Pgoodwin1

I never noticed the link to the old TMN test site until the upload issue postings. Good that it's there as a reference.

Oh, and your test results thing didn't cause me any real trouble. I was kind of just waiting to see if the upload speed ever got better after Time Warner fixed the signal level problem, and there wasn't any noticeable difference in performance from what it had been in the past at 0.8Mbps. I was a little worried that a new Gigabit Ethernet switch (that I put in just prior to this issue) had gone flakey on me, but again, everything seems to be working right, so I kind of just ignored it. I didn't have a good feel about how much upload speed affects web performance when no really huge files are involved. Obviously the effect is around an order of magnitude smaller than the effect of download speed since, since the download is roughly an order of magnitude faster than the upload speeds at many ISPs.

I had forgotten what a Greek Sophist was and had to go look it up. Hopefully I can help on another day. I'm a retired engineer so I'm always looking for interesting tech stuff.

Thanks so much. I'm both surprised and honored.

Yes, you are right, a true bug in one means that there's a bug in all. And as for it being a scary time to fly, amazingly, the reliability and safety of the aircraft is way better than in the old analog days. Mostly because the size and weight of those old systems wouldn't allow you to put redundancy everywhere you needed it. Now the probability of a catastrphic failure due to electronics or software failure is extremely low because with a redundant system, the probability is the product of the failure rates. So if one channel has a probability of catastrophic failure of 1.0 E-06 per flight hour, then the probability of having both channels go out is 1.0 E-12. These numbers are really small, but with thousands of aircraft flying all the time, they are racking up millions of hours a month, so the numbers have to be incredibly small or there'd be planes falling out of the sky regularly. The safety critical flight control systems on the planes are usually triple channel redundant. Engine systems are dual redundant because there are two engines. So as for is there too much redundancy, economics keeps it to a minimum, but as the number of aircraft flying increases, better safety numbers are always being sought.

As for the weight of that redundancy, it's all about gas mileage (making money). The aircraft design weight is set by competition amongs the plane manufacturers; each one wanting to earn more money with better mileage and lower ticket costs to steal sales away from the other guy. So in order to get the weight down with the added redundancy, smaller lighter electronics and new stronger lighter hardware in the control systems is required. It's usually more expensive. So redundancy usually only goes into the real safety critical systems. It's getting to be the same in cars.

Well enough rambling about the aircraft world. Thanks again for the promotion. I do test regularly using your tools, and check in the forums every week or two.

Interesting. Glad you found it. When I look in my test results, I can see exactly when the fix went in. I was a bit puzzled when the upload speed showed low but I didn't notice any performance hit. Because of that, I didn't push it with Time Warner. Their fix of the download speed wild variation due to the signal level made the performance right again.

Software bugs are tough. Before I retired I worked at GE Aircraft Engines in Evendale OH. I was an electronic engine control circuit designer. In the 1980s we transitioned from purely analog controls to digital controls. Each engine control had two independent channels of hardware running the same OS and AS. In those days there weren't very good software design and validation tools and standards. We were always terrified of the subtle software bugs that could lock up the Software and cause an engine shutdown. Commercial airlines always have a minimum of two engines and the ability to fly with one engine out. But both engines (4 control channels) run the same software. So there was always that small probability of a bug that would take out all of the engines at the same time. Miraculously (due to a lot of SW engineers checking code) it never happened. We had a couple of control channel shutdowns due to subtle software errors or hardwarevfailures over the years, but never a common mode one that took everything down. Back then the software was a lot simpler, and the engine controls had hydro mechanical backups. These days, there are no hydromechanical backups because they are very heavy, and the software is orders of magnitude more complex. But the design and validation process tools are also orders of magnitude more sophisticated.

But every time there is a new set of requirements that result in a software change, there's always the potential for something to slip by. Thankfully, a simple core of hardware and software safety nets that were developed that could be ported to new processors, memory, and control chips, and the wheel didn't have to be reinvented. Subtle software glitches are very tough to catch.

On Sun Aug 19 2012 @ 1:10:48 pm the world was right again.

Even after Time Warner came out and fixed the signal level problem, after they left, I was still only getting about 0.4 Mbps upload speed per TMN tests. Then about a week later, all of a sudden, it went back up to about 0.8 Mbps where it normally is. Their speed tests showed the same 1Mbps at a real 0.4 AND at 0.8. How worthless.

I was getting intermittent web page loads. What bothers me is that when you test the connection with their SpeedTest.ohio.rr test, you can watch the analog meter wander around between 0.4 and 1 Mbps upload during the speed test, and even when the need stabilizes at about 0.5 Mbps for the last 1/2 of the test or so, the digital readout at the end indicates 0.97 Mbps. There should be a class action lawsuit against them for that BS.

The TMN upload test was presenting a reasonable result showing about 0.4 and at time much worse than that. I tried 3 other speed test sites, and the only one that displayed the Upload speed being low was SpeedTest.org (showed about 0.5 Mbps). All the rest of them showed some distorted result that made the system appear good at 1Mbps.

Thanks TMN for having a good test system.

You can close this thread. Or if I can, how do I close it?

I just talked to Time Warner Roadrunner support and they detect a signal power out of range low problem, so forget this post

That sounds pretty bad. If you call the problem in to them (ISP) several times, they might actually put you on a more serious list. Time Warner does that; they'll finally escalate a problem.

My ISP (Time Warner Roadrunner) is very inconsistent with bandwidth too. Mine's usually very fast in the morning and slower at night during prime viewing times. Also, I think the video source (Netflix, Vudu etc) servers often get "surprised" with high volume demands and they display that they are adjusting to your network speeds when it's really a speed problem at their end. I believe that since we're still fairly early in the streaming HD video technology curve, the whole system is marginal. Heck, I still have the same cable modem that Time Warner gave me about 6 years ago, and their baseline Roadrunner Internet package only "guarantees" 10 Mbps download and 1 Mbps Upload. Their SpeedTest always shows green, when my truer speeds here on TMN are mor like 8 and 0.8.

Their pricing for the faster service is ludicrous

My test results lately for Upload speeds have consistently been about 1/2 of what they were July 15th and earlier. The Download speeds show about the same as they were before that date. I was curious if there were any changes to the calculation or test method.

I get about 1/2 the Upload speeds of previous tests on all my devices.

When I check the speeds using Time Warner's SpeedTest, the results are about what they used to be. Their upload test shows me getting about 0.9 Mbps and TMN tests used to show about 0.8. Now it's consistently about 0.4.

MudMan. Thanks. I will check that out. Doing it on a schedule (middle of the night) would be the way to go.

your modem and router need to be .......

you can probably find the modem config at http://192.168.100.1

thanks TriRan. The 192.168.100.1 page brought up a multiple button select tool for the modem and included a modem reset button.

Thanks everyone.

What software would I use to do a soft reset of the cable modem. I have a separate Router that I communicate with (the D-link) in the diagram I put a link to above. But I don't know how to reset the modem other than unplugging it. I'll take a look at at Warner's RoadRunner support info tomsee if I can find anything.

MudMan..when you run Automator, how do you communicate with your modem? My cable modem is outboard of my router.

TriRan-it's the Motorola Surfboard SB5101 model referenced above. I have a network diagram link in my original post showing how everything is hooked up.

Time Warner swapped my cable modem a few months ago while troubleshooting a performance problem. Same model. Only the old one would run for many many months without ever having to be reset. The old modem had nothing wrong with it; the performance issue was related to signal levels, but they swapped it anyway.

About once every 3-4 weeks, my network slows down to 20% of my averages. I called Time Warner on this and they said "well your modem hasn't been reset in a long time". It had been about 5-6weeks since the last reset. To reset it I have to go down into the basement, unplug it, then re-power it. After every reset the network speeds jump right back to their normally pretty decent speeds. Anyone have any idea as to why it wouldn't manage itself to where you didn't have to do a hard boot reset every month.

The modem is a Motorola Surfboard SB5101

My network configuration is:

Yeah their test tool typically shows almost 3x what the TMN tool shows. Theirs shows really good numbers even when the service is herky jerky and intermittent and nowhere near their guaranteed 10 down and 1 up. When I'm having problems with their service, the numbers are more like 4-5 down and 0.2 up tested on TMN, but show green on theirs at about 15 down curiously their tool reads much more accurately measuring upload-reads almost the same as TMN. Our local RoadRunner here in Cincinnati is also quite a bit slower than the Nat'l typical numbers that you can pull up here on TMN.

It was the cable modem. A reset fixed the problem. Time Warner's online chat support guy said empty browser cache often, delete cookies often and reset the modem more often. I hadn't reset it it in probably 3-4 weeks. The problem was fixed without deleting any cookies. Not sure what they'd have to do with connection speed???

Anyone got any experience/advice on how often to reset a Motorola SURFBoard (SB5101 I think) modem to keep things running smoothly? It's way down in the basement so it tends to get neglected

My download speeds are off 1/3 and my upload speeds are down by 80%. anyone else having issues today?

I didn't reset any of my stuff yet to see if it cleared because the wife works from the home and can't go offline until after 6PM

Thanks guys. Well, according to Time Warner I'm only guaranteed 10 MBps down and 1 MBps up. I consistently get about 9 and 0.9 using TMN - it shows above 20 down on Time Warner's OOKLA derived tool, and 0.9 up. And this is on two different modems (they swapped one out for me lately because my speeds were erratic, but later found it was circuits outside). Based on those upload and download numbers, I doubt if the the modem is the bottleneck. But to be honest, MudMan, I don't really know if bigger RAM buffer sizes and faster processor in a more modern modem still might help some.

And yes the numbers are 42.88 (30). Mbps Where: "Maximum raw throughput including overhead (maximum usable throughput without overhead)"

Thanks TriRan. I had a hunch it wouldn't be that simple

Set the fan turn on point as low as you can stand from a fan noise and power consumption perspective. If the fan is relatively low power compared to the total power draw of the computer, then it's not much of a money impact letting it run at just above the idle temperature. If the fan is real noisy, and it's bothersome except when you're gaming, set the threshold higher- just above the hottest temp it gets when the room is warm and your doing you typical stuff on the computer.

Running electronics hot decreases the reliability of the components. The predicted failure rates double about every 10 deg C for most electronic assemblies. Allowing the parts to get hot then cool down is also detrimental in that the temperature cycles stress and unstressed the solder joints. The bigger the temperature swing the more detrimental it is and the less likely it is that some solder joint will fail. The best case is cool and constant.

If you have the option of low speed and high speed fan set points, you could set the fan to low ON at 25C and high ON at 40C for example.

The one sentence in there is wrong. "The bigger the temperature swing the more detrimental it is and the less likely it is that some solder joint will fail". It should have said:

The bigger the temperature swing the more detrimental it is and the MORE likely it is that some solder joint will fail

Sorry 'bout that, didn't proof read. B(-).

From Wikipedia:

DOCSIS 3.0 features channel bonding, which enables multiple downstream and upstream channels to be used together at the same time by a single subscriber and adds management over IPv6.

Speeds

2.0 38 Mbit/s  downstream     27 Mbit/s. upstream

3.0 m × 38 Mbit/s n × 27 Mbit/s

Where

m and n are # channels, max of 4

It looks to me that the the throughput increase of DOCSIS 3 over 2 is from multiple channel operation. If I put a DOCSIS 3 TIme Warner Cable compatible modem in place of my DOCSIS 2 model they provided me, will I automatically get multi channel operation and a speed increase on their standard service? i.e. does Time Warner have to enable the multi channel operation on their end? Or does the modem respond back to Time Warner that it's multi channel and automatically TxRx in multi channel.  I'm wondering if their high speed service is as simple as a DOCSIS 3 model or do they have to enable the 4 channel operation

Mudman.. You think they'd let me keep the modem? I'd probably like the faster service and be disappointed when I dropped it for this serve. I'm limited to 1 Mbps upload and they "guarantee" 10 Mbps download times on the plan I'm on now. I rarely get over 9 down and 0.9 up as measured by TMN. Of course it's all green and 3 times as high on download with their speed test tool. Strange though that their upload speed measures about the same on their tool as the on on this site.

Thanks for the suggestion TMNSV. I may try that.

I did the 7.6.1 update about a week ago and everything in the house that I've tested (2 Macs, 2 iPads, 1 Dell laptop, 2 iPhones) improved. All wireless bands a, b, g and n improved. I'm getting much more consistent results, and a much improved range. I'm using it in Bridge mode connected to a 10/100 wired router. I'm getting pretty much my ISP (RoadRunner Cincinnati) max speeds even at over 40 feet thru 2 walls and kitchen cabinets on the iPad and nearly that on the iPhone on WiFi. I'm getting the same speeds now on the iPad that I get on the iMac on wired Ethernet through the 10/100 router and Time Warner provided Motorola cable modem. Too bad the modem maxes out at about 8-9 Mbps down and 0.9 up. One note on the update. At first the iPhone speeds were only about 1/2 of their prior averages on Wifi. I looked on the Apple Support Airport forum and a lot of people had the phone slow down issue. the fix was to change the AEBS 2.4 GHz channel from automatic (was on ch 6) to a different fixed channel (I chose 10). That fixed the phone. People surmised that the firmware update changed the gain of the unit and that interference from neighbor's wifi on ch 6 was bleeding more of their signals into the unit and worsening the noise figure. I did note using the Airport Utility that the signal to noise ratio was better, and that 3 more of the the neighbor's networks showed up on the list of networks showing. Even the older Dell laptop 802.11a is running faster. And the the 2006 MacBook Pro with 802.11g is running as fast as the "n" devices-which shows me that Time Warner and their equipment are the bottleneck, not my gear - confirmed with a direct wired connection to the cable modem. They want more money per month to get faster service. I wonder if they would even have to change any of their equipment other than the cable modem.

That's cool. I didn't know that at first, but now that I do, it's not a big deal. Once I deleted out the orphan readings, it shows me what the simultaneous readings were. I just now always run the UP and Down.