[WXC/VFX] FS Up and Down but not quite

Forums › One New Zealand (including Vodafone, WxC, Farmside) › [WXC/VFX] FS Up and Down but not quite

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#73379 13-Dec-2010 11:34

Hello,

After just moving from my river plan to a full VFX plan everything is going well, except we just can't get upload speeds which are comparable to the download speeds. The difference is usually something like 750kbps download and 145kbps upload.

I have logged a ticket and have been working through some options with the helpdesk fellow (who has been very helpful to date), but figured posting here I might just trawl other peoples thoughts too.

So far we have recreated/used another account (in case something was corrupted on the account setup side) - no difference
We have requested that Telecom rebuild the port - no difference
Used a different computer - no difference

I have verified the firmware is the current/most up to date version.

And we have rebooted a number of times - all no difference

I have tried at different times of the day, and it always seems consistent.

My DSL connection is as follows:

DSL Connection
-----------------------------------------
DSL Status: Connected
DSL Modulation Mode: ADSL2+
DSL Path Mode: Fast
Downstream Rate: 5025 kbps
Upstream Rate: 1003 kbps
Downstream Margin: 7 db
Upstream Margin: 11 db
Downstream Line Attenuation: 42 db
Upstream Line Attenuation: 12.5 db
Downstream Transmit Power: 12 db
Upstream Transmit Power: 21 db

PVC Connection
-----------------------------------------
Encapsulation: RFC 2364 PPPoA
Multiplexing: LLC
Qos: UBR
Pcr Rate: 0
Scr Rate: 0
Autodetect: Disable
VPI: 0
VCI: 100
Enable: Yes
PVC Status: Up

Anyone have any ideas as to what might be causing this?

Cheers
Troy

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

#416441 13-Dec-2010 11:39

upload speeds are almost never comparable to download speeds. it's the nature of DSL

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#416447 13-Dec-2010 11:43

So going from a fs/256 plan to a fs/fs plan; I should expect no difference?

inquisitor

135 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#416451 13-Dec-2010 11:49

NonprayingMantis: upload speeds are almost never comparable to download speeds. it's the nature of DSL

It's the nature of ADSL, where the A stands for assymetric, since the ratio between up- and download is assymetric. In contrast SDSL provides a symmetric up- and download ratio.

E3xtc: So going from a fs/256 plan to a fs/fs plan; I should expect no difference?

If you really constantly get 145 kbps (= KBit/s) upstream, it's slow, since your connection should be able to deliver nearly 1000 kbps. But as you might know bandwidth on the internet is based on the bottleneck principle - the tightest (slowest) section limits total speed. When using services on the web your data packets go through dozens of sections (links) - if only one of these is congested, your speed decreases.

router: AVM Fritz!Box Fon 7390 with Huawei K3765 USB modem attached as GSM voice gateway
VoIP-providers: intervoip.com | sipgate.de (German DID) | sipgate.co.uk (British DID) | sipcall.ch (Swiss DID)
connection: 100/5 MBit/s (DOCSIS 3.0)
mobile devices: Huawei P6 | Nokia Lumia 630 Dual SIM | Huawei: E5832, E1762, K3715, K3765 | Qualcomm Gobi 2000 in Sony VAIO VPC-Z12X9E/X

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#416459 13-Dec-2010 11:58

Thanks Inquisitor for the detail/info. Yeah I appreciate that concept, but this seems to be consistently around the 140-150kbps...even if I get on in a real low use period (0700 Sat morn) the figures are exactly the same.

inquisitor

135 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#416533 13-Dec-2010 14:04

What actually are you uploading and to where? Have you tried a www.speedtest.net?

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#416535 13-Dec-2010 14:12

Am just using the Xnet speed test. Have done speedtest.net also, and that mirrors what is happening - ie just completed it now again and it did .8Mb/s and .16Mb/s

Griven

174 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#416983 14-Dec-2010 11:28

There is something wrong you should get somewhere between 5-800kbps up with fs/fs. Your sync rates to the exchange are good. I can see you have spoken with the help desk and they have a fault currently in with Telecom to have your port looked at.

Nicholas Cuc

Network Support
WorldxChange Communications
www.xnet.co.nz

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#416992 14-Dec-2010 11:43

Hello Nicholas; yeah Telecom rebuilt the port on Friday (or was it Thursday), as I received an automated email saying the task had been completed. However since then I have not noticed any difference at all(even after a restart of the router). Sort of weird.

Oldhat

180 posts

Master Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#417176 14-Dec-2010 17:59

Probably totally unrelated, but I noticed that you are running LLC. Perhaps try VC-MUX and see if that alleviates the problem?

Even though the port profile has supposedly been recreated, you could try requesting interleaving the connection as that generally requires recreation. If that does the trick you could then go back to no interleaving.

RunningMan

8953 posts

Uber Geek

#417215 14-Dec-2010 19:31

Oldhat: Probably totally unrelated, but I noticed that you are running LLC. Perhaps try VC-MUX and see if that alleviates the problem?

That's good spotting - Xnet do specify VC-MUX for multiplexing on their support page

Niel

3267 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#417238 14-Dec-2010 20:10

Anything else running in the background and eating up your bandwidth? My brother had lots of trouble with slow speed until I disabled Metacafe and all the hidden junk that came with it...

You can never have enough Volvos!

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#417440 15-Dec-2010 08:33

Oldhat: Probably totally unrelated, but I noticed that you are running LLC. Perhaps try VC-MUX and see if that alleviates the problem?

Even though the port profile has supposedly been recreated, you could try requesting interleaving the connection as that generally requires recreation. If that does the trick you could then go back to no interleaving.

Nice one OldHat; thanks for spotting that one...I had spent many times trolling through the settings of the router, but alas my lack of technical aptitude meant I didn't really see anything out of place...I will change that setting tonight and see if I get any improvement!

E3xtc

773 posts

Ultimate Geek

#417937 16-Dec-2010 08:05

Oh well; I tried VC, rebooted (x2) and made no difference :(

Was worth a try though....this is truly bizarre.