McCleud

It is highly unlikely you are (or will ever see) service speeds provided by the isp go beyond what your modem can actually handle. This assumes you have a modem that at least supports 10mbps. I'm not a networking+equipment expert so there might be residential cable modems that are (hardware)capped well below 10mbps but I'm not aware of them personally. In general the steps for you to upgrade would probably be utterly simple, such as 'Ok, I'll pay. Bump my account settings'. "Done sir." 'Thanks'. You would then apply 6000/768 VanB settings (or use tcpoptimizer with less registry automation features) to try and maximize your network traffic handling. At that point, if things are working properly a testmy.net speed test should get you at, near or over the 6mbps marker.

Yes. When it works, it works great. Was glad to see Comcast tried to make it worth 'continuing' to pay for the higher priced home networking package by bumping it from original 4 to 6mbps in the recent global bump. Sure would be nice if they would just go ahead and make it 10 :::.. Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 6244 Kbps about 6.2 Mbps (tested with 12160 KB) Download Speed is:: 762 KB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Mon Mar 7 13:46:34 CST 2005 Bottom Line:: 112X faster than 56K 1MB download in 1.34 sec Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 99.94 % faster than the average for host (comcast.net) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-KFNXTLE1Q

dotNET provides any number of ways to easily handle this including every detailed aspect such as sending off a disconnected blob of data to be consumed for logging or whatnot. Hate to see VB6 get hammered but won't go into wars. C#/VB.NET is a whole new animal entirely. Excellent stuff

I know. I was wondering if he's actually getting full upstream (that he's paying for) or something less, and as a complete picture of the connection, regardless if there (isnt) a thing that could be done to improve it.

Just curious if you would also go ahead and post the upload results for original and optimized so the pitcure is complete.

Excellent. Trace route shows you at 0 loss on that page except for gblx-gw.cgcil.ip.att.net. Most of the time seeing any packet loss is, at-minimum, 'odd'. If things are working properly everywhere between your machine and all the equipment and routing to the destination then should be 0's across the board regardless. Definitely 1000% better than the severe local packet loss your original tests showed.

omg dude lol DONT reformat you machine! One of the reasons Comcast has people go delete all of their cookies and temp files is to try and knock out potential issues from spyware and other shit that could effect speed in marginal ways. The actual implications of HAVING such things on the machine goes far beyond anything related to speed and is another discussion. As far as them telling you to reformat your drive, tell him to F**K off pronto. If spyware, malware, trojans or ANYTHING ELSE was causing your "speed" problem it would mean the program(s) are stealing your bandwidth doing nasty things such as using your machine as a remote hacking station etc. This would also mean you would be able to see your machine is, for some reason, uploading/downloading data that you are not specifically aware of but COULD see it using any number of ways including the simplest which is watching the network tab of taskman if using WindowsXP etc. Bottom line: Comcast has no means/methods to resolve bottlenecks in their network for the home user. Not sure if they have it for the Business customers or not. It "is" possible you may have a bad cable or physical connection problem that has suddenly exposed itself enough to be noticed. The simplest way of determining that is to just replace the cables with known-good spares so you can know your have a solid connection from your machine to the cable coming into your house. Not everyone has spare LAN cables laying around. Radio Shack can help there.

This is VERY likely unrelated to the settings of his machine in this case and may infact be an external "to the users" issue. I am in the Wylie area east of Dallas and COMCAST over the past few days has been absolute shit regarding stability, consistency and especially speed. According to comcast they do not currently have a known issue and think it is 'local' (user problem) but this is obsurd. A major outage happened about a month ago in the Garland area that crippled enough 'important' users (business) that they resolved it. After that things were back on track and smooth/fast until a few days ago when things started going bad again, somewhere. I have the 6mpbs/768K package and when comcast is working, I get the full speed confirmed using this site + dslreports + university sites. Right now though it's puking along at a chunking 1.3mpbs +/-50% variance! Sickening. Comcast doesn't seem to care that we don't get the speeds we pay for. They only seem to care that they can ping the modem using MAC so they can say "well it appears you have internet connectivity! Guess you must have some local problem!" To me, that answer is SO FAR beyond acceptable I can't describe it. I look at it in these terms. If I went and bought myself a Porsche and realized the top speed of the car was about the same as a Pinto I would expect the dealer to either fix the broken Porsche or sell the cars at the price of a Pinto. Right now, I'm paying for a Porsche ($70/m!) but am driving a busted Pinto with black smoke pouring out the pipes... Comcast needs to address this crap. They seem to have no known way of determining where bottlenecks/problems are happening until something major finally happens that gets their "business customers" pissed off and barking at their door about performance issues. As an engineer I can invision M A N Y ways they could implement methods of tracing these issues better. For instance, having simple TCP server/client software written that specifically bursts/packs a data pipe with large streams (50+mbps) and monitors all aspects. The client/server modules could be placed throughout the country at major hubs. Sounds simple enough, and I've written enough TCP code to know that it actually is as simple as it sounds. Having this could allow further isolation of potential particular 'paths/routes/hops" problems that don't otherwise immediately show up on their doorstep in the form of a business saying "HEY, umm, wth? Fix this!" Just my 2cents (left over from the $70/m sent to Comcast).