Jump to content
Minstrel

Re: RCN speeds after tweak using j79zlr's tweak tool

Recommended Posts

Hi group! Can't believe it's been 3 years since I've last posted in here. As I seem to remember my last post, I was complaining that my speeds from RCN were not up to specs and had given up on any success to achieve the advertised results. Well, after numerous attempts with other sources. I went back to Cablenut after finding out that there were new updates available. After getting the correct info from RCN about caps and a few attempts with j79zlr's tweak tool, I have achieved  the following results...

:::.. testmy.net test results ..:::

Download Connection is:: 14140 Kbps about 14.14 Mbps (tested with 12288 kB)

Download Speed is:: 1726 kB/s

Upload Connection is:: 393 Kbps about 0.4 Mbps (tested with 1496 kB)

Upload Speed is:: 48 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net (Main)

Test Time:: 2009/09/26 - 3:51pm

D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-056HDAP4L

U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-4HYGE6IMA

User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) [!]

As you can imagine, I am happy with DL speeds in this range since my last post. It isn't an awesome speed, but, it is acceptable. However, the UL speed is still ridiculously slow. I am still trying to figure out why it is so poor. If anyone has any other suggestions to my issue please respond. All I can tell you is that RCN's UL ratelimit cap claims to be 800000. I have tried everything I know to increase my upload speed without success. Any input is welcomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an update for all the RCN users out there. After using RCN's new beta speed test (http://pa.speedtest.rcn.net/newtest/) the results are much different from those here at testmy.net. According to RCN, my speeds are  "Max Download Speed: 6.97Mbps (or 55760 kbps)" and "Max Upload Speed: 1.38Mbps (or 11040 kbps)". Now, can someone please explain the discrepancy in these two location speed tests? They were only taken 5 min. apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I ran it in IE8, seems that my Java Runtime Environment was disabled... anyways, here's the results.

TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.5.4b

click START to begin

** Starting test 1 of 1 **

Connected to: ndt.anl.gov  --  Using IPv4 address

Another client is currently being served, your test will begin within 45 seconds

Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Done

checking for firewalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Done

running 10s outbound test (client-to-server [C2S]) . . . . . 761.0kb/s

running 10s inbound test (server-to-client [s2C]) . . . . . . 7.33Mb/s

Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem

Information: Other network traffic is congesting the link

here's the the stat details...

WEB100 Enabled Statistics:

Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Done

checking for firewalls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Done

running 10s outbound test (client-to-server [C2S]) . . . . . 761.0kb/s

running 10s inbound test (server-to-client [s2C]) . . . . . . 7.33Mb/s

------  Client System Details  ------

OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1

Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.6.0_16

------  Web100 Detailed Analysis  ------

Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found.

Link set to Full Duplex mode

Information: throughput is limited by other network traffic.

Good network cable(s) found

Normal duplex operation found.

Web100 reports the Round trip time = 79.01 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and

There were 99 packets retransmitted, 345 duplicate acks received, and 307 SACK blocks received

The connection stalled 3 times due to packet loss

The connection was idle 0.85 seconds (8.5%) of the time

S2C throughput test: Packet queuing detected: 0.88%

This connection is sender limited 49.76% of the time.

This connection is network limited 50.23% of the time.

Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to:

RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON

RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON

RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF

RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF

RFC 1323 Window Scaling: ON

Server 'ndt.anl.gov' is probably behind a firewall. [Connection to the ephemeral port failed]

Client is probably behind a firewall. [Connection to the ephemeral port failed]

Packet size is preserved End-to-End

Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End

Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address

Server says [216.164.xxx.xxx] but Client says [192.168.1.100]

and here's the "more details" screen...

WEB100 Kernel Variables:

Client: localhost/127.0.0.1

CurMSS: 1460

X_Rcvbuf: 262142

X_Sndbuf: 262142

AckPktsIn: 2204

AckPktsOut: 0

BytesRetrans: 144540

CongAvoid: 0

CongestionOverCount: 0

CongestionSignals: 3

CountRTT: 1826

CurCwnd: 97820

CurRTO: 284

CurRwinRcvd: 513920

CurRwinSent: 5888

CurSsthresh: 77380

DSACKDups: 0

DataBytesIn: 0

DataBytesOut: 9355660

DataPktsIn: 0

DataPktsOut: 6392

DupAcksIn: 345

ECNEnabled: 0

FastRetran: 3

MaxCwnd: 195640

MaxMSS: 1460

MaxRTO: 324

MaxRTT: 176

MaxRwinRcvd: 513920

MaxRwinSent: 5888

MaxSsthresh: 137240

MinMSS: 1460

MinRTO: 244

MinRTT: 44

MinRwinRcvd: 513920

MinRwinSent: 5840

NagleEnabled: 1

OtherReductions: 3

PktsIn: 2204

PktsOut: 6392

PktsRetrans: 99

RcvWinScale: 7

SACKEnabled: 3

SACKsRcvd: 307

SendStall: 0

SlowStart: 0

SampleRTT: 84

SmoothedRTT: 84

SndWinScale: 3

SndLimTimeRwin: 0

SndLimTimeCwnd: 5140457

SndLimTimeSender: 5090614

SndLimTransRwin: 0

SndLimTransCwnd: 885

SndLimTransSender: 885

SndLimBytesRwin: 0

SndLimBytesCwnd: 8746260

SndLimBytesSender: 609400

SubsequentTimeouts: 0

SumRTT: 144276

Timeouts: 3

TimestampsEnabled: 0

WinScaleRcvd: 3

WinScaleSent: 7

DupAcksOut: 0

StartTimeUsec: 786485

Duration: 10234165

c2sData: 2

c2sAck: 2

s2cData: 3

s2cAck: 3

half_duplex: 0

link: 0

congestion: 1

bad_cable: 0

mismatch: 0

spd: 7.32

bw: 6.51

loss: 0.000469337

avgrtt: 79.01

waitsec: 0.85

timesec: 10.00

order: 0.1565

rwintime: 0.0000

sendtime: 0.4976

cwndtime: 0.5024

rwin: 3.9209

swin: 2.0000

cwin: 1.4926

rttsec: 0.079012

Sndbuf: 262142

aspd: 0.00000

CWND-Limited: 501.83

minCWNDpeak: 2920

maxCWNDpeak: 194180

CWNDpeaks: 4

The theoretical network limit is 6.51 Mbps

The NDT server has a 127.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 25.31 Mbps

Your PC/Workstation has a 501.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 49.62 Mbps

The network based flow control limits the throughput to 18.89 Mbps

Client Data reports link is 'T1', Client Acks report link is 'T1'

Server Data reports link is 'Ethernet', Server Acks report link is 'Ethernet'

What do think the problem is mud...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, here's the most recent speed check...

:::.. Download Stats ..:::

Download Connection is:: 12368 Kbps about 12.4 Mbps (tested with 12288 kB)

Download Speed is:: 1510 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Main)

Test Time:: 2009/10/14 - 11:15am

Bottom Line:: 216X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.68 sec

Tested from a 12288 kB file and took 8.139 seconds to complete

Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 139.83 % faster than the average for host (rcn.com)

D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-VU4ATQND1

User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) [!]

And the Upload...

:::.. Upload Stats ..:::

Upload Connection is:: 749 Kbps about 0.7 Mbps (tested with 1496 kB)

Upload Speed is:: 91 kB/s

Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Main)

Test Time:: 2009/10/14 - 11:45am

Bottom Line:: 13X faster than 56K 1MB Upload in 11.25 sec

Tested from a 1496 kB file and took 16.369 seconds to complete

Upload Diagnosis:: Looks Great : 1.77 % faster than the average for host (rcn.com)

U-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-C5HU0V4J2

User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.3) Gecko/20090824 Firefox/3.5.3 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) [!]

I guess I shouldn't be complaining, both speeds are above average for RCN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah mudmanc4, I think you're right. I shouldn't be complaining when both DL & UL is higher than average for RCN. I think I'll just shutup and be happy with what I've got. But that doesn't mean I'm going to stop "tweaking". I'll squeeze every last kbps out of this critter if it's the last thing I do!  :twisted: Thanks for the help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah mudmanc4, I think you're right. I shouldn't be complaining when both DL & UL is higher than average for RCN. I think I'll just shutup and be happy with what I've got. But that doesn't mean I'm going to stop "tweaking". I'll squeeze every last Kbps out of this critter if it's the last thing I do!  :twisted: Thanks for the help.

Now thats what I'm talkin about  :icon_thumright:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...