UltimateHigh
join:2004-02-11
Monticello, ME
| Connection problems
I've been having connection problems(packet loss, slow web page loading) for awhile now and tech support just love to not do a damn thing... Anyways, here's some info: Linksys Cable Modem: BEFCMU10 ver. 4 -- Package is a 4mb/1mb... I have never reached 3MB, let alone 4MB's though.
Lock Status Operational
Modulation 64QAM
Channel ID 0
Provisioned Rate 4096 kbps
Symbol Rate 5056.941 Ksym/sec
Downstream Power 10.6 dBmV
SNR 40.9 dB
Upstream Channel
Lock Status Operational
Modulation QPSK
Channel ID 2
Provisioned Rate 1024 kbps
Symbol Rate 2560 Ksym/sec
Upstream Power 53.0 dBmV
2008-04-11 21:09:07 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
2008-04-02 14:19:13 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire FEC framing
2008-04-02 14:19:10 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire QAM/QPSK symbol timing
2008-04-02 14:13:59 critical Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Unicast Maintenance opportunities received - T4 timeout
2008-04-02 14:13:31 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to receive MAC SYNC frame within time-out period
2008-04-02 14:02:56 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
2008-04-02 14:02:50 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
2008-04-02 14:02:46 critical Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Unicast Maintenance opportunities received - T4 timeout
2008-04-02 14:02:13 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
2008-04-02 02:24:09 critical Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Unicast Maintenance opportunities received - T4 timeout
2008-04-02 02:23:41 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to receive MAC SYNC frame within time-out period
2008-03-31 21:41:58 critical Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Unicast Maintenance opportunities received - T4 timeout
2008-03-31 21:41:30 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to receive MAC SYNC frame within time-out period
2008-03-31 14:24:45 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
2008-03-30 19:54:09 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to receive MAC SYNC frame within time-out period
2008-03-30 14:13:44 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
2008-03-29 02:34:54 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
2008-03-21 01:55:57 critical Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Unicast Maintenance opportunities received - T4 timeout
2008-03-21 01:55:30 critical SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to receive MAC SYNC frame within time-out period
1970-01-01 00:01:41 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:01:36 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
1970-01-01 00:00:28 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
1970-01-01 00:00:27 critical REG RSP not received
1970-01-01 00:00:16 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:00:13 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
1970-01-01 00:00:13 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:00:13 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:00:13 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:00:12 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:00:10 critical DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
1970-01-01 00:00:10 critical Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - T3 time-out
1970-01-01 00:00:08 critical No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out |
|
daveinpoway
join:2006-07-03
Poway, CA
| Not sure if this will correct everything, but it will definitely help if you get your upstream power down below 50 dBmv. Make sure you have no more than one splitter between where the cable enters the house and your modem's input. If you've done this, and the upstream power is still high, time for a tech visit (could be a bad splitter or cable, but impossible to diagnose without being there). |
|
MadMANN
Premium
join:2005-08-19
 ·Comcast
| reply to UltimateHigh
I guess my first question is what you would expect tech support to do, other than the usual phone troubleshooting? They can't physically do anything at your home, so the next step would be to send a tech, who has the tools to help you.
The next question is to ask if you have an amplifier. Your forward levels are pretty high for having an upstream as high as it is. If not, then you should have a tech check the lines and make sure that the tap levels are balanced. If your cable modem is installed correctly with the right cable & connectors, only one split between the main drop and your modem, no amp, and no splitter problems, then my guess is a plant problem.
If you do have an amp in your house, take the modem off of it and see if that helps. |
|
UltimateHigh
join:2004-02-11
Monticello, ME
| reply to UltimateHigh
I have had a tech come out, do whatever a tech does and walk away satisfied... Of course, that "fix" lasted a mere 3 hours before it was back to it's annoying ways. i feel like I'm going in circles(for months) with everyone that is involved with the ISP.
I do not have an amplifier and I will probably check out the splitter tomorrow. |
|
UltimateHigh
join:2004-02-11
Monticello, ME
| reply to UltimateHigh
So here are some results after consulting with my ISP again and recieving a new modem:
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Documents and Settings\adam>tracert www.yahoo.com
Tracing route to www.yahoo-ht3.akadns.net [69.147.114.210]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 14 ms 37 ms 42 ms 10.0.99.1
2 57 ms 18 ms 11 ms 66.186.180.209
3 43 ms 15 ms 15 ms 66.186.173.37
4 65 ms 64 ms 58 ms pwn-pi-mont-core.pwless.net [66.186.173.43]
5 65 ms * 61 ms pi-rtr-wt.mainewireless.net [64.89.247.242]
6 * 58 ms 54 ms 64.89.249.97
7 48 ms 101 ms 88 ms 74.221.67.130
8 47 ms 245 ms 190 ms 74.221.67.134
9 185 ms 30 ms 32 ms 198.164.27.13
10 47 ms * 71 ms ge-0-2-2.cr02.stjh.nb.aliant.net [142.166.211.13
0]
11 243 ms 261 ms 280 ms rtp629047rts [64.230.203.29]
12 293 ms 324 ms 309 ms core2-saintjohnnb_pos5-0.net.bell.ca [64.230.167
.73]
13 292 ms 218 ms 257 ms core3-montreal02_pos2-3.net.bell.ca [64.230.147.
45]
14 276 ms 284 ms 313 ms bx4-montreal02_so-0-0-0.net.bell.ca [64.230.170.
174]
15 258 ms 236 ms 246 ms if-6-0-0.mcore4.mtt-montreal.teleglobe.net [216.
6.115.29]
16 233 ms 254 ms 225 ms pos-channel1.mcore3.nyy-newyork.teleglobe.net [2
16.6.81.17]
17 235 ms 271 ms 212 ms if-12-0-0-723.core4.aeq-ashburn.teleglobe.net [2
16.6.42.61]
18 89 ms 111 ms 60 ms 64.86.85.38
19 80 ms 58 ms 59 ms ge-3-1-0-p141.msr1.re1.yahoo.com [216.115.108.59
]
20 74 ms 57 ms 64 ms gi1-23.bas-a1.re3.yahoo.com [68.142.238.67]
21 70 ms 64 ms 84 ms f1.www.vip.re3.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]
Trace complete.
C:\Documents and Settings\adam>
Lock Status Operational
Modulation 64QAM
Channel ID 0
Provisioned Rate 4096 kbps
Symbol Rate 5056.941 Ksym/sec
Downstream Power 9.6 dBmV
SNR 39.2 dB
Lock Status Operational
Modulation QPSK
Channel ID 2
Provisioned Rate 1024 kbps
Symbol Rate 2560 Ksym/sec
Upstream Power 51.0 dBmV
I actually think that my connection is actually WORSE now. |
|
daveinpoway
join:2006-07-03
Poway, CA
| I accept that some folks may disagree, but I feel that your 51 dBmv upstream power is still too high. Is the new modem you received the same model/version as the old one? If they are different, it could be that the reason your speeds are now worse is that the new model is more handicapped by the upstream issues than the old one was.
I noted that in a previous post, you indicated you were going to check out the splitter. What did you determine? |
|
UltimateHigh
join:2004-02-11
Monticello, ME
| reply to UltimateHigh
My power level is back up 53 dBmv and I went to check out the splitter but I really didn't know what I was looking at. I'm not positive as to what a splitter looks like but I have an idea and I don't think I saw one out there.
I've requested that a tech come out and look again. This time I will have some data for him to look at. |
|
