Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Rogers Cable Internet Canda VOIP

Last response: in Networking
Share
January 28, 2005 2:55:38 AM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

VOIP On a Rogers 3 meg connection

My experiences have been terrible.

Well at first It was great .. I could call all the time and recieve
calls. I called every day all over the place was trying to find ways to
call places I was local to , trying to find a reson to play with it.
6 months later just after christmas My voip connection started geting
crummy. i noticed my ping rates dropping. (I am guessing alot of people
in my area got highspeed?) I dunno but was unable to make or recieve a
voip call weather it was over freeworld dial or my voip provider lines
with out the othere party telling me they can not hear me and I am
breaking up and that they are going to hang up now.


I noticed my ping to my gate way increased to 100+ ms and its all
over the place.

My question is are there otheres out there with ping rates 60-80 with
peeks like 180 here and there after 4pm

Early morning its great I get like 5-10 peeking at 21 or so... as the
day rolls pon it get crummy. thats when I can't get the calls

after repeated calls to the rogers support lines i get that 60ms is
fairly decent.

I sumited numours times for them to fix my connection. for a bit there
I had a week or so of decent net with pigs to the gate way at busy
times (after 4pm) at 30-40ms ) I thought that was acceptible
considering cable highspeed is my only option.

that did not last long. Maybe I never made that many calls but its just
as bad again. after 12 noon it gets crummy. I can dial put but I am
lucky if I can speek for 5 mins before I lose the ability to speak to
the othere party. the people on the othere end always seem to be decent
clear. Just me they stop hearing.

in my numous attempts to get them to fix that i have been told by one
fellow technical support rogers that possibly they can fix it

Then a bit later i managed to get a not so friendly fellow who tells me
the service they provide is not on othere ping rates and on providing a
3 meg service. I told him with such crummy pings to the gate way does
not give me the full 3 meg connection he really did not listen much to
me and went on to tell me I am wasteing my time complaining. Itold him
I just want my internet back the way it was before the christmas nice
and fast. I made it clear I do not run windows and that its not a issue
of communication s spyware using up my bandwidth. unlike windows users
I am in control of what goes in and out of my computer.

I hear Rogers plans to roll out the VOIP of there own service .. i have
a feeling they are not going to be very good at it. I hear also they
want to use seperate units (not sure what they mean by that) but I got
the impression from a few techs that it was a seperate connection all
together for the phone service.

I have a friend I speak with in the states NY and he gets a steady 2ms
in a 50 ping .. All i can say is wow thats amazing. and how bad Rogers is.

my bloody 2 cents. dam it .
January 29, 2005 12:57:04 AM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

m wrote:
> VOIP On a Rogers 3 meg connection
>
> My experiences have been terrible.
>
> Well at first It was great .. I could call all the time and recieve
> calls. I called every day all over the place was trying to find ways to
> call places I was local to , trying to find a reson to play with it. 6
> months later just after christmas My voip connection started geting
> crummy. i noticed my ping rates dropping. (I am guessing alot of people
> in my area got highspeed?) I dunno but was unable to make or recieve a
> voip call weather it was over freeworld dial or my voip provider lines
> with out the othere party telling me they can not hear me and I am
> breaking up and that they are going to hang up now.
>
>
> I noticed my ping to my gate way increased to 100+ ms and its all
> over the place.
>
> My question is are there otheres out there with ping rates 60-80 with
> peeks like 180 here and there after 4pm
>
> Early morning its great I get like 5-10 peeking at 21 or so... as the
> day rolls pon it get crummy. thats when I can't get the calls
>
> after repeated calls to the rogers support lines i get that 60ms is
> fairly decent.
>
> I sumited numours times for them to fix my connection. for a bit there
> I had a week or so of decent net with pigs to the gate way at busy
> times (after 4pm) at 30-40ms ) I thought that was acceptible
> considering cable highspeed is my only option.
>
> that did not last long. Maybe I never made that many calls but its just
> as bad again. after 12 noon it gets crummy. I can dial put but I am
> lucky if I can speek for 5 mins before I lose the ability to speak to
> the othere party. the people on the othere end always seem to be decent
> clear. Just me they stop hearing.
>
> in my numous attempts to get them to fix that i have been told by one
> fellow technical support rogers that possibly they can fix it
>
> Then a bit later i managed to get a not so friendly fellow who tells me
> the service they provide is not on othere ping rates and on providing a
> 3 meg service. I told him with such crummy pings to the gate way does
> not give me the full 3 meg connection he really did not listen much to
> me and went on to tell me I am wasteing my time complaining. Itold him
> I just want my internet back the way it was before the christmas nice
> and fast. I made it clear I do not run windows and that its not a issue
> of communication s spyware using up my bandwidth. unlike windows users
> I am in control of what goes in and out of my computer.
>
> I hear Rogers plans to roll out the VOIP of there own service .. i have
> a feeling they are not going to be very good at it. I hear also they
> want to use seperate units (not sure what they mean by that) but I got
> the impression from a few techs that it was a seperate connection all
> together for the phone service.
>
> I have a friend I speak with in the states NY and he gets a steady 2ms
> in a 50 ping .. All i can say is wow thats amazing. and how bad Rogers is.
>
> my bloody 2 cents. dam it .

You're ping isn't that important with the numbers you described. It
would be more helpful if you can actually describe you voip setup in
detail. From what you've said so far one is to assume Rogers is the bad
guy. Could you provide more details about your setup?
January 29, 2005 7:01:35 AM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

It sounds as if the problem is that you are using a broadband
connection to carry voip but the service provider doesn't guarantee QoS
or bandwidth. You are simply seeing that the cable network segment you
are attached to is more heavily used than that of your friend in NY -
the quality and performance of the cable network may well be identical.

When your service provider introduces VoIP based telephony service they
will probably use the DOCSIS and PacketCable standards, which guarantee
quality of service. This does not run over a separate network however
would use a separate "slice" of bandwidth within the cable network that
is reserved for voice traffic.

Alan
www.voiptroubleshooter.com
Related resources
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 12:33:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

Alan wrote:

> It sounds as if the problem is that you are using a broadband
> connection to carry voip but the service provider doesn't guarantee QoS
> or bandwidth. You are simply seeing that the cable network segment you
> are attached to is more heavily used than that of your friend in NY -
> the quality and performance of the cable network may well be identical.
>
> When your service provider introduces VoIP based telephony service they
> will probably use the DOCSIS and PacketCable standards, which guarantee
> quality of service. This does not run over a separate network however
> would use a separate "slice" of bandwidth within the cable network that
> is reserved for voice traffic.
>
> Alan
> www.voiptroubleshooter.com
>

Listen to Alan; I think he is 100% correct.

Sounds to me like a number of people think they can add VoIP all by
themselves if they have broadband!-)
February 2, 2005 1:19:14 AM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

Well what is it you would like to know.

I am runing a DOCSIS modem toshiba PCX2500. residential connection 3
meg. I have a Linksys wrt54gs modem runing the sveasoft firmware. My
computer is a Linux debian runing sarge.

I have a snome190 IP phone connected to a Debian asterisk server located
in anouther part of ontario on a business sympatico connection static ip.
-Linksys pap2-na (unlocked) runing line 1 fwd
and a babytel.ca toronto DID line 2


My gateway ping... as Of 10 pm
--- 69.xxx.xxx.1 ping statistics ---
101 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 31.8/117.7/1034.1 ms


69.xxx.xxx.1
traceroute to 69.xxx.xxx.1 (69.xxx.xxx.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 0.333 ms 0.241 ms 0.218 ms
2 10.82.8.1 (10.82.8.1) 242.906 ms * *

$ traceroute pbx.xxxxxx.com
traceroute to pbx.xxxxxx.com (69.xxx.xxx.xxx), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 0.288 ms 0.240 ms 0.226 ms
2 10.82.8.1 (10.82.8.1) 386.191 ms 41.839 ms 44.028 ms
3 gw03.pr.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.91.57) 45.018 ms 35.322
ms 42.946 ms
4 gw01.pr.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.80.113) 82.108 ms
38.346 ms 41.964 ms
5 gw02.ym.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.81.178) 50.546 ms
127.915 ms 104.624 ms
6 gw02.bloor.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.80.134) 55.020 ms
33.813 ms 50.484 ms
7 gw04.ym.phub.net.cable.rogers.com (66.185.83.134) 79.091 ms
148.505 ms 61.982 ms
8 p13-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.213) 69.097 ms
174.042 ms 118.112 ms
9 p15-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.61) 97.592 ms
315.756 ms 244.772 ms
10 bellnexxia.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.30) 69.565 ms
75.906 ms 74.566 ms
11 core2-chicago23-pos0-3.in.bellnexxia.net (206.108.103.126) 151.172
ms 98.442 ms 100.596 ms
12 core3-toronto63-pos6-3.in.bellnexxia.net (206.108.103.113) 83.558
ms 83.920 ms 80.036 ms
13 HSE-Sherbrooke-ppp98325.qc.sympatico.ca (64.230.220.226) 216.796 ms
165.045 ms 90.561 ms
14 64.230.xxx.xxx (64.230.xxx.xxx) 102.600 ms 109.520 ms 75.036 ms
15 Quebec-HSE-pppxxxxxx.qc.sympatico.ca (69.xxx.xxx.xxx) 162.194 ms
221.655 ms 171.654 ms
16 Quebec-HSE-pppxxxxxx.qc.sympatico.ca (69.xxx.xxx.xxx) 106.090 ms
132.482 ms 172.709 ms

The last two repeat not sure why? Quebec-HSE-pppxxxxxx.qc.sympatico.ca
(xxx for privacy of our static ip)




Rick Merrill wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>
>> It sounds as if the problem is that you are using a broadband
>> connection to carry voip but the service provider doesn't guarantee QoS
>> or bandwidth. You are simply seeing that the cable network segment you
>> are attached to is more heavily used than that of your friend in NY -
>> the quality and performance of the cable network may well be identical.
>>
>> When your service provider introduces VoIP based telephony service they
>> will probably use the DOCSIS and PacketCable standards, which guarantee
>> quality of service. This does not run over a separate network however
>> would use a separate "slice" of bandwidth within the cable network that
>> is reserved for voice traffic.
>>
>> Alan
>> www.voiptroubleshooter.com
>>
>
> Listen to Alan; I think he is 100% correct.
>
> Sounds to me like a number of people think they can add VoIP all by
> themselves if they have broadband!-)
February 2, 2005 1:30:26 AM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

In the early morning its a low ping, things seem fast. I can use the
g711u - a no problem, and its not till just after 12 noon that I
literly have to switch to gsm or g729a to maintain a call with out them
asking me if I am still there.. and that i am cutting out.

I was at a residence with a sympatico DSL connection last night that
during 7pm-9pm I did pings to the gate way and they seemed steady flow
all the way down the screen at 10ms and 11ms I think i had in a ping of
50 1 12ms. Now everything on his connection was quick, no long pauses
between web pages and stuff, not to mention the snom 190 test to the
server everything was clear.. . Now why can't they tune up my side like
that.

Now I did a series of pings. now I know you say pings don't matter but
look at this. On the fast decent connection (offices where I work that
have fast connections they have steady pings. i do fwd.pulver.com on a
rack we have based off a major connection.

# ping fwd.pulver.com
PING fwd.pulver.com (69.90.155.70) from 216.194.68.218 : 56(84) bytes of
data.
Warning: no SO_TIMESTAMP support, falling back to SIOCGSTAMP
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=58.3 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=2 ttl=52 time=58.1 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=3 ttl=52 time=57.9 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=4 ttl=52 time=58.2 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=5 ttl=52 time=57.9 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=6 ttl=52 time=57.9 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=7 ttl=52 time=58.1 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=8 ttl=52 time=58.2 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=9 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=10 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=11 ttl=52 time=57.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=12 ttl=52 time=58.5 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=13 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=14 ttl=52 time=57.7 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=15 ttl=52 time=58.4 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=16 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=17 ttl=52 time=58.2 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=18 ttl=52 time=57.7 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=19 ttl=52 time=58.3 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=20 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=21 ttl=52 time=57.9 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=22 ttl=52 time=57.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=23 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=24 ttl=52 time=57.9 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=25 ttl=52 time=58.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=26 ttl=52 time=57.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=27 ttl=52 time=57.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=28 ttl=52 time=58.6 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=29 ttl=52 time=57.9 ms

--- fwd.pulver.com ping statistics ---
29 packets transmitted, 29 received, 0% loss, time 28783ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 57.705/58.084/58.695/0.270 ms

note the steady ness of the times in ms
now here is anouther from the astrisk pbx off the business connection

same idea steady

pbx:~# ping fwd.pulver.com
PING fwd.pulver.com (69.90.155.70) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=39.5 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=38.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=37.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=37.2 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=5 ttl=51 time=36.3 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=36.4 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=7 ttl=51 time=40.6 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=8 ttl=51 time=36.6 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=9 ttl=51 time=36.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=10 ttl=51 time=36.5 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=11 ttl=51 time=36.8 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=12 ttl=51 time=36.5 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=13 ttl=51 time=37.2 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=14 ttl=51 time=36.4 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=15 ttl=51 time=36.9 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=16 ttl=51 time=37.1 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=17 ttl=51 time=37.4 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=18 ttl=51 time=37.3 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=19 ttl=51 time=36.3 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=20 ttl=51 time=37.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=21 ttl=51 time=37.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=22 ttl=51 time=36.0 ms
64 bytes from 69.90.155.70: icmp_seq=23 ttl=51 time=36.7 ms

--- fwd.pulver.com ping statistics ---
23 packets transmitted, 23 received, 0% packet loss, time 26354ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 36.016/37.199/40.637/1.074 ms
pbx:~#

Maybe the connection I have has issues with QOS on the DOCSIS. Possibly
Rogers is allowing there networks to be overloaded.

Rick Merrill wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>
>> It sounds as if the problem is that you are using a broadband
>> connection to carry voip but the service provider doesn't guarantee QoS
>> or bandwidth. You are simply seeing that the cable network segment you
>> are attached to is more heavily used than that of your friend in NY -
>> the quality and performance of the cable network may well be identical.
>>
>> When your service provider introduces VoIP based telephony service they
>> will probably use the DOCSIS and PacketCable standards, which guarantee
>> quality of service. This does not run over a separate network however
>> would use a separate "slice" of bandwidth within the cable network that
>> is reserved for voice traffic.
>>
>> Alan
>> www.voiptroubleshooter.com
>>
>
> Listen to Alan; I think he is 100% correct.
>
> Sounds to me like a number of people think they can add VoIP all by
> themselves if they have broadband!-)
February 2, 2005 9:56:36 AM

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

6:56 Am Eastern Time
--- 69.192.132.1 ping statistics ---
29 packets transmitted, 29 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 17.6/30.4/79.6 ms


Rick Merrill wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>
>> It sounds as if the problem is that you are using a broadband
>> connection to carry voip but the service provider doesn't guarantee QoS
>> or bandwidth. You are simply seeing that the cable network segment you
>> are attached to is more heavily used than that of your friend in NY -
>> the quality and performance of the cable network may well be identical.
>>
>> When your service provider introduces VoIP based telephony service they
>> will probably use the DOCSIS and PacketCable standards, which guarantee
>> quality of service. This does not run over a separate network however
>> would use a separate "slice" of bandwidth within the cable network that
>> is reserved for voice traffic.
>>
>> Alan
>> www.voiptroubleshooter.com
>>
>
> Listen to Alan; I think he is 100% correct.
>
> Sounds to me like a number of people think they can add VoIP all by
> themselves if they have broadband!-)
!