is Cisco EPC3925 older modem than the Thompson, Im Fuming

kamin99

I upgraded from 120mb to 150mb only to get 30mb wired, I complained to UPC they sent a techey who changed my Thompson modem to the Cisco EPC3925
which looks outdated and dose'nt seem to have wireless N , it even downgraded my speed to 17mb unbelievable

is the Cisco EPC3925 older modem than the Thompson, Im Fuming:mad:

demanufactured

No its a newer router.
Ring UPC

DECEiFER

No. The Thompson I believe has been issued by UPC since the first 100Mb connection was sold. The EPC3925 is the newest modem/router they're issuing today to new customers. It does have Wireless-N and you should definitely be able to get above 30Mb/s. I have the EPC3925 and while I use another router bridged with it, I do have past experience of using it on its own over WiFi and it was fine aside from the lack of decent range (at the time I lived in an old Georgian apartment and the walls were extremely thick but have since moved and taken my UPC account and equipment with me).

Unless the device is faulty, your connection is experiencing external issues, or your computer is ill-configured, there's no reason why the EPC3925 would fail you while using Ethernet. Try a speed test on more than one computer. Use the UPC speed test as the servers on speedtest.net are more than erratic, or use both sites!

http://www.upc.ie/broadband/speedtest/

kamin99

demanufactured wrote: »

No its a newer router.
Ring UPC

DECEiFER wrote: »

No. The Thompson I believe has been issued by UPC since the first 100Mb connection was sold. The EPC3925 is the newest modem/router they're issuing today to new customers. It does have Wireless-N and you should definitely be able to get above 30Mb/s. I have the EPC3925 and while I use another router bridged with it, I do have past experience of using it on its own over WiFi and it was fine aside from the lack of decent range (at the time I lived in an old Georgian apartment and the walls were extremely thick but have since moved and taken my UPC account and equipment with me).

Unless the device is faulty, your connection is experiencing external issues, or your computer is ill-configured, there's no reason why the EPC3925 would fail you while using Ethernet. Try a speed test on more than one computer. Use the UPC speed test as the servers on speedtest.net are more than erratic, or use both sites!

http://www.upc.ie/broadband/speedtest/

Guys many thanks for your replies, At least now I know the techie didn't downgrade my modem, called UPC and told them I'm not welling to go into a new contract for the 150Mb if I'm only getting 20Mb , they are sending another Techie on Friday , I hope he find and external cause a cable or something wrong as my Mac is only 2 years old and don't think it is the cause as I used to get 110Mb out of the !20Mb before the upgrade

kamin99

so i got a second visit from the engineer today and typical my Mac scores 120Mb wired out of the 150Mb during the visit in the afternoon, Now ,night time, i'm getting 50-70Mb , Crazy , don't know what to do next UPC now will not believe me after the engineer visit , Any one in similar situation , any ideas what is causing the fluctuation in speed

Mister Gooey

kamin99 wrote: »

so i got a second visit from the engineer today and typical my Mac scores 120Mb wired out of the 150Mb during the visit in the afternoon, Now ,night time, i'm getting 50-70Mb , Crazy , don't know what to do next UPC now will not believe me after the engineer visit , Any one in similar situation , any ideas what is causing the fluctuation in speed

Congestion???? Check again early morning!

kamin99

that seems to be the case as my speed in the morning is 130Mb , should I be complaining to UPC again ?

ED E

kamin99 wrote: »

that seems to be the case as my speed in the morning is 130Mb , should I be complaining to UPC again ?

Wired I assume? Is it cat6, how long and decent quality?

Thor

Ever since I upgraded to the 150Mb, I haven't gotten full speed once. I think UPC have increased their contention ratio(if that's possible) or something, because to be honest, I never got slow speeds like this before. Sure I had the minor 5/10Mb drop here or there, but since the speed increase, I haven't gotten anywhere near full speed and sometimes I barely even get 60Mb/s.

UPC Told me they would contact me, but I haven't heard anything from them as of yet and this is going on for a few weeks.

kamin99

ED E wrote: »

Wired I assume? Is it cat6, how long and decent quality?

It is Cat5 , on my way now to get Cat6 and retest thanks for the advice

Thor wrote: »

Ever since I upgraded to the 150Mb, I haven't gotten full speed once. I think UPC have increased their contention ratio(if that is possible) or something, because to be honest, I never got slow speeds like this before. Sure I had the minor 5/10Mb drop here or there, but since the speed increase, I have not gotten anywhere near full speed and sometimes I barely even get 60Mb/s.

UPC Told me they would contact me, but I haven't heard anytime from them as of yet and this is going on for a few weeks.

So it take it am not alone with this shambles from UPC when i was on 120 i got 122 , I think it is unacceptable to be charged more and get less not even half the speed most of the time unless I'm up into the unsocial hours of the night

ED E

kamin99 wrote: »

It is Cat5 , on my way now to get Cat6 and retest thanks for the advice

Make sure your NIC is gigabit aswell.

And UPC have be known for usually having plenty of capacity, I suspect more people took this new deal than they'd counted on, give them a month or two to get things running smoothly, remember, many people are doubling their speed, thats a fair jump in throughput.

DECEiFER

ED E wrote: »

Make sure your NIC is gigabit aswell.

And UPC have be known for usually having plenty of capacity, I suspect more people took this new deal than they'd counted on, give them a month or two to get things running smoothly, remember, many people are doubling their speed, thats a fair jump in throughput.

That may be the case but I'd definitely be calling their billing department once it's all fixed to get some dosh back as goodwill from them for not being able to in the first number of weeks or months. It's hardly fair to pay less for more (regarding people paying for and getting the full 100Mb).

I'm on the 50Mb package but was upgraded to 60Mb back a few months ago and I'm getting about 60-65Mb/s on speed tests. Nothing has changed for me since the new packages came out, the service hasn't gotten any better or worse.

ED E

DECEiFER wrote: »

That may be the case but I'd definitely be calling their billing department once it's all fixed to get some dosh back as goodwill from them for not being able to in the first number of weeks or months. It's hardly fair to pay less for more (regarding people paying for and getting the full 100Mb).

I'm on the 50Mb package but was upgraded to 60Mb back a few months ago and I'm getting about 60-65Mb/s on speed tests. Nothing has changed for me since the new packages came out, the service hasn't gotten any better or worse.

Would depend on how many neighbors jumped from 60 to 120 if I'm right.

We got 25 originally, always got 26+, then bumped to 30, always get 32+, so thats why I'd wager its just teething.

DECEiFER

Not only the amount of neighbors, but the ones likely to be on the higher packages will more than likely be the ones to use more bandwidth (compared to those on the basic package who may be just checking e-mails and on Facebook, etc.). You could be living nearby a merry band of pirates!

ED E

*lives in an area built post WW2 full of nearly dead widows*

Usage is low here.

kamin99

well, I spent 70 Euro on upgrading all my Cat5 to Cat6 cables and still no different ,Im running a MAC with pretty good NIC . I also can see 3 UPC network from the neighbours , and the people here don't seem to be Pirates , so really cant do more than wait for UPC to improve! But I know myself I cant wait long enough !

DECEiFER

All things considering you could be subscribed to ADSL and connected to an oversold exchange, as is often the case. Happened to me and had to put up with it for parts of the 3 years living in an oversold area (usually from August through to January), getting speeds of less than 1Mb in the evenings and ping times of over 300ms to domestic servers with 75% packet loss. It felt worse than HSDPA and dial-up and it's still happening to a lot of folks out there today. If your ping times are fine, you're not getting packet loss, and your only problem is that you're not getting your full speed, count yourself as half-lucky!

However, it's still not right that you should have to put up with any ongoing issues like this. If I was you right now, I'd downgrade to 100Mb and tell UPC to fu*k their €10 downgrade fee since it's their fault. I think you also have to be on the higher package a month before you can downgrade, but I'd also tell them to...you know...on that front. You can always get 150Mb again in 2-3 months and see how it goes then.

kamin99

ok as you can see this is my speed


and this is my line results

DECEiFER

Meanwhile on the 60Mb pack:




What you have is not bad but clearly you are paying more for less. Were those tests done over wired or wireless?

kamin99

DECEiFER wrote: »

Meanwhile on the 60Mb pack:




What you have is not bad but clearly you are paying more for less. Were those tests done over wired or wireless?

these were wired and wireless My wireless is ASUS AC-RT-66U which has an amazing speed so wireless is exactly as wired , Really. Mind you I measure wired from UPC Cisco Modem not via the Asus router

DECEiFER

Yeah, as long as the latency to the wireless router is 2ms or less and the link signal and speed is at least twice the net's top rated speed, I wouldn't normally factor it in as a problem. But since you're getting the same speeds over wired, then it's definitely not the issue at all. Have you used other computers to perform the tests?

kamin99

DECEiFER wrote: »

Yeah, as long as the latency to the wireless router is 2ms or less and the link signal and speed is at least twice the net's top rated speed, I wouldn't normally factor it in as a problem. But since you're getting the same speeds over wired, then it's definitely not the issue at all. Have you used other computers to perform the tests?

I did use a windows laptop as well and it is consistent with 50-70mb, I don't have UPC TV , should I get rid of the splitter ?

DECEiFER

kamin99 wrote: »

I did use a windows laptop as well and it is consistent with 50-70mb, I don't have UPC TV , should I get rid of the splitter ?

Yeah get rid of it. That also reminds me, can you screen-shot your DOCSIS WAN screen inside the router to show the signal and power levels for your connection?

kamin99

could find a screen shot program so here is the power levels


Power Level: Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1: 4.5 dBmV 40.8 dB
Channel 2: 4.7 dBmV 40.4 dB
Channel 3: 4.4 dBmV 40.9 dB
Channel 4: 4.2 dBmV 40.3 dB
Channel 5: 0.0 dBmV 0.0 dB
Channel 6: 0.0 dBmV 0.0 dB
Channel 7: 0.0 dBmV 0.0 dB
Channel 8: 0.0 dBmV 0.0 dB

Upstream Channels
Power Level:
Channel 1: 48.4 dBmV
Channel 2: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 3: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 4: 0.0 dBmV

DECEiFER

Those are better than mine! But I'm not an expert on this, but I am using 8 downstream channels. Why would you only be using 4? That's something worth looking into.

Here's mine for comparison...


Downstream Channels
Power Level: Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1: -11.2 dBmV 36.7 dB
Channel 2: -11.4 dBmV 36.5 dB
Channel 3: -12.1 dBmV 36.0 dB
Channel 4: -11.5 dBmV 36.2 dB
Channel 5: -12.2 dBmV 36.0 dB
Channel 6: -12.5 dBmV 35.6 dB
Channel 7: -13.3 dBmV 35.2 dB
Channel 8: -12.2 dBmV 35.9 dB

Upstream Channels
Power Level:
Channel 1: 56.7 dBmV
Channel 2: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 3: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 4: 0.0 dBmV

kamin99

DECEiFER wrote: »

Those are better than mine! But I'm not an expert on this, but I am using 8 downstream channels. Why would you only be using 4? That's something worth looking into.

Here's mine for comparison...


Downstream Channels
Power Level: Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1: -11.2 dBmV 36.7 dB
Channel 2: -11.4 dBmV 36.5 dB
Channel 3: -12.1 dBmV 36.0 dB
Channel 4: -11.5 dBmV 36.2 dB
Channel 5: -12.2 dBmV 36.0 dB
Channel 6: -12.5 dBmV 35.6 dB
Channel 7: -13.3 dBmV 35.2 dB
Channel 8: -12.2 dBmV 35.9 dB

Upstream Channels
Power Level:
Channel 1: 56.7 dBmV
Channel 2: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 3: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 4: 0.0 dBmV

pretty much interesting! could someone please explain why I have only 4 downstream channels instead of 8

ED E

kamin99 wrote: »

pretty much interesting! could someone please explain why I have only 4 downstream channels instead of 8

Please confirm all are same: (Remember not to post your MAC by accident)

Bootloader Revision:	2.3.0_R1
Current Software Revision:	epc3925-ESIP-12-v302r125533-110830c_upc
Firmware Name:	epc3925-ESIP-12-v302r125533-110830c_upc.bin
Firmware Build Time:	 Aug 30 11:09:31 2011
Cable Modem Status:	Operational
Wireless Network:	Disable

DOCSIS Downstream Scanning:	Completed
DOCSIS Ranging:	Completed
DOCSIS DHCP:	Completed
DOCSIS TFTP:	Completed
DOCSIS Data Reg Complete:	Completed
DOCSIS Privacy:	Enabled

My stats for comparison:

 	Power Level:	Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1:	 1.8 dBmV	40.4 dB
Channel 2:	 1.5 dBmV	40.5 dB
Channel 3:	 1.2 dBmV	40.3 dB
Channel 4:	 1.6 dBmV	39.7 dB
Channel 5:	 4.2 dBmV	39.6 dB
Channel 6:	 4.0 dBmV	40.7 dB
Channel 7:	 4.0 dBmV	40.4 dB
Channel 8:	 3.5 dBmV	38.5 dB



 	Power Level:
Channel 1:	42.2 dBmV
Channel 2:	 0.0 dBmV
Channel 3:	 0.0 dBmV
Channel 4:	 0.0 dBmV

Ok, I also am not a cable engineer or networking specialist, but I'll try and interpret things as best I can and hopefully educate myself in the process.

dBmV
dB(1 mVRMS) – voltage relative to 1 millivolt across 75 Ω. Widely used in cable television and off air antenna signals, where the nominal strength of a single TV signal at the receiver terminals is about 0 dBmV. Cable and antenna systems use 75 Ω coaxial cable, so 0 dBmV corresponds to −78.75 dBW (−48.75 dBm).

The reference level was defined in the late 1950s and references the minimum voltage required by a television tuner to produce an excellent television picture. In the early days of television, voltages generated by antennas were measured in microvolts (uV). It was decided that 1000 microvolts at the input of the television tuner was the minimum required to produce excellent video image quality. Of course other factors also affected the tuner’s performance but it was generally accepted that 1000 microvolts was the target value. In an effort to simplify the large numbers associated with using the microvolt scale, the decibel-milivolt scale was created and the 1000 microvolt requirement was represented as 0 dBmV.


Voltage values above and below the reference of 0 dBmV are incremented in decibels or “dB.” Therefore, the difference between 6 dBmV and 2 dBmV is 4 dB. Often the short-hand way of speaking about the dBmV scale confuses people. For example, the output of an amplifier may be 44 dBmV but is incorrectly stated as “44 decibels” when in fact it should be said as “44 decibel-millivolts.

Digital television tuners operate with a lower minimum requited voltage or about -12 dBmV. You will note this is 12 dB below the reference level of 0 dBmV for analog TV. Also, digital signal measurements made by newer signal level meters are the result of a sequential set of small measurements, combined and averaged to produce an “average digital power” measurement. Despite the measurement process, the result is reported as a dBmV value.

Confused? Don’t be. Just remember that for the new digital television tuners, you need a signal level between -12 dBmV and 16 dBmV.
By:
Steve Zahn, Doc. #113005C
© 2011 Used By Permission
szahnengineering@msn.com

Also this from Wiki(Hope I dont hit the character limit here)(Slightly relevant)

As frequency allocation bandwidth plans differ between United States and European CATV systems, DOCSIS standards have been modified for use in Europe. These modifications were published under the name "EuroDOCSIS". The differences between the bandwidths exist because European cable TV conforms to PAL standards of 8 MHz bandwidth and North American cable TV conforms to ATSC standards which specify 6 MHz. The wider bandwidth in EuroDOCSIS architectures permits more bandwidth to be allocated to the downstream data path (toward the user).

Throughput
All of these features combined enable a total upstream throughput of 30.72 Mbit/s per 6.4 MHz channel, or 10.24 Mbit/s per 3.2 MHz channel. All three versions of the DOCSIS standard support a downstream throughput with 256-QAM of up to 42.88 Mbit/s per 6 MHz channel, or 55.62 Mbit/s per 8 MHz channel for EuroDOCSIS. (see table below)

So this suggests that working at full efficiency(never happens in any kind of analogue system) you should get 165Mbps from 3 D channels. Also this doesnt include the networking overhead. For torrenting this can be almost 10% so I'll use that for a rule of thumb here.

Going back to the top, mine and your lines are above 0dBmV, or in laymans terms better than "excellent" which is the benchmark. DECEiFER on the other hand is a little below(older copper, more people on his stem, longer stem etc) but still within cable limits for analogue tv anyways, and digital on cable works at lower thresholds should, and is fine.

You have the same SNRs as me too, and as mine is a brand new cable, and is quite short(I think we are the first or second away from the fibre in the footpath) should be in the excellent category.

So, laymans maths:
4 EuroDocsis Downstream channels gives 222 odd Mbps, theoretical limit. Say then 80% efficiency gives 177 rounded down. Take 10% for overhead and you get 159. SO, your link to the node should supply, if I'm doing it right, at least 159(say 160 with decimals included).


Your jitter is a little high, but I dont think its enough to be alarmed about. Can you sort java and test packet loss. Also, I'm only a 30Mb but I'm connected on 8, so I dont know why you wouldnt be. Possibly a filter still on the line somewhere? Are you able to trace it all the way back to the pole or nipples(four pins on a wall).

Now that I think about it, the old standard only used 4 channels, so maybe your node doesnt support any more(in which case they shouldnt have upgraded you I suspect).

Reading more now.

In a DOCSIS 3.0 network implementing downstream channel bonding, the DOCSIS CMTS dynamically balances the data across the Downstream Bonding Group (DBG), which can consist of four or more downstream channels. The reason this is done is to offer subscribers the best quality of service across downstream channels with changing impairments and changing congestion at the receive side. Each outgoing packet from the CMTS is tagged with a sequence number. The sequence number becomes important for a number of reasons. Packets can be dispersed across different downstream channels and can have different time delays in arriving at the receiving cable modem. It is then the cable modem’s responsibility to re-synchronize the incoming packets based upon the sequence numbers. TCP/IP windowing acknowledgments will take care of any lost packets at Layer 3, however for UDP flows, such as voice and video, those packets will be forever lost. Further, by dynamically distributing the packets across downstreams, the CMTS can take advantage of statistical gains of many cable modems connected to the DBG. This becomes especially critical when your system has a mixture of legacy DOCSIS 1.x, 2.0 and 3.0 cable modems. The 1.x and 2.0 modems will all be receiving data from only the Primary Channel of the DBG which the DOCSIS 3.0 modems will be able to receive data from all four+ downstream channels in the DBG. So this dynamic prioritization is in effect acting like upstream load balancing in the downstream.


read read read....

THIS: When you configure a DOCSIS channel as a primary it must carry all of the DOCSIS protocol overhead, which is about a 15% to 20% loss of user data.

So overhead is higher than I guessed. So maybe then your four channels cant cope, if 80% is a good guess for the hardware layer.


The caffeine is wearing off now, but I'd say try call UPC and badger them until they put you in touch with an installation engineer(Not the tech, the actual engineer who oversees the group of new connection installers). These guys are the ones that plan and set up the nodes and connections, they understand the layer 1/2/3 tech really well, and will be able to advise you much better than the muppets working CS who probably couldnt crimp a cat5 patch cable.

gNight,
ED E

DECEiFER

DECEiFER wrote: »

Those are better than mine! But I'm not an expert on this, but I am using 8 downstream channels. Why would you only be using 4? That's something worth looking into.

Here's mine for comparison...


Downstream Channels
Power Level: Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1: -11.2 dBmV 36.7 dB
Channel 2: -11.4 dBmV 36.5 dB
Channel 3: -12.1 dBmV 36.0 dB
Channel 4: -11.5 dBmV 36.2 dB
Channel 5: -12.2 dBmV 36.0 dB
Channel 6: -12.5 dBmV 35.6 dB
Channel 7: -13.3 dBmV 35.2 dB
Channel 8: -12.2 dBmV 35.9 dB

Upstream Channels
Power Level:
Channel 1: 56.7 dBmV
Channel 2: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 3: 0.0 dBmV
Channel 4: 0.0 dBmV

Your upstream power is a tad high at 56.7 - ideally this should be in the 40s or 55 at a push. 58 is the highest that most modems can work at but some go up to 64dBmV.

Also, the receive power at -12 is on the edge. I know you're not the OP but am just getting it out there.

DECEiFER

Karsini wrote: »

Your upstream power is a tad high at 56.7 - ideally this should be in the 40s or 55 at a push. 58 is the highest that most modems can work at but some go up to 64dBmV.

Also, the receive power at -12 is on the edge. I know you're not the OP but am just getting it out there.

Oh I know I'm a bit borderline. I can get those levels down (-8dBmV / 38-40dB SNR on all the downstream channels and 50-52dBmV upstream) by removing a splitter but the signal needs to be split twice since I keep the modem upstairs and there's a TV up here also. The only other way to boost the signal without removing the upstairs splitter would be to get UPC out and do some work on the main signal coming into the house but unless I see notice any issues there's really no point. So far, so good!

EDIT: You post got me to thinking. I went downstairs to the main signal box and tried a few little trinkets I'd saved from a previous UPC install. I added a third splitter to the equation. That's not good, but in this case, for the broadband, it is. At the box there was a three-way splitter (for the two TV's downstairs and the cable that runs through the wall upstairs). That's going to do more damage than a two-way splitter. So I replaced it and put a two-way at the box to take the upstairs cable and downstairs TV. Since there's two TVs, I used the three-way splitter (I don't have another two-way to hand) to split the TV signal that's coming from the two-way splitter. The signal is well strong enough and the TV service won't suffer one bit at the slight reduction (the digital box still gets 100% quality without any fluctuation). So the upstairs feed is only coming from the two-way splitter downstairs and it's split one more time upstairs using a two-way.

After all that, the cable modem reports improved levels overall. Though not perfect, it does give more headroom, and I've never had any speed issues in the past so the only thing I'm preventing here is possible disconnections (where the EPC3925 will reset or stall - which occurs infrequently, enough to count on one hand in the last half a year, but maybe the cause was the borderline levels).

Here are the new stats:

About	 	
Model:	Cisco EPC3925
Hardware Revision:	1.0
Bootloader Revision:	2.3.0_R1
Current Software Revision:	epc3925-ESIP-12-v302r125533-110830c_upc
Firmware Name:	epc3925-ESIP-12-v302r125533-110830c_upc.bin
Firmware Build Time:	 Aug 30 11:09:31 2011
Cable Modem Status:	Operational
Wireless Network:	Disable
 	
 		
Cable Modem State	 
DOCSIS Downstream Scanning:	Completed
DOCSIS Ranging:	Completed
DOCSIS DHCP:	Completed
DOCSIS TFTP:	Completed
DOCSIS Data Reg Complete:	Completed
DOCSIS Privacy:	Enabled
 		
Downstream Channels	 
 	Power Level:	Signal to Noise Ratio:
Channel 1:	 -9.6 dBmV	37.8 dB
Channel 2:	 -9.6 dBmV	37.9 dB
Channel 3:	 -9.5 dBmV	37.8 dB
Channel 4:	 -9.4 dBmV	37.6 dB
Channel 5:	 -10.8 dBmV	36.9 dB
Channel 6:	 -10.8 dBmV	36.9 dB
Channel 7:	 -10.6 dBmV	37.1 dB
Channel 8:	 -10.0 dBmV	37.5 dB
 		
Upstream Channels	 
 	Power Level:
Channel 1:	51.9 dBmV
Channel 2:	 0.0 dBmV
Channel 3:	 0.0 dBmV
Channel 4:	 0.0 dBmV

Sorry for stealing the thread's thunder. I think we should concentrate on why kamin99 is only using 4 channels instead of 8. It does seem to be very coincidental...

vibe666

kamin99 wrote: »

well, I spent 70 Euro on upgrading all my Cat5 to Cat6 cables and still no different ,Im running a MAC with pretty good NIC . I also can see 3 UPC network from the neighbours , and the people here don't seem to be Pirates , so really cant do more than wait for UPC to improve! But I know myself I cant wait long enough !

€70? that's a bit pricy and also unnecessary for a home network. cat5e is more than capable of gigabit speeds at shorter distances (i.e. in a home setting as opposed to longer distances in an office).

kamin99

ED-E and DECEiFER you guys are just amazing , what an insight, what do you suggest be my next move , should I email UPC with some of the details here regarding why I'm only on four downstream channels , or try and get the Installation engineer which might prove to be very difficult

kamin99

vibe666 wrote: »

€70? that's a bit pricy and also unnecessary for a home network. cat5e is more than capable of gigabit speeds at shorter distances (i.e. in a home setting as opposed to longer distances in an office).

I know i only went by the advice of one of the forum members

ED E

kamin99 wrote: »

I know i only went by the advice of one of the forum members

Its actually not that bad a move, 5e is only a small bit cheaper than 6, but 6 is "futureproof". €70 is expensive, but most people dont know Radionics or the like and shops like harvery norman charge crazy prizes for the stuff.

Is not something that'll wear out, so good to have.

I'd go down the phone route and just keep insisting on speaking to a supervisor.

DECEiFER

kamin99, have you gotten any answers from UPC? I'm guessing that the only way you will is if they send out a proper engineer.

But in the meantime, if you know anyone else with a UPC connection in your area, you should bring your modem over to their place and see what's what with the channels and also check their modem to see what's what. You can then deduce whether it's an area problem if both modems are only using 4 channels, your modem's problem if it's just your modem using 4 channels, or if both modems use 8 channels it could be a problem with your feed into your home. Just my two cents!

TCP/IP

My set-up is only using 4 channels as well instead of eight. Would love to know why as well.

DECEiFER

TCP/IP wrote: »

My set-up is only using 4 channels as well instead of eight. Would love to know why as well.

Hmmm... What package are you on and what top speed are you getting via Ethernet?

TCP/IP

DECEiFER wrote: »

Hmmm... What package are you on and what top speed are you getting via Ethernet?

I am on the 120mb package was getting 120mb all day long but over the last week there seems to be a massive problem and I am only getting between 10-30 meg. Called UPC and they cannot figure it out so engineer coming this Saturday.

DECEiFER

It's possible that your 4 channels aren't giving you enough bandwidth. Definitely say it to the engineer but it is something we'll all have to figure out so we can help others in the future. If you've read any of my posts in this thread, I'm using all 8 channels and I'm on the 60Mb pack and so far have never had any real issues to report (since signing up in January this year). If my 60Mb connection is using all 8 channels that the modem is capable of, then surely you'd need all 8 also. But for now, I'm only guessing.

kamin99

DECEiFER wrote: »

kamin99, have you gotten any answers from UPC? I'm guessing that the only way you will is if they send out a proper engineer.

But in the meantime, if you know anyone else with a UPC connection in your area, you should bring your modem over to their place and see what's what with the channels and also check their modem to see what's what. You can then deduce whether it's an area problem if both modems are only using 4 channels, your modem's problem if it's just your modem using 4 channels, or if both modems use 8 channels it could be a problem with your feed into your home. Just my two cents!

I was away in the UK for the day , Just back have serious plans to chase UPC early morning and find a solution will certainly update

kamin99

So I just been to UPC spoke to a supervisor , She said that the 4 or 8 downstream channels are wireless and can only be adjusted from the modem by techie, what she did after talking to a 3rd level support is increase the bandwidth for me and advised me to monitor the line for 24 H and at the same time sending a techie tomorrow PM (again) I mentioned the Buzz words of Node being oversold and congestion , but no comment on that from the support person
so another 24 Hours of watchful waiting!

kamin99

kamin99 wrote: »

So I just been to UPC spoke to a supervisor , She said that the 4 or 8 downstream channels are wireless and can only be adjusted from the modem by techie, what she did after talking to a 3rd level support is increase the bandwidth for me and advised me to monitor the line for 24 H and at the same time sending a techie tomorrow PM (again) I mentioned the Buzz words of Node being oversold and congestion , but no comment on that from the support person
so another 24 Hours of watchful waiting!

The DOCSIS channels are nothing to do with wireless. That's first tier tech support not having a clue again. They tried to say the same thing to me when my modem was losing sync due to a dodgy (outdated) firmware version. I knew exactly what was wrong but the person on the other end was having none of it.

DECEiFER

Hmmm... Wireless she said? I don't know, man.

But if your bandwidth per channel has been increased, how's it working out for you so far? There's you and TCP/IP who have reported only having use of 4 channels, and you both have speed issues. It's got to be more than a coincidence...

You should have them send out a top-level tech (I'm not sure what their job title is) and tell them you're not going to accept anything else, no more half-assed bullsh1t talk, as it hasn't solved anything so far and that won't change.

DECEiFER

DECEiFER wrote: »

Hmmm... Wireless she said? I don't know, man.

But if your bandwidth per channel has been increased, how's it working out for you so far? There's you and TCP/IP who have reported only having use of 4 channels, and you both have speed issues. It's got to be more than a coincidence...

You should have them send out a top-level tech (I'm not sure what their job title is) and tell them you're not going to accept anything else, no more half-assed bullsh1t talk, as it hasn't solved anything so far and that won't change.

It's definitely not wireless channels. That's just what first tier support assume you mean once you mention a "channel." They honestly haven't a breeze.

The whole idea of DOCSIS 3.0 is that it uses channel bonding to deliver higher throughput. These channels are VHF and UHF frequencies, nothing to do with wireless.

Then again, you probably know all this already. :pac:

DECEiFER

Karsini wrote: »

It's definitely not wireless channels. That's just what first tier support assume you mean once you mention a "channel." They honestly haven't a breeze.

Absolutely, that's exactly what I was thinking when I read it. The first-tier most likely get two weeks of training and a crash course in MS Office. It's the same with any ISP. I'd laugh them out of the room (or off the phone, ha) if they tried to pull a fast one on me. I did it with BT Ireland and UTV when they both insisted that my ADSL connection password was entered incorrectly over and over (separate incidents) during a period of downtime. It's just typical half-assery.

Karsini wrote: »

The whole idea of DOCSIS 3.0 is that it uses channel bonding to deliver higher throughput. These channels are VHF and UHF frequencies, nothing to do with wireless.

Then again, you probably know all this already. :pac:

I know the basics (and I know about VHF and UHF) but I've only been a customer of UPC's since January, prior to that I was proficient enough in helping myself and some others here on Boards in the past with their ADSL/Eircom woes. So I have a lot to learn about DOCSIS still, but as I said, I have a grasp on the outline as I've done some light reading recently.

kamin99

Guys she was supposed to be the second tier or at least i was told so by the first person who took my call, when they increased my bandwidth I enjoyed 2 hours of 140-145Mb then comes afternoon/evening/night time and it is down to 50-70 , I was asked to keep a record of times and speed so I did will show to Techie tomorrow and God Help him if he dosent fix it:mad:

DECEiFER

You should really place your emphasis on getting the channel thing sorted. It seems to be the best explanation. If they don't sort that, I don't know if you'll enjoy top consistent speeds.

kamin99

will defo keep this in mind tomorrow pm , and finger crossed I get it sorted , will update ASAP

Thor

kamin99 wrote: »

Guys she was supposed to be the second tier or at least i was told so by the first person who took my call, when they increased my bandwidth I enjoyed 2 hours of 140-145Mb then comes afternoon/evening/night time and it is down to 50-70 , I was asked to keep a record of times and speed so I did will show to Techie tomorrow and God Help him if he doesnt fix it:mad:

I'm in the same position as you, tech guy is suppose to call tomorrow between 1 and 6 to check my line.

I mentioned in the talk to forum for UPC that UPC contacted me again and said their network team may have found an issue with my line but have no other details other than it's under review and that they are still sending out the technician to see if hey notices anything.

Now I have the full 8 channels and have an identical issue as you do. I think they really need to sort this out rapidly. It's going on three weeks now.

I have pretty much had a flawless line since the 100Mb package and never had a single issue. Then I get upgrade to the 150Mb package and my line sucks in the evenings. Now it can't be a coincidence that they launch the newest speed and then make 50Mb their lowest package and at the same time the issues arise.

kamin99

Thor wrote: »

I'm in the same position as you, tech guy is suppose to call tomorrow between 1 and 6 to check my line.

I mentioned in the talk to forum for UPC that UPC contacted me again and said their network team may have found an issue with my line but have no other details other than it's under review and that they are still sending out the technician to see if hey notices anything.

Now I have the full 8 channels and have an identical issue as you do. I think they really need to sort this out rapidly. It's going on three weeks now.

I have pretty much had a flawless line since the 100Mb package and never had a single issue. Then I get upgrade to the 150Mb package and my line sucks in the evenings. Now it can't be a coincidence that they launch the newest speed and then make 50Mb their lowest package and at the same time the issues arise.

That is Very interesting now , You have the 8 Downstream channels and still suffering , It seems UPC have totally missed it up this time round, Keep us updated with your status Please

Thor

kamin99 wrote: »

That is Very interesting now , You have the 8 Downstream channels and still suffering , It seems UPC have totally missed it up this time round, Keep us updated with your status Please

Yeah, the amount of channels I believe comes down to whether there is enough bandwidth on each channel and as fair as I'm aware, there is more than enough with 4 to cover 150Mb, I could be wrong. I think they just have some estates with 8 channels if there is a lot of people with high packages. Again, i could be wrong.

Whatever issue UPC are having, I don't think is related to our connections, but more whatever UPC are doing at their end.

Will of course update tomorrow first thing.

Thor

kamin99 wrote: »

That is Very interesting now , You have the 8 Downstream channels and still suffering , It seems UPC have totally missed it up this time round, Keep us updated with your status Please

So technician came. He saw no real issues with the line other than the signal was a little up and down when it should have been more flat.

Hard to explain, but at the time I was getting perfect speeds. Actually 160Mb/s.

When he saw the speed, he said he never saw speed that fast on their network. He didn't know they had the 150Mb speeds. Didn't think a technician for a company would be shocked about their own products.

Anyway, he agreed that it sounds like an issue on UPC's own network end and moved it to the 2nd line support.

Just tested my speed their and still getting a solid 150Mb/s+, here comes the 6pm speed drop.