Menu
Reply
JonWilliams
  • 4
  • 0
  • 0
Tuning in
490 Views
Message 1 of 6
Flag for a moderator

Huge Latency issues and slower than advertised speeds on day one of the service.

Hi there,

Yesterday I had VM M500 installed. As part of moving to the service I began monitoring my BQM when I noticed that the wifi connection to the TV/firestick began to drop its picture quality and in some instances say that no network was active. 

You will see from the BQM how much latency I am getting on this line at the moment.

Further to that and equally as frustrating is the speed of this network appears to fluctuate considerably.

I have no real network experience to even know what is happening here or if this being the first day of service is 'expected' but either way it looks poor and the service quality below what I am expecting.

Can someone help me and take a look at this please?

This is the BQM since yesterday;

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/broadband/monitoring/quality/share/15b65d6a17fca4f9ab5c8db895c09302e8...

Here are my Downstream, Upstream and Network Log content;

Cable Modem StatusItem Status Comments

Acquired Downstream Channel (Hz)
331000000
Locked
Ranged Upstream Channel (Hz)
46200056
Locked
Provisioning State
Online

 

Downstream bonded channels

Channel Frequency (Hz) Power (dBmV) SNR (dB) Modulation Channel ID

13310000000.540256 qam25
22670000000.240256 qam17
32750000000.238256 qam18
4283000000-0.238256 qam19
5291000000-0.438256 qam20
6299000000-0.240256 qam21
7307000000-0.538256 qam22
8315000000-0.240256 qam23
9323000000-0.238256 qam24
103390000001.238256 qam26
11347000000140256 qam27
12355000000038256 qam28
13363000000-0.238256 qam29
14371000000-138256 qam30
15379000000-1.538256 qam31
16387000000-1.538256 qam32
17395000000-1.540256 qam33
18403000000-1.738256 qam34
19411000000-2.238256 qam35
20419000000-2.238256 qam36
21427000000-2.538256 qam37
22435000000-2.738256 qam38
23443000000-3.738256 qam39
24451000000-438256 qam40

 

0 Kudos
Reply
JonWilliams
  • 4
  • 0
  • 0
Tuning in
488 Views
Message 2 of 6
Flag for a moderator

Re: Huge Latency issues & slower than advertised speeds on day one of the service.

 

Downstream bonded channels

Channel Locked Status RxMER (dB) Pre RS Errors Post RS Errors

1Locked40.3240
2Locked40.390
3Locked38.9120
4Locked38.9160
5Locked38.9120
6Locked40.3140
7Locked38.9110
8Locked40.3190
9Locked38.9220
10Locked38.6280
11Locked40.3220
12Locked38.9160
13Locked38.990
14Locked38.9140
15Locked38.6270
16Locked38.6240
17Locked40.3260
18Locked38.9280
19Locked38.9220
20Locked38.6130
21Locked38.6150
22Locked38.6240
23Locked38.6340
24Locked38.9320

 

Channel Frequency (Hz) Power (dBmV) Symbol Rate (ksps) Modulation Channel ID

1462000564.6512064 qam3
2394000834.6512064 qam4
3537000144.6512064 qam2
4603000464.6512064 qam1



Upstream bonded channels

Channel Channel Type T1 Timeouts T2 Timeouts T3 Timeouts T4 Timeouts

1ATDMA0000
2ATDMA0000
3ATDMA0000
4ATDMA0000

 

Time Priority Description

27/09/2020 14:50:27noticeLAN login Success;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
27/09/2020 10:16:16criticalNo Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
26/09/2020 21:57:20noticeLAN login Success;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
26/09/2020 21:56:22Warning!LAN login FAILED : Incorrect Username / Password / ConnectionType;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
26/09/2020 21:28:49noticeLAN login Success;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
26/09/2020 21:28:23Warning!LAN login FAILED : Incorrect Username / Password / ConnectionType;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
26/09/2020 20:38:39criticalNo Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
26/09/2020 13:02:2noticeSW download Successful - Via Config file
26/09/2020 12:59:50noticeSW Download INIT - Via Config file
22/08/2020 16:35:33noticeUnit has been restored to factory defaults from a software issued command;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
01/01/1970 00:01:37criticalNo Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
04/08/2020 18:08:44noticeSW download Successful - Via Config file
04/08/2020 18:03:15noticeSW Download INIT - Via Config file
01/01/1970 00:01:33criticalNo Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
07/06/2020 07:55:5criticalSYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Loss of Sync;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
07/06/2020 07:40:17ErrorDHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
07/06/2020 07:35:4criticalSYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Loss of Sync;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
07/06/2020 03:44:56ErrorDHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
06/06/2020 21:00:14criticalSYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Loss of Sync;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
06/06/2020 19:54:14ErrorDHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
0 Kudos
Reply
Andrew-G
  • 6.99K
  • 1.22K
  • 3.06K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
463 Views
Message 3 of 6
Flag for a moderator

Re: Huge Latency issues & slower than advertised speeds on day one of the service.

The downstream power levels have a wider range than may be ideal, but all are within the accepted range.  SNR is good, and upstream power and modulation are OK.  The downstream error counts are possibly OK, but depend on when the hub was last restarted because that clears the error counts - at the time you took the data there was no evidence of problems there.  Network log doesn't tell us much so far (other than that you've been issued with a re-boxed secondhand hub that's had the baked bean stains cleaned off with a baby wipe by a trained professional).

However, your BQM is troubling.  It suggests two things to me: A noisy line, and over-utilisation.  The noisy line is something that can (the vast majority of the time) be fixed fairly readily.  Over-utilisation....well, that's a different matter.  Now, note that at the moment over-utilisation is my suspicion, not proven.

Over-utilisation manifests in a BQM as massive increases in latency that start around 7:00-8:00am, grows through the day, often become intense during the late afternoon and evening, and then fades away between 11:30pm and 1:00am.  Performance during the small hours is usually good because there's little internet traffic.  What do you see in your BQM?

If it is the case, then the cause is that VM have sold more contracts in the area than the local equipment has the capacity to handle.  They're currently blaming Covid for many of these problems, and there's a bit of truth in that, but the widespread complaints about over utilisation were picking up before lockdown, so I think there's been a policy decision by the company last year to sell more even if that causes problems (not that I can prove that).  

Sometimes VM invest to fix over-utilisation.  And often they don't.  Doing so is slow, complicated and expensive, and the financial returns are usually not there.  From their point of view better to stick their fingers in their ears to drown out the complaints, maybe issue a fault number that keeps getting shoved two months down the road every time it is due to be resolved, and hope that customers either grow accustomed to the shonky service, or leave in sufficient numbers to bring traffic back within capacity.  There's little you can do to change this.  VM's complaint process won't change company behaviour.  Appealing to the industry arbitration scheme CISAS won't help because they can't force VM to make investments.  And you can complain to Ofcom, but they are useless, a true chocolate teapot amongst regulators.

Your main options:

1) Put up with this hoping it gets better.  It may, it may not, and there will be no credible or useful guidance from VM on whether they really plan to invest to fix the fault.  Possibly after lockdown has fully gone then things will improve.  Are you a gambler?

2)  Use your 14 day penalty free cancellation window, and investigate your options with other ISPs.  

Sorry, this is not what you want the hear, nor what I'd like to advise, but that's how I think the land lies.  I hope that the forum staff can offer more clarity, and possibly an alternative explanation and a credible fix date.  But if they admit there's an over-utilisation fault you should cancel, and if they deny there's a problem likewise.  You may want to phone to cancel, the customer retention team will agree to send a technician, and then your best option is to agree to this, but only if they confirm that your 14 day cancellation window starts ONLY when VM have connected you with a connection that offers the speed, reliability and latency performance that you would reasonably expect from a major cable ISP.

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

JonWilliams
  • 4
  • 0
  • 0
Tuning in
447 Views
Message 4 of 6
Flag for a moderator

Re: Huge Latency issues & slower than advertised speeds on day one of the service.

I really appreciate that response. It is exceptionally insightful and a little anger inducing 🙂 

Can someone from the forum staff please respond ASAP to address this specifically? I hope that the forum staff can offer more clarity, and possibly an alternative explanation and a credible fix date in relation to the above post?

In the meantime I will reach out to Virgin and have them take a look at the line and see if that can be looked at.

What a hell of an experience day one of a ISP......

 

0 Kudos
Reply
JonWilliams
  • 4
  • 0
  • 0
Tuning in
398 Views
Message 5 of 6
Flag for a moderator

Re: Huge Latency issues & slower than advertised speeds on day one of the service.

Can I please have a response from a member of the forum staff today? All the data is doing at this moment is confirming the contents of the above post. 

Right now, it simply looks as though as the neighbourhood wakes up the connection becomes hugely unclean and latency becomes crazy. 

Thanks,

Jon

0 Kudos
Reply
MikeRobbo
  • 15.27K
  • 1.17K
  • 1.94K
Alessandro Volta
394 Views
Message 6 of 6
Flag for a moderator

Re: Huge Latency issues & slower than advertised speeds on day one of the service.

The VM Forum Staff normally take a few days to pick up a thread.

Or

You can try phoning in; 08:00 is the best time.


*********************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
BT Smart Hub 2 with 70Mbs Download,18Mbs Upload, 9.17ms Latency & 0.35ms Jitter.