Menu
Reply
Guybrush85
  • 614
  • 9
  • 172
Rising star
625 Views
Message 1 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Hub 5 - Upstream levels

Hi all,

So I have received my hub 5 today, plugged it in, got setup and flipped straight into modem mode. 

I'm on a gig 1 connection and via port 4 on the hub into an Asus AX86 doing the speedtest directly on the router, I'm getting 1148 and 54 upload on the 2.5Gbit port - all sounds good so far.

After things settled a little I went check out hub stats and the upstream doesn't look right. 

Status page - What is ranged? 😕

Acquired Downstream Channel(Hz)330000000Locked
Ranged Upstream Channel(Hz)53700000Ranged
Provisioning StateOnlineOperational
 
Downstream all 3.0 channels looks fine and in spec, although there's no visibility of the DOCSIS 3.1 channel anywhere.

Upstream - why am I at QAM32?

15370000040.35120QAM 3210
24620000039.85120QAM 3211
33940000039.35120QAM 3212
43260000039.35120QAM 3213

Lastly the network logs:

29-11-2021 17:24:21errorDHCP RENEW WARNING - Field invalid in response v4 option;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:08:50noticeCM-STATUS message sent. Event Type Code: 5; Chan ID: 159; DSID: N/A; MAC Addr: N/A; OFDM/OFDMA Profile ID: N/A.;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:08:30noticeREGISTRATION COMPLETE - Waiting for Operational status
29-11-2021 17:08:25warningRNG-RSP CCAP Commanded Power in Excess of 6 dB Below the Value Corresponding to the Top of the DRW;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:08:25warningDynamic Range Window violation
29-11-2021 17:08:25warningDynamic Range Window violation
29-11-2021 17:08:25warningRNG-RSP CCAP Commanded Power in Excess of 6 dB Below the Value Corresponding to the Top of the DRW;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:08:24warningREG-RSP-MP Mismatch Between Calculated Value for P1.6hi Compared to CCAP Provided Value;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:08:19noticeDS profile assignment change. DS Chan ID: 32; Previous Profile: ; New Profile: 1 2 3.;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:51criticalDHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:41criticalDHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:36criticalDHCP FAILED - Critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:35criticalDHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:28criticalDHCP FAILED - Critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:27criticalDHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:25criticalDHCP FAILED - Critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:24criticalDHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:24criticalDHCP FAILED - Critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:16criticalDHCP FAILED - Critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:15criticalDHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:15noticeTLV-11 - unrecognized OID;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:12warningDHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:11criticalDHCP FAILED - Critical field invalid in response ;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:07:10noticeHonoring MDD; IP provisioning mode = IPv4
29-11-2021 17:07:06criticalSYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire QAM/QPSK symbol timing;;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 17:06:56criticalSYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire QAM/QPSK symbol timing;;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 16:41:34criticalSYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire QAM/QPSK symbol timing;;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
29-11-2021 16:41:32criticalREG-RSP - invalid format or not recognized;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.1;
--------------------------------------------------------
Look behind you, a three-headed monkey

0 Kudos
Reply
Adduxi
  • 5.75K
  • 468
  • 1.44K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
620 Views
Message 2 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

As the Hub 5 is "invite only" there are very few users so far with the knowledge you are seeking  😉

I'm a Very Insightful Person, I'm here to share knowledge, I don't work for Virgin Media. Learn more

Have I helped? Click Mark as Helpful Answer or use Kudos to say thanks

0 Kudos
Reply
Guybrush85
  • 614
  • 9
  • 172
Rising star
614 Views
Message 3 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

Sharing the live graph:

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/broadband/monitoring/quality/share/thumb/57b3a331088707b1fab72beea46e...

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

0 Kudos
Reply
Guybrush85
  • 614
  • 9
  • 172
Rising star
610 Views
Message 4 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels


@Adduxi wrote:

As the Hub 5 is "invite only" there are very few users so far with the knowledge you are seeking  😉


Yes well it was a little different for me. I was following the hub 5 thread and someone posted a live link to request one, so I did. I didn't expect it to arrive when I noticed the link was taken down a couple of days later, but 2 weeks later it arrived! 

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

0 Kudos
Reply
jem101
  • 3.47K
  • 348
  • 1.59K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
595 Views
Message 5 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

The upstream channels will drop to 32 QAM if the line is a bit too noisy to maintain a stable connection at 64 QAM. This is normal behaviour and as you are getting the rated upstream speed, VM will argue that there's nothing to worry about.

Now it might, and I'll stress might, cause you some latency issues but your BQM above didn't look too shoddy.

0 Kudos
Reply
Guybrush85
  • 614
  • 9
  • 172
Rising star
590 Views
Message 6 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels


@jem101 wrote:

The upstream channels will drop to 32 QAM if the line is a bit too noisy to maintain a stable connection at 64 QAM. This is normal behaviour and as you are getting the rated upstream speed, VM will argue that there's nothing to worry about.

Now it might, and I'll stress might, cause you some latency issues but your BQM above didn't look too shoddy.


Thanks for this. The odd thing is that it was locked at 64 beforehand. I have a 6db multiband attenuator on it right now, just to rule it out, I have a 3db (which will probably get my downstream power levels a bit too high) and a 6db forward path attenuator, which will mean the upstream power level will show lower.

I will test both once it's not netflix happy hour in the house just to rule it out.

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

0 Kudos
Reply
Andrew-G
  • 9.77K
  • 1.58K
  • 4.7K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
583 Views
Message 7 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

As stated, we have little to no experience of the Hub 5, but the network log you posted is troubling - whilst the syntax of messages is different to other hubs, there's sufficient commonality to see that the connection has been erratic, with power and ranging problems, and a few instances of channel loss.  The fact that the hub has filled up so quickly with DHCP messages that I think don't indicate much still says there's something going on that shouldn't be.  Whilst not universally so, there is a common theme that upstream problems are associated with those types of log errors, and erratic connections.

Quite how you'll get VM to pay attention I don't know.  If you ring it in, some untrained script reader will tell you that there's nothing wrong.  BQM looks as though there may be an underlying utilisation issue that VM are using Hub 4's and (one must assume) Hub 5's to help resolve, but that doesn't explain the error messages.  You weren't playing around with the hub's connections at the times that the network log was indicating non-DHCP errors, were you?

I'm a Very Insightful Person, I'm here to share knowledge, I don't work for Virgin Media. Learn more

Have I helped? Click Mark as Helpful Answer or use Kudos to say thanks

0 Kudos
Reply
-tony-
  • 18.92K
  • 1.44K
  • 4.7K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
571 Views
Message 8 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

i assume you have taken route 1 and re booted - in most cases it does little to nothing but in the odd case its worth while

____________________

Tony
0 Kudos
Reply
Guybrush85
  • 614
  • 9
  • 172
Rising star
549 Views
Message 9 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

Yeah, tried all the usual stuff. Some of the messages was during it's first boot up, so hard to say for certain if they will return - will need to watch that.

I remembered that when the link was available I'd sent it to a friend who's in the same area as me. He's had his installed a few days, got him to screenshot me the stats and it's showing the same thing with ranged upstream and QAM 32.

Will see how the next 24 hours goes on the BQM and if I see any weird an wonderful latency issues due to this 'ranged' upstream, I will look at getting the Hub 4 back up and running (assuming this is simple enough).

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

0 Kudos
Reply
Andrew-G
  • 9.77K
  • 1.58K
  • 4.7K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
524 Views
Message 10 of 25
Flag for a moderator

Re: Hub 5 - Upstream levels

Unless you had the BQM running beforehand and seen that the Hub 4 offered a clean BQM, no log error messages, and consistent upstream modulation, then I'm not convinced that the Hub 4 would be any better, as there's no obvious reason to expect the Hub 5 will be worse at managing the noise issues that can occur on a DOCSIS connection.  I'd certainly expect more glitches in the Hub 5 user interface and router firmware as the device is newer, but those aren't really involved in the cable modem activity which is mostly what a BQM monitors, and the cable modem is essentially mathematics processing most of which I'd expect to be done in hardware.

If you look at the BQM trace from 1am this morning to 5:50am, that's as good as you'll ever see on DOCSIS, and suggest there's nothing wrong with the hub, but the nastiness that's very obvious elsewhere looks like line conditions are deteriorating when the local network is busy.  

I'm a Very Insightful Person, I'm here to share knowledge, I don't work for Virgin Media. Learn more

Have I helped? Click Mark as Helpful Answer or use Kudos to say thanks

0 Kudos
Reply