Thursday, March 05, 2009

The Comcast Rant

I’m a current Comcast subscriber for a couple of years now, and everything’s been going pretty smoothly, until a few days ago. We’re talking latency issues, ping times shooting up into the thousands, loss of connectivity and so on. So I decided to give Comcast a call, they scheduled a tech for the next day, and he swapped out the modem, which seemed to fix the problem. That is until the next day, it started up again. Latency shot through the rough, online gaming was impossible, browsing websites became a chore.

So then I decide to go back to an earlier idea of the problem, a bad node. Come to find out that hop/node in my trace route test that reports 100% packet loss, according to a few people over at DSLReports.com, is supposed to be there. I’m thinking to myself, alright, I did a trace route test on network-tools.com, and noticed that it timed out on hop 11, right before hitting my IP/Modem. The latency difference between hop 10, and hop 12, was about 200ms. Now if it’s supposed to be there, why is it that the trace route test reports back a hundred or two ms difference in the ping, and isn’t that difference for DOCSIS 3.0, and not DOCSIS 2.0, which I’m now currently on. Oh and the kicker here, I was on DOCSIS 1.0, until they swapped out the modem, which is DOCSIS 2.0 compliant.

Don’t get me wrong, tech support is nice, and it’s nice talking to an understanding individual, even though the problem persisted. I haven’t encountered the latency drop yet today, but it’s still early, and I’m hoping that it will eventually go away on it’s own. Regardless, Comcast is looking into whether or not for sure that HOP that’s reporting a 100% packet loss should really be there or not.

Comcast is already at stretched capacity and the storm on the east coast probably didn’t help much, as other people I’ve spoken to up and down the north east, report the same problem. Will Comcast fix this? Who knows, but if it persists for over three months, I’m switching providers, maybe even going back to Verizon.

No comments: