Menu
Reply
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
696 Views
Message 1 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Packet Loss

Hello,

I have been experience a severely degraded performance for a week or so, with a constant packet loss.

My online services are not usable, I can only browse.

The connection parameters seem to be fine, i.e. the same I was seeing before, so I run a continuous ping to the first two IPs visibile in a traceroute to bbc.co.uk

Results below:

Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=62
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=62
Request timed out.
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=62
Reply from 62.252.114.121: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=62

Ping statistics for 62.252.114.121:
Packets: Sent = 824, Received = 738, Lost = 86 (10% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 6ms, Maximum = 94ms, Average = 10ms

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=59
Reply from 213.46.174.118: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 213.46.174.118:
Packets: Sent = 957, Received = 904, Lost = 53 (5% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 9ms, Maximum = 101ms, Average = 13ms

Downstream:

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

1299000000238256 qam21
2403000000140256 qam28
33950000001.239256 qam27
43870000000.740256 qam26
53790000001.538256 qam25
63230000002.238256 qam24
73150000001.938256 qam23
8307000000238256 qam22
9291000000240256 qam20
102830000001.538256 qam19
112750000001.738256 qam18
122670000001.738256 qam17
13259000000238256 qam16
142510000001.938256 qam15
15243000000238256 qam14
162350000002.438256 qam13
172270000002.438256 qam12
182190000002.738256 qam11
192110000002.538256 qam10
202030000003.238256 qam9
211950000003.538256 qam8
221870000003.938256 qam7
23179000000440256 qam6
24171000000438256 qam5

 

Upstream:

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

16030000048.3512064 qam1
25370000048512064 qam2
33940000046.5512064 qam4
44620000047.5512064 qam3

 

Thanks!

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 19.36K
  • 1.69K
  • 4.23K
Very Insightful Person
Very Insightful Person
682 Views
Message 2 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss

Nothing showing a miss with signal levels this via wired,wireless? Can you post the network log 

Since would be close to a week for the forum staff to take a look


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

Click to learn more about VIP

Use Kudos to say thanks

 

Mark as Helpful Answer if I've helped

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
679 Views
Message 3 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss

First of all, thanks for your answer.

It is a wired connection and this is the log:

Time Priority Description
2018-12-18 03:58:24.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-19 08:32:03.00 Warning! RCS Partial Service;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-19 12:35:48.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-20 22:53:17.00 Warning! RCS Partial Service;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-21 00:37:10.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-21 19:20:48.00 Error DHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-22 02:33:00.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-22 09:42:55.00 Error DHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-22 13:07:24.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-22 16:53:58.00 Error DHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;


+++ Start of the issue +++
2018-12-23 00:05:05.00 Error DHCP REBIND WARNING - Field invalid in response;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-23 01:35:49.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-26 01:43:28.00 Warning! RCS Partial Service;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-26 09:08:05.00 Error DHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-26 12:58:18.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-26 20:11:13.00 Error DHCP RENEW sent - No response for IPv4;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-27 07:14:25.00 Error DHCP REBIND WARNING - Field invalid in response;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-27 07:27:38.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;
2018-12-27 21:20:04.00 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out;CM-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CMTS-MAC=**:**:**:**:**:**;CM-QOS=1.1;CM-VER=3.0;

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
678 Views
Message 4 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss

I think you are right, the signal level are pretty much the same I had before the problem.

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
649 Views
Message 5 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss

Bumping, hoping that someone in the forum team might notice it.

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 11.48K
  • 256
  • 1.57K
horseman
Alessandro Volta
643 Views
Message 6 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss


@andf wrote:

Bumping, hoping that someone in the forum team might notice it.


Errr  Yes they would have noticed it via their "work queuing" systems but even though you didn't bother to read the other 2Million posts let alone comprehend Paul's Message 2 previously (viz:  which part of "Since would be close to a week for the forum staff to take a look" - didn't you understand? ) did you think your minimalistic diagnostic attempt would  elevate your priority above every other poster. that has patiently waited 2 - 10days for a forum response?

Instead  of  alternatively ringing 150/0345 454 1111 for a more immediate "interaction" via Customer Support? (of course  contacting offshore support is a "mixed blessing" so don't blame you for trying to avoid that - as UK and especially Swansea are far more informed and competent.

Well as  a fellow "naive optimist" I wish you the best in you endeavour.....    😛

Regards Tony
"Life is a Binary Inspired Turing Computed Hologram"(don't PM or @Mention me - in case ignoring you offends)
DEFROCKED
0 Kudos
Reply
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
639 Views
Message 7 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss

Hi Tony,

Thanks for answering my message, I have noticed the previous answer regarding the one week waiting queue.

I have already called 150 and I have been told that my connection parameters are fine, which is most probably true.

I have also explained that I am experiencing a packet loss problem, but that din't help.

Every piece of information can help the troubleshooting process, even a simple ("minimalistic") one.

  • 11.48K
  • 256
  • 1.57K
horseman
Alessandro Volta
634 Views
Message 8 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss


@andf wrote:

....Every piece of information can help the troubleshooting process, even a simple ("minimalistic") one.


Absolutely agree but as they say: "The Devil's in the detail" so invariably the "Context" is almost always probably all-important.... and thus some considerable attention  to detail with structured and methodical diagnostic path is required! 

This unfortunately excludes a large proportion of offshore Level1 albeit far less Indo-Asian Level2 but inevitably UK VM Support is (over  last 9yrs) consistently more competent.....  especially. Swansea. L2/Network Support Sites which sadly will close March-midyear 2019 (due to LG "beancounter" short sighted lack of  customer support visioning).    

Regards Tony
"Life is a Binary Inspired Turing Computed Hologram"(don't PM or @Mention me - in case ignoring you offends)
DEFROCKED
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
630 Views
Message 9 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss


@horseman wrote:

... 

Swansea. L2/Network Support Sites which sadly will close March-midyear 2019 (due to LG "beancounter" short sighted lack of  customer support visioning).    

That's really unfortunate, mainly because some competent people are losing their jobs.

I am sincerely confused by the lack of resources most companies put in their customer support department...

0 Kudos
Reply
  • 72
  • 1
  • 7
andf
Dialled in
603 Views
Message 10 of 13
Flag for a moderator

Re: Packet Loss

One last piece of information: I am in Area 15.

0 Kudos
Reply