cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Hub 3 / Compal CH7465-LG (TG2492LG) and CGNV4 Latency Cause

Datalink
Up to speed

Good Day Ladies and Gentlemen,

Greetings from the other side of the pond, so to speak.  Over the last few weeks I've been perusing various user forums across North America and Europe for issues related to Intel Puma 6 modem latency.  Of those forums, your Hub 3 stands out as yet another Puma 6 based modem where users see continuous latency no matter what site is used or what online game is played. Considering all of the problems that are on the go, the following information should be of interest to all Hub 3, Compal CH7465-LG and Hitron CGNV4 modem users.  There is much more to post regarding this, so this is a start, to alert VM users as to the real cause of the latency and hopefully engage the VM engineering staff, via the forum staff, with Arris.  I am surprised to see that there has been no mention on this board of users from other ISPs who are suffering the exact same issues with their modems, so, this may come as a surprise to some, and possibly old news to others.

So, the short story ........

The Hub 3 / Compal CH7465-LG (TG2492LG) & Hiton CGNV4 modems are Intel Puma 6 / 6 Media Gateway (MG) based modems.  These modems exhibit high latency to the modem and high latency thru the modem.  The latency affects all IPV4 and IPV6 protocols, so it will be seen on every internet application and game.  The basic cause is the processing of the data packets thru a CPU software based process instead of thru the hardware processor / accelerator.  It appears that a higher priority task runs periodically, causing the packet processing to halt, and then resume.  This is observed as latency in applications and in ping tests to the modem and beyond.  For the last several weeks, Hitron, along with Intel and Rogers Communications in Canada have been addressing the latency issue within the Hitron CGNxxx series modems.  To date, only the IPV4 ICMP latency has been resolved.  Although this is only one protocol, it does show that a Puma 6MG modem is capable of using the hardware processor / accelerator with good results.  Currently Rogers is waiting for further firmware updates from Hitron which should include an expanded list of resolved protocol latency issues.  For Arris modems, "Netdog" an Arris engineer indicated last week that Arris was onboard to address the issue for the Arris SB6190 modem.  That should be considered as good news for any Arris modem (read Hub 3) user as Arris should be able to port those changes over to other Puma 6/6MG modems fairly quickly.  This is not a trivial exercise and will probably take several weeks to accomplish.  Note that there is no guarantee at this point that it is possible to shift all packet processing to the hardware processor / accelerator without suffering from any packet loss side effects.  Time will tell if all of the technical issues can be resolved with the current hardware included in the Puma 6/6MG chipset.  Last night, Netdog loaded beta firmware on selected test modems on the Comcast Communications network.  As this was only done last night, it's too soon to tell what this version resolves and if it was successful or not.  Netdog has contacts with staff at Comcast, Rogers, Charter and Cox Communications to fan out beta versions and modifications for testing.  I'd say its time to add Virgin Media and/or Liberty Global to that group as well.

Recent activity:

Approx three weeks ago a DSLReports user, xymox1 started a thread where he reported high latency to an Arris SB6190 and illustrated that with numerous MultiPing plots.  This is the same latency that I and other users with Rogers communications have been dealing with for months so it came as no surprise.  As well as reporting via that thread, xymox1 took it upon himself to email several staff members at Arris, Intel, Cablelabs and others.  The result of that campaign was Netdog's announcement, last week, that Arris was fully engaged at resolving the issue.  That has led to last nights release of beta firmware, although as I indicated its too early to determine what the beta firmware resolves, if anything.


The original thread that xymox1 started is here:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31079834-ALL-SB6190-is-a-terrible-modem-Intel-Puma-6-MaxLinear-mis...


Yesterday, DSLReports issued a news story covering the thread:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/The-Arris-SB6190-Modem-Puma-6-Chipset-Have-Some-Major-Issues-138...


Today, Arris responded:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Arris-Tells-us-Its-Working-With-Intel-on-SB6190-Puma6-Problems-1...


That response was also picked by Multichannel.com

http://www.multichannel.com/news/distribution/intel-arris-working-firmware-fix-sb6190-modem/409379

This is more news likely to appear in the next few days as additional tech and news staff pick up on this issue.


Hub 3 observations:

Like many others using a Puma 6/6MG modem, Hub 3 users are experiencing latency when they ping the modem, or ping a target outside of the home, game online or use low latency applications.  The common misconception is that this is Buffer Bloat. It's not. Its most likely a case of the packet processing stopping while the CPU processes a higher priority task.  The packet processing is done via the CPU no matter what mode the modem is operating in, modem mode or router mode and no matter what IPV4 or IPV6 protocol is used.  Normally, the latency is just that, latency.  The exception are UDP packets. In this case there is latency and packet loss.  The result of that is delayed and failed DNS lookups, and poor game performance for games that use UDP for player/server comms or player/player comms.


Can this be fixed?

So far, it appears that the answer is yes.  Rogers Communications issued beta firmware to a small group of test modems in October.  This version shifted the IPV4 ICMP processing from the CPU to the hardware processor / accelerator, resulting in greatly improved performance in ping latency.  At the present time we are waiting for the next version firmware which should shift other protocols over to the hardware processor / accelerator.  That can be seen in the following post:

http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/forums/forumtopicpage/board-id/Getting_connected/message-id/369...

The details and results of last nights beta release to the Comcast group have yet to be seen.

At this point there is enough reading to keep most staff and users busy.  My intention is to post some of the history leading up to this point and instructions on how to detect the latency and packet loss.  This is not thru the use of a BQM.  I had hoped to post this all at once but events are moving much faster than I had thought they would.  For now this should suffice to get the ball rolling.

Below is a link to a post with a couple of HrPing plots from my 32 channel modem to the connected CMTS.  This shows the latency that is observed and reflects what others have posted in this forum using Pingplotter and HrPing.

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31106550-

HrPing is one of the freebie applications that can be used to monitor the latency to and thru the modem. 

Pingplots with Pingplotter which show the latency from my modem to the CMTS can be found in the first two to three rows of my online image library at Rogers Communications, located below.  They are essentially what the BQM would look like if you were able to zoom into the plot to the point where you could see the individual ping spikes.  Those ping spikes are common to Puma 6 and Puma 6MG modems.

http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/media/gallerypage/user-id/829158

 

 

 [MOD EDIT: Subject heading changed to assist community]

4,478 REPLIES 4,478


@philjohn wrote:

Looking very good!

Here's my latest BQM from today, whole family has been out riding rollercoasters so very minimal traffic (mostly keepalive from VOIP phone to SipGate) and showing a very stable connection:

 

My Broadband Ping - CrazyCritters


If you have a windows machine to hand and haven't installed it in the past, you can get a free trial of Pingplotter. If you set up TCP to google and set the interval at 0.1 you should be able to see how that looks. You can of course compare to ICMP, which should look a lot better than the last time I did it.

--------------------------------------------------------
Look behind you, a three-headed monkey

Yep, have a gaming rig upstairs, wireless, but can run a 10m cat 6 cable to the router for an hour or so to test, I'll do that tonight.

hammic
Up to speed

About a week after installing my Superhub 2ac, this is what my recent ping chart looks like:

259jsx2

 

My ping chart in around 2016:

dwzaj4

 

Is it worth while creating another thread to see what the cause could be?

macalac
Tuning in

vdslvdslvmediavmedia

I'm about to quit VM, so just had a VDSL installed couple of days ago and here's my jitter graph comparison.

Out of pure curiosity, does the underlying architecture of DSL make the graph so clean, or should I ever expect a healthy fibre connection to look similar?

 

Md0h
On our wavelength

I just gave my notice to virgin this week over this issue.

Tried to get a Hub 2ac but virgin were having none of it. Every phone I made they denied there is an issue.

Trying to cancel was a real stress fest too as the chap refused to accept my reasons for leaving. After saying I want to cancel 34 times and asking for a manager I am finally free.

Been comparing FTTC in my street to my VM 100Mb connection for 2 months and the difference in ping stability/packet loss is night and day. I can live with a drop in bandwidth for a better connection (hitting the wall at 80/20 on FTTC).  No more massive yellow spikes and shooting blanks in games.

Good Bye Virgin.

VM 100MbVM 100Mb

FTTC (ignore the red I was doing resets on the modem for configs)FTTC (ignore the red I was doing resets on the modem for configs)


@philjohn wrote:

Looking very good!

Here's my latest BQM from today, whole family has been out riding rollercoasters so very minimal traffic (mostly keepalive from VOIP phone to SipGate) and showing a very stable connection:

 

My Broadband Ping - CrazyCritters


 

Wow, mine is nothing like that.

Vivid 350/20 (FW .603), in router mode.

untitled.png

francis@archbangi7pc:~# iperf3 -c ping.online.net -p 5207 -R -u -t 62 -O 2
Connecting to host ping.online.net, port 5207
Reverse mode, remote host ping.online.net is sending
[ 4] local 192.168.0.12 port 57564 connected to 62.210.18.40 port 5207
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Jitter Lost/Total Datagrams
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 136 KBytes 1.11 Mbits/sec 1.858 ms 0/17 (0%) (omitted)
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.698 ms 0/16 (0%) (omitted)
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.037 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.093 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.066 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.068 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.058 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.076 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.090 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.058 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.050 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.059 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 10.00-11.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.075 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 11.00-12.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.084 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 12.00-13.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.065 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 13.00-14.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.090 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 14.00-15.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.086 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 15.00-16.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.084 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 16.00-17.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.064 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 17.00-18.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.100 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 18.00-19.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.091 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 19.00-20.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.101 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 20.00-21.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.107 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 21.00-22.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.108 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 22.00-23.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.081 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 23.00-24.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.105 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 24.00-25.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.084 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 25.00-26.00 sec 120 KBytes 983 Kbits/sec 0.098 ms 1/16 (6.2%)
[ 4] 26.00-27.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.059 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 27.00-28.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.072 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 28.00-29.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.068 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 29.00-30.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.106 ms 0/16 (0%)
[ 4] 30.00-31.00 sec 128 KBytes 1.05 Mbits/sec 0.090 ms 0/16 (0%)

Hub 3.0, vivid 200 with a cisco sg100 switch, disabled the wifi completely and using a dlink dir615 with ddwrt that i have had since the ambit 300
2x xbox one s, 3x nowtv boxes, ps4, downstairs pc, dlink ap are all wired up to the cisco switch with cat6 cabling, my tablet and my wifes phone are all linked to the dlink ap, if the wireless devices has a lan port then ill find a way of wiring it somehow and completely get rid of the dlink!

Only issue i have with VM is the dropping out in connection but thats due to one of the cabinets on route to, However by looking at some iperf3 results i can see my CMTS must be lower then some during this time, 1PM?

Hub 3.0, VIVID200 Package only

Looks like you might be in an oversubscribed area ... especially as the packet loss and average ping rises during peak hours ...


@philjohn wrote:

Looks like you might be in an oversubscribed area ... especially as the packet loss and average ping rises during peak hours ...


Seems a lucky few are in areas where VM has only just been installed or have a extremely low subscriber / usage.

My area has been oversold for coming up to 4 YEARS now... and you can see this on my BQM below, however do you think VM will push the new FW to me NOPE, will they actually do something with my CMTS to improve my connection NOPE.

Surely as I am on 24 downstream channels I should be higher up the chain for anything that may help my connection?

I would reinstall my old SH2AC but I know it will make my connection beyond useless if I do due to being in such an oversold area.

Nice to see some people are experiencing good things with the new firmware I just wish VM would actually release it to more people it's been way to long.

Yep - it's a drawback to the way the cable network is setup in the UK - with a tree and branch model.

In Holland they are mostly a star topology, which makes it far easier to split nodes.

The big issue is that Liberty are trying to make VM attractive for a sale, probably to Vodafone, and are only going to invest minimally ... just enough so that they show a growing user base, but not enough to provide a truly world class service.

And yes, I'm on a brand new cabinet installed as part of project lightning, so aware that I'm probably on a very quiet node - especially as the entire estate already has access to 80/20 FTTC (and most can get full whack as there are frequent fibre twin cabinets throughout the main roads - it's an older estate, started in 2001, so it's not a rabbit warren like many new ones - one main road going through it).