Is there anyone here that can fix my cable modem problems th

[imtim83 0]

I am willing to call as much as i got to, or whatever because i really want this fixed because i really use to love my Cox@Home but lately it hasnt been what it should be at all. Not even close. Been having the service for 2 years +

With paying from $45 to $50 a month for this is just not fair because you know why rise the price when you arent going to get the same speed or better for paying more. Doesnt make sense. But anyone out there that can help me please please do. I am willing to do anything to get this problem fixed. I mean does anyone out there work for Cox@Home in louisiana, work for @Home in general , a big CEO of @Home, anyone important out there that deals with @Home, anyone that works out there for above.net routers, or above.net in anyway? I am trying to find everyone and anyone who can help me. I been waiting 6 to 8 months for getting these other problems fixed and i think they had lots of time. Also on there website Cox@Home in louisiana they say they are contantly proactively upgrading. But i dont think thats the case because this would have not happened.

 

Please reply

Any help is very appreicated

 

 

Tracing route to www.download.com [64.124.237.148]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

 

2 44 ms 87 ms 60 ms 10.68.3.129

3 20 ms 56 ms 109 ms 10.83.128.49

4 79 ms 12 ms 30 ms c1-pos9-1.nworla1.home.net [24.7.78.109]

5 106 ms 32 ms 41 ms c1-pos3-0.atlnga1.home.net [24.7.65.194]

6 49 ms 46 ms 135 ms c1-pos2-0.washdc1.home.net [24.7.65.209]

7 1142 ms 1154 ms 1155 ms above-athome-oc3.iad.above.net [209.249.203.81]

 

8 1110 ms 1112 ms 1154 ms core1-core3-oc48.iad1.above.net [209.249.203.34]

 

9 1177 ms 1189 ms 1171 ms sjc2-iad1-oc48.sjc2.above.net [216.200.127.26]

10 1212 ms 1225 ms 1206 ms sfo1-sjc2-oc48-2.sfo1.above.net [208.184.232.54]

 

11 1190 ms 1185 ms 1194 ms main2colo78-core1-oc48.sfo1.above.net [208.184.2

28.10]

12 1201 ms 1280 ms 1185 ms 209.133.66.13.above-gw2.cnet.com [209.133.66.13]

 

13 1220 ms 1225 ms 1188 ms abv-sfo1-redirect.cnet.com [64.124.237.148]

 

Trace complete.

 

 

 

Tracing route to www.techtv.com [208.185.233.134]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

 

2 10 ms 9 ms 38 ms 10.68.3.129

3 73 ms 159 ms 20 ms 10.83.128.49

4 46 ms 19 ms 18 ms c1-pos9-0.nworla1.home.net [24.7.72.85]

5 37 ms 45 ms 22 ms c1-pos3-0.atlnga1.home.net [24.7.65.194]

6 56 ms 42 ms 84 ms c1-pos2-0.washdc1.home.net [24.7.65.209]

7 1103 ms 1106 ms 1113 ms above-athome-oc3.iad.above.net [209.249.203.81]

 

8 1116 ms 1110 ms 1221 ms core1-core3-oc48.iad1.above.net [209.249.203.34]

 

9 1200 ms 1220 ms 1205 ms sjc2-iad1-oc48.sjc2.above.net [216.200.127.26]

10 1199 ms 1277 ms 1203 ms main1colo4-core3-oc12.sjc2.above.net [208.184.21

0.162]

11 1206 ms 1177 ms 1194 ms 64.124.32.151.e-media.com [64.124.32.151]

12 1193 ms 1196 ms 1187 ms www.zdtv.com [208.185.233.134]

 

Trace complete.

 

 

 

Look at how much my first hop changes it should be 10ms or less

Plus 2nd hop shouldnt be that high either or 3rd.

Also the 1000 ms + is very bad too.

[Brian Frank 0]

I don't know if this means anything, but Comcast@Home has had major woes for many subscribers in the NE Indiana area--specifically Fort Wayne.

Another option would be to buy a cable modem at a store, but I have no clue on how well they would work. They better do a good job, as they cost around $150 at Best Buy. Then again, that may not be your problem.

Try replacing the cable between the modem and your PC if it's a direct link, or between the modem and whatever device is hooked up to it if you have it.

Also, if a lot of people have jumped on cable internet in your neighborhood, there's really not much you can do about it.

[CUViper 0]

Quote:

6 49 ms 46 ms 135 ms c1-pos2-0.washdc1.home.net [24.7.65.209]
7 1142 ms 1154 ms 1155 ms above-athome-oc3.iad.above.net [209.249.203.81]

6 56 ms 42 ms 84 ms c1-pos2-0.washdc1.home.net [24.7.65.209]
7 1103 ms 1106 ms 1113 ms above-athome-oc3.iad.above.net [209.249.203.81]

These huge jumps are clear indicators that the biggest problem is on their connection to above.net (probably their bandwidth provider). This kind of thing will affect ALL of their users.... have you sent the tracert results to them? Well, good luck getting them to fix it - don't let up on them about this....

[clutch 1]

CUViper is right, the vast majority of your problem is related to the connectivity of those hops. I had the same issue with RoadRunner when we were being switched out of Ohio (I am in Wisconsin), and complained. A couple of days later, I was switched out of New Jersey and had a MAJOR increase in performance. It turns out that there was some serious equipment issues in Ohio and it couldn't support all the expansion going on in the surrounding states by RoadRunner. We had some more intermittent problems sometimes lasting up to a couple of weeks at a shot while RoadRunner was building out the area here, but once the finished the infrastructure upgrades we haven't had any more issues since. I was setup last November, and I am now faster than I ever was before.

 

So, report your traces to support over and over again so they will get logged. At some point, they will either tell you what is going on (support may not even know either, so don't get too mad at them for not telling you) and give you a timeframe for the repair, or they will simply fix/reroute the issue.

[Busby 0]

I personally just did a traceroute and noticed that I use above.net servers to for routing but I don't have bad ping times. It appears as though above.net is the provider for ATT now.

 

C:\>tracert www.techtv.com

 

Tracing route to www.techtv.com [208.185.233.134]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

1 10 ms <10 ms <10 ms NET-SERVER [10.0.0.1]

2 10 ms 10 ms 20 ms 10.6.0.1

3 20 ms 10 ms 10 ms 209-186-12-1.hsacorp.net [209.186.12.1]

4 20 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.127.170.77

5 10 ms 10 ms 20 ms gbr1-p57.attga.ip.att.net [12.123.197.194]

6 11 ms 30 ms 10 ms gr1-p3100.attga.ip.att.net [12.123.20.194]

7 10 ms 20 ms 10 ms above-att.atl-oc3.above.net [216.200.254.173]

8 30 ms 20 ms 50 ms ord1-atl1-oc3.ord1.above.net [208.185.156.221]

9 30 ms 30 ms 20 ms core2-ord1-oc48.ord2.above.net [208.185.0.202]

10 110 ms 100 ms 110 ms sjc2-ord2-oc48.sjc2.above.net [208.184.233.45]

11 110 ms 100 ms 110 ms main1colo4-core4-oc12.sjc2.above.net [208.184.23

2.214]

12 111 ms 110 ms 110 ms 64.124.32.151.e-media.com [64.124.32.151]

13 100 ms 111 ms 110 ms www.zdtv.com [208.185.233.134]

 

Trace complete.

[imtim83 0]

Here is the email i got from Above.net

 

The problem is capacity between @home and abovenet, and we are working to increase it.

There is nothing more that can be done untill the new capacity arrives.

 

Jason

[CUViper 0]

Quote:

P.S.=> That would stink! We cable & dsl folks pay pretty darn good money over the course of a year & nearly a grand over two years (that's a NEW PC if you think about it, & state of the art)... he deserves the bandwidth he paid for if you ask me! apk

Just a note on this - most people don't seem to realize that cable/dsl connections are extremely cheap for the amount of bandwidth they provide. Consider the fact that a dedicated ptp T1 (1.54 mbps) could easily cost over $1000 per month.... and here you are complaining about $1000 over two years?

Don't get me wrong, I love my cable connection, but you should realize how good a deal it really is....

[clutch 1]

Our HDSL T1 costs us about $1500/month. And we don't even get any zippy POP3 accounts with it...

 

[Manos 0]

MAN I'M PISSED OFF TOTALLY NOW!!!

 

I live in sweden. And i always thought of the US as a great country, espescially regarding the IT development.

 

And you say you pay like $50 a month for DSL. I have ADSL 521kbps and i pay $30 a month. I can live with the $20 buck difference... I know that the US is a little more expensive.

 

BUT!!! When U say that a T1 at lameass 1.54Mbit costs $1500 a month then that really makes me mad out of my skin!!! Why whould anyone pay that silly amount of money for that bad connection?

 

The ISP im using is a former gov. owned company named Telia and they supply the best coverage over sweden regarding so called broadband Internet.

 

The company BoNet offers a 2.5Mbit con (both this and my Telia con is via normal telephone line and needs only an ADSL modem) And their prise is $25 per month. So i pay more for less.

 

And listen to this. And i kid you NOT!!! The company Bred Bands Bolaget(they are really limited to big citys) offer a 10Mbit internet con. for about $35 a month. There is a second ISP in sweden called Sunet which also delivers 10Mbit at similar rates.

 

You can visit the homepages of these copanies if you like... Some of them have info in english.

 

On the start page of bonet (www.bonet.se) it says 249 kronor ($25) in bold text and also 2.5Mbit.

 

www.bredbandsbolaget.se

 

and also check out www.telia.se or www.telia.com

 

Sorry you guys have those kinds of opressor rates and i really only wanted to recomend that there are some cable modem speedup proggs out there so go search on Direct connect for instance...

[clutch 1]

Ours is expensive due to our location. We have no other main lines to run off of, and needed to have our own line run. It crosses 2 major TELCO vendors, and runs over 42,000 feet to our nearest CO. Also, when we pay prices like that for our lines, we get a certain level of service (24/7 monitoring and support, notification of planned outages, cross-vendor support when an issue arises, etc) that you don't typically get at the lower cost levels. It also sounds like the market you are in (in addition to several main cities in the US) might be used ethernet systems rather than SONET. This is a much, much cheaper option provided the infrastructure is available. This option also allows for greater "bandwidth on demand" flexiblity, so all you have to do is call and ask to jump from 2Mbps to 10Mps for a day, and then go back to normal when done.

[Busby 0]

Seriously the majority of the cable modems in the US are rated at a max of 1.5 Mbps download and some actually exceeding the amount of 1.5 Mbps, plus it's unlimited traffic. Unless your a business REALLY concerned with upload why not just get a cable modem? I personally don't see the reasons for paying more for a T1. Unless T1 ISPs offer some neato services why pay more for the same or even less?

[clutch 1]

Quote:

Seriously the majority of the cable modems in the US are rated at a max of 1.5 Mbps download and some actually exceeding the amount of 1.5 Mbps, plus it's unlimited traffic. Unless your a business REALLY concerned with upload why not just get a cable modem? I personally don't see the reasons for paying more for a T1. Unless T1 ISPs offer some neato services why pay more for the same or even less?

Because there weren't (and still aren't) any business offerings for cable modems out at our business park. Hell, at the time there weren't any cable modems either. Plus, our distance from the CO killed pretty much any telco-based low end system (ADSL/SDSL, ISDN, etc). Plus, we host our own email (and soon our EDI traffic as well), and that REQUIRES a stable and reliable connection. Even with my cable modem at home, I have had intermittent outages that have lasted DAYS with no commitment to repair times or anything. That is why companies pay more for this class of connection; guaranteed uptime and bandwidth. These enterprise class providers can deliver 24/7 support and immediate response time, and that is something that we need. Also, we will eventually have to go to an ANX circuit (rather than going through our tradition EDI VAN) for a couple of our clients, and we can either farm some of that through our T1, and bundle a second on-demand circuit to our current connection. Now, a great deal of you will have no idea what I am talking about, and that's perfectly normal (and desirable, as EDI sux a$$), but these are reasons for commercial-class lines, and hence the reasons for their extra cost. It is worth it to me to have a company that will call me BEFORE I see an outage and keep me up to date on the current status of the repairs, plus reroute me as needed on the fly. I had a hard enough time getting a hold of RoadRunner and Ameritech just to beg them to take my money in exchange for broadband at my home!

[Manos 0]

Originally posted by clutch

Quote:

It also sounds like the market you are in (in addition to several main cities in the US) might be used ethernet systems rather than SONET. This is a much, much cheaper option provided the infrastructure is available. This option also allows for greater "bandwidth on demand" flexiblity, so all you have to do is call and ask to jump from 2Mbps to 10Mps for a day, and then go back to normal when done.

 

Well yes. The speeds at 10Mbit are Ethernet as far as i know. But then again they use optocable between the houses and the terminals and im not all into the different connection types.

 

As far as i know you cant change yourrate for a specific time here. But i can assure you that my con. is stable. It doesnt depend on how many ppl are up in y neighbourhood at the moment. (As far as i have noticed anyway). And I also do believe that the major companies that use up a really big load of Bandwidth have 24/7 assistans and monitoring.

 

But, the thing is that arpanet started off in the US and the internet boom started there too. So it whould only be right that the US have the best coverage, highest bandwidths and lowest priceing in the world. But then we have poor little old sweden (Finland are not too far behind either) we are cheep as hell, we have a really good coverage and BW supply is really good to. OK sweden is a pretty small country compared to the US. But still there are like a illion times as many americans as there are swedes so you do have the manpower to build and the cash aswell.

 

I don't have all the facts really... but I was merely concerned over the overpriceing you guys have over there...

[clutch 1]

Ahhh, yeah, I see what you were thinking now. My cable (1.5Mbps downstream/384Kbps upstream for $40/mo) has been pretty cheap, and in some areas of the US DSL can be even cheaper. What keeps us from getting any better/cheaper in a lot of areas is having too many telcos fighting of the property lines. In AZ for instance, US West handles all of the local traffic and infrastructure, and can provide long distance as well. When DSL first became available, they were rolling it out pretty fast. Then other broadband providers came out (People's Choice-Now Sprint Broadband @ up to 8Mbps+, Gain Wireless @ 1.5Mbps, and a couple of cable providers) and the only companies there that really have any territorial issues are the cable providers. Both of the wireless systems (Sprint and Gain) don't have that problem, and US West can provide DSL anywhere that it is physically possible. Out here in the midwest though, they constantly fight and bicker with each other, and never get anything rolled out due to constant confusion. One day, it will get better. Maybe...

 

[Manos 0]

Hmm... That seems odd... Isn't competition amongst the telcos supposed to bring the prices down and the BW up? I mean... I can't win the war by giving my costumers worsend cons and raised priceing?

 

The wireles cons, what are those? can they really be as fast? I work at ericsson here in sweden and the wireless solutions that we bring now are merely for mobile-/cell phones. In the future (upcomming GPRS) the transfer rates are going to be higher and support a greater data transfer. But from were I'm sitting, it seems the raised capacity in the links (that ericsson produces) is to small to support the growing demand of the consumers and the fast expanding usage of the internet both via computers and cellphones.

 

Anyways, I see what you mean by it being a rough market in the middle west. But in the places where theres a lot of ppl. new telcos can raise up and get a big market share right?

 

[clutch 1]

The competition isn't exactly in the same vein as something like retail stores dropping prices on the same goods. The telcos spend so much time and money on "locking" areas to keep other vendors out, that they just raise the prices whenever they want. Then, when other vendors have the "right" to provide the same service in that area, it winds up be offset by royalties and taxes to the core infrastructure provider. Just for one DSL hookup, you can wind up paying 4-6 companies to get setup. One may do the check, another may provide the hookup, one provides the line service, another may be your ISP, and so on. Plus, all the bickering over property lines just slows down the process as a whole, which is why I feel that cable modems will always deploy faster. Since most of the government restrictions regarding the intra-state data portion of telecom services have been somewhat relaxed for cable, the larger providers (@Home, RoadRunner, AT@T) just simply own the infrastructure and can rollout at will. And, with having so many subscribers, they can lower the prices and still have the income to expand and upgrade their network (as opposed to having several "baby-bells" that can barely hold on to their current networks).

[Manos 0]

That sound alot like monopolies to me... It iot really legal to buy a certain area? And have all the rights for your self? That if anything prohibits copmetition and shouldn't be legal anywhere?

 

But also we don't have that many ISPs in sweden so the smaller companies that you talked about arn't really present. I'd imagine that it whould be really hard to start up a new ISP in sweden if you don't have a **** load of cash and a really super great idea and BW...

 

I also wanted to thank you very much Clutch for makeing e understand how the IT consortium works over there... It's really been insightful to me! thx again!

[clutch 1]

Yeah, companies can "own" an area because they can get licensed/authorized to lay down the cable and infrastructure to support it. Then, that provider can now either provide service to that area, or lease out time and usage of their infrastructure to competitors so they can provide service to the users in that area. That's why wireless connections are so great for competition; they can allow several vendors to provide service to the same area which can over time make that service a simple commodity. At that point, they have to compete on features, performance, quality, and cost.

 

As for the brief intro to our wonderful world of telecommunication costs, no problem. It's been a rough ride for me to pick this up, and like you I was pi$$ed about all the costs (hidden or otherwise) associated with something that other people simply take for granted.