.
Any idea what's going on here?
Hi Matt, welcome to the Intel Puma modem world 😞 Your results with a simultaneous ping and download aren't surprising. In fact, that's very normal for an Intel Puma chipset modem unfortunately. What you're seeing is the modem's QOS in action. This brings about a much larger discussion about QOS, bufferbloat, etc, etc, and what is the best way to prioritize the traffic of your choice. In your case, that happens to be gaming traffic from what I can see.
If you were to run Pingplotter, which you can run in freebie Pro mode for 14 days, and run a higher rate ping test (interval at 0.25 seconds and below) to something like the Rogers DNS and then initiate a speedtest, you would see a fairly large initial ping latency spike when the download test cranks up, and then a secondary spike when the upload test runs. Here's an example of this which I just ran. There is an ongoing ICMP ping to the Rogers IPV4 DNS. Then there are five speedtests using the Montreal speedtest server. The first initial spike is the download test running which then tapers off. The second much larger spikes are the upload test running. Looking at this, it would appear that the modem's priority is the TCP/IP speedtest instead of the ICMP ping test. The same would probably apply to TCP/IP traffic versus gaming UDP traffic. The one thing to note is the inconsistency in the latency results. I suspect that's a result of memory management of the modem and how quickly (or not) that the modem recovers unused memory from previous tasks. Note this is just a personal opinion.
Note that one of the moderators will have to approve the latency test image so that its publicly available.
Here's a close up view of that combined ping test and speedtest with a lower interval ping test running:
If you ran the same test with a Broadcom chipset modem, using the same ping intervals and speedtest servers, you would see a very minor blip, in terms of the ping latency. What that comes down to is modem horsepower, the manner in which the chipsets are built, and the traffic priority as determined in the modem firmware. This also brings about a discussion about whats right or wrong with Intel's chipset design and its decisions on QOS priority.
Fwiw, there was a change in the modem firmware back in version .27 which imposed a FQ-Codel type of response to traffic loads. Here's the post from way back when:
If you look at the two plots, you can see that the bottom plot has a much better latency response time than the original Intel firmware. That test hasn't been repeated since then as @RogersDave departed Rogers for Hitron some time ago, and no one, at least publicly, has posted results of any updated testing. The continued presence of high latency spikes during a download makes me wonder if the firmware update included in version .27 is still present in the firmware? Maybe not?
Ok, so, can you do anything about this. Yes (maybe) and no. Running a router that gives you much better control over the user priority would probably go a long way to solving the issue (Maybe Yes). The unknown factor here is, what does the modem do with the traversing data, despite any efforts by the user to assign a priority to that traffic (maybe No). Modems these days aren't just simple modems anymore. They do a lot of traffic processing and the question at this point is, if you do run the modem in Bridge mode instead of Gateway mode, does that shut off or bypass any QOS processing that does occur Gateway mode. That's probably a question that no one, including Intel, the manufacturers or ISPs are willing to discuss due to Intel's Non Disclosure Agreements. That leaves the users to sort this out for themselves, as usual. Sorry for the discouraging opinion ......
There is a recent low latency extension that has been written by Cablelabs, the originator of the DOCSIS specifications and the question has been asked in the forum as to whether or not that extension will make an appearance in the modem firmware. There has never been any response to that query.
So, can you really do anything. Probably. If you were running a fast router, and by that I mean something with a processor running at 1.8 Ghz or faster, with the ability to set your own traffic priority, you might be able to see a very good improvement in latency. Remember though, the wild card here is what will the modem do, despite any of your attempts to run low gaming latency.
There are consumer all in one routers out now with 1.8 Ghz processors, the RT-AC86U being one of them. Beyond that your looking at building a router, which is nothing more than a pc with an extra ethernet port (or more thru an add-on card) which is then loaded with Opnsense or PfSense or other router firmware. At that point you should have a much faster router than anything you can buy commercially and have the ability to set your chosen traffic priority.
Just for reference purposes, here's a thread for an Asus router add-on, which does exactly what your looking for, which is to assign user priorities to transiting traffic:
So, there is a lot more to this particular topic, far beyond the scope of this forum. And there is always the issue of traffic flow thru the Rogers servers and network and Peering and routing with other networks (which has never been discussed in the forum). There is a gaming thread which can be used to submit problems and queries as well, located here:
I think what you're currently seeing is due to the modem itself, but, there is always the possibility that there are network and routing issues mixed in as well.
Hope this provides some answers, even if its not what you're hoping for.
Thanks for the detailed response, that is much more information that I was expecting and probably more than I could even understand haha. I do have an Asus RT-AC1200 router that I have tested, the only measure that showed any promise was limiting the download bandwidth per machine to 25 Mbps and the upload to 10 Mbps. That allowed my girlfriend to watch Netflix partially in HD, although it would switch back to SD every 30-60 seconds; while I managed to play a game for a few minutes until the packet loss turned it into an unbearable mess. I am not sure a custom QoS addon would make much difference unfortunately as I appear to be battling something in the modem itself.
I will admit I find this whole situation quite confusing, I never expected to signup for a package with Gigabit in the title that could not consistently stream in HD nor allow the end user to play an online game comfortably. Perhaps it is more inline with families who enjoying high speed browsing of Wikipedia with each other? Haha
I sincerely hope they someday find a solution to this issue. It saddens me to have to seek service elsewhere. Hopefully Roger's technology catches up to the quality of their customer service soon!