Extremely high latency from 4am - 12pm in Baltimore, MD

Lately for the past month I have been getting extremely high latency 1500ms+.  I am directly wired to the Actiontec router using a new cable on a confirmed working lan card.  I believe the problem maybe at the POD card.  How would I go about proving to Verizon without going through numerous transfers of people that don't have a clue?

I had the same problem since Mid-June. Seems like it's anywhere in North Eastern United States. I myself is located about 20 Minutes from Washington DC. I get the latency right around 12~50 ms on first hop to Google or verizon.net on a good day with trace route test. The people in Verizon tells me that's normal but I don't buy that because my neighbor gets around less than 20 ms, never higher. It gets progressively bad around prime time and onward. Around 12 AM it can reach from 100~400 ms on latency to Google or verizon.net server.
I am a late night gamer and need that low latency badly. Seems like most of the people I have talk to from FSC (Fios solution Center) had no idea what is the difference between Bandwidth to Latency. They just call it "Speed". I have spoken with these people for almost every night for a month and a half, when I get a hint that they have no idea what they're talking about, I just hang up and call another one up or just request a supervisor to speak with.
Here is my trace route result, I have highlight the part that are unacceptable.
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
  2    61 ms    54 ms    23 ms  L100.WASHDC-VFTTP-62.verizon-gni.net [96.231.212.1]
  3    25 ms    15 ms    19 ms  G11-3-662.WASHDC-LCR-06.verizon-gni.net [130.81.104.182]
  4    36 ms    17 ms    33 ms  so-4-2-0-0.RES-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.28.146]
  5    57 ms    65 ms    58 ms  po1.ctn-border1.vzlink.com [206.46.225.85]
  6    56 ms    67 ms    54 ms  po121.ctn-core1.vzlink.com [206.46.225.18]
  7    60 ms    71 ms    68 ms  206.46.228.130
  8    76 ms   102 ms   141 ms  206.46.232.39
Trace complete
I'm going to list the things I have done so that perhaps if you are having the same issue, maybe you can anticipate or maybe save you time with this issue.
Replaced Router
This will be my 3rd Router in my possession. The odds of having 3 bad routers are astronomical but yet FSC will try to keep sending you more.
Replaced coax cable (twice), ONT, and splitter.
Once again, the problem still persist. To get these fix, I had total of 4 dispatchers. From the word of their mouth, they stated it's beyond their level and when it comes to latency the tech at verizon server will be the best people to help you.
Reset ONT by unplugging it for 5 minutes or more to pull up a new Gateway IP.
Appearently, someone were able to fix their latency issue this way but the results are mixed. Either it's a permanent fix or temporary fix or it made the problem even worse.
Optimizing connection/wired connections
I have a gaming PC, when they ask to clear the cache to solve my problem, it's an insult. Not only it's irralavent, in order for the computer to bog down because of cache overload, I must possess a computer that is less than of Pentium 2 back from 1995.
Anti-virus and FireWall
If these were actually the source of my problem then the high latency should be constantly bad.
Potentially hacked or other connection to your router.
While this problem can be an issue, I can see who uses the internet and even turned off the wireless. There's no way an uninvited person can slow down my connections.
The server that I am connecting to such as website and gaming server is not guaranteed by the verizon.
Yes, that is true but what are the odds of having google, verizon.net, altavista, gaming server from Steam, etc are having the latency issue all at the same time? It is as if they are blaming traffic problem on I-95 for having bad congestion on I-66. It's not relevant at all!
Verizon in-home Agent
Must I continue?
I will now list the solutions that others have found. Please keep in mind that these problems may not be relevant to you.
1) Bad PON card
Good luck convincing the verizon that this is the issue. For this to be the issue, people from your neighborhood must experience the same problem. Sadly, the problem is the latency and most people will be completely unaware of the problem as long as they are "online". There were cases where group of people resolved the problem but unfortunately the problem came back again the next day because the network tech at Verizon decided to switch them back to the old one.
2) Faulty hardware on rack
As far as I have been told, couple claimed that this has been the issue and was permitted to move their line into another rack.
3) Switching Gateway IP
One have claimed that certain Gateway IP they have been assigned are bad. For example, the house you're trying to drive away from has a huge pothole so you have to go around it by taking a detour.
4) Resetting the ONT by unplugging the battery
There has been claim that doing this for 5 mintues clears it up. What this actually does is it allows you to get a new Gateway IP and re-establish connections.
5) They blocked my IP
Yes, this can happen. I have been blocked once or more perhaps because sometimes I like to purchase and download games from Steam. When I do download, it does so for about an hour to 3 hours depending on the size of the game. Whilst this is going on, my room mate watches movie on Netflex and perhaps download music on the side. Also I watch On-Demand (requires internet). Also not to mention sometimes torrent and other P2P downloads. Check to see if you are blocked.
6) Last but not least, Verizon is purposely gimping our latency to squeeze budget.
There has been talks and speculations that since many primary account holders are not advance users. In otherwords, many would settle for just being "online". This supports the claims for having such a low standard for latency management in verizon. If so, Verizon must stop advertising their "fast" gaming gimmick that they display on their commercial.

Similar Messages

  • Super Slow speeds and extremely high latency

    This is my last attempt with Verizon high speed DSL (the only service they offer here). I have been dealing with them for months about my slow connection speeds and high latency. Finally, after a new modem, supposed line monitoring and a two tech visits the last tech found noise in the line and fixed some of my issue. Now my speed and pings are good EXCEPT during peak hours (M-F 12 pm -1 pm, 3 pm - 7 pm and Friday and Saturday 7-11 pm). During these times m Internet becomes completely unusable with download speeds of 0.25 MBps and pings over 400 ms and today I had a pint of 1713 ms!!! Clearly there is an issue here.

    Hi schichler,
    Your issue has been escalated to a Verizon agent. Before the agent can begin assisting you, they will need to collect further information from you. Please go to your profile page for the forum and look at the top of the middle column where you will find an area titled "My Support Cases". You can reach your profile page by clicking on your name beside your post, or at the top left of this page underneath the title of the board.
    Under "My Support Cases" you will find a link to the private board where you and the agent may exchange information. The title of your post is the link. This should be checked on a frequent basis, as the agent may be waiting for information from you before they can proceed with any actions. To ensure you know when they have responded to you, at the top of your support case there is a drop down menu for support case options. Open that and choose "subscribe". Please keep all correspondence regarding your issue in the private support portal.

  • E4200 - Extremely high latency, drops connections

    I have 50mb high speed Internet via comcast using a docsys 3 modem, and my wired connection is blazingly fast. I am more than happy to pay for performance, thus this purchase. And that's precisely why it's so infuriating to have 5 to 10 seconds of waiting for a web page to even BEGIN to load via the wireless network. Something is seriously wrong with this router - probably the firmware - even though I'm up to date (I called to double check)
    Once connections are made, the transfer is impressive. But I'm not sure the 5+ seconds to start each connection is worth it.

    There might be some settings required in the router so that it gets the proper solution. If you are facing the concern of getting lag, dropped connections then you can try the following steps:
    A] With the help of Cisco Connect Software (if at all you have installed the router with the help of this software)
    1] Open the software and go to the option which says "Router Settings"
    2] Then click on the option which says "Advanced Settings" which will take you to the router's configuration page.
    3] Lower the MTU (Maximum Transmission Unit) from 1500 to 1400 or less (usually found on your router's main/ basic setup page)
    4] Then go to the Wireless tab, keep network mode as mixed,
    For Channel Settings of 2.4 GHz you can make Channel Width to 20 MHz only and Channel to 6, 9, 11..
    For Channel Settings of 5 GHz you can make Channel Width to 20 MHz only and Channel to 40 or 161...
    B] If you haven't installed Cisco Connect then you can log on to the router's user interface using it's default IP address in the browser which is 192.168.1.1 and type in 'admin' as the password leaving the username field blank. This will take you to the router's web interface and then follow steps as mentioned above to make the changes.
    You should also make sure you upgrade the drivers for the WLAN card on your laptop computers.
    Second, for best results, wireless-N routers should be paired with wireless-N adapters in the same way that wireless-G routers should be paired with wireless-G adapters.
    Should there be a mix of wireless-G and wireless-N adapters connecting to the network, it would be best to set the wireless network mode to Mixed. This will allow wireless-G devices to have a stable connection to the network and will allow the wireless-N device to still connect to the network but will be performing based on the wireless-G speed.

  • Safari loading pages slowly / high latency

    I have recently been asked by one of my clients to look at a problem with their 3 macs at their place of business. They are an iMac, a macbook and a macbook air. They have all started to exhibit the same problem of being slow to load web pages using safari as their web browser of choice.
    Using the broadband speed test at speedtest.net shows that they are getting some extremely high latency (~4000ms) to some sites.
    I have tested the broadband connection thoroughly using my own (linux) laptop and everything seems to be in working order. Tests on the macs themselves using a terminal show that latency to the internet and dns response times are all as they should be.
    From some limited searching the problem appears to be similar to the problem described in http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=8799710&#8799710 where safari itself is causing some problems for some reason.
    What I'm looking for is some suggestions on how i can go about fixing the problem when i next visit the client

    Welcome to the forums!
    The following usually works on both Tiger and Leopard:
    (First, if yours is an Intel Mac, check that Safari is not running in Rosetta, which is enough to slow it to a crawl.)
    Adding DNS codes to your Network Settings, should gives good results in terms of speed-up:
    Open System Preferences/Network. Double click on your connection type, or select it in the drop-down menu. Click on TCP/IP and in the box marked 'DNS Servers' enter the following two numbers:
    208.67.222.222
    208.67.220.220
    (An explanation of why that is both safe and a good idea can be read here: http://www.labnol.org/internet/tools/opendsn-what-is-opendns-why-required-2/2587 / )
    Whilst in System Preferences/Network you should also turn off 'IPv6' in your preference pane, as otherwise you may not get the full speed benefit (the DNS resolver will default to making SRV queries). If you want to know what IPv6 is:
    This is Apple's guidance on iPv6:
    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=Mac/10.5/en/8708.html
    Click on Apply Now and close the window.
    Restart Safari, and repair permissions.
    If that didn't do it, then try this as well:
    Empty Safari's cache (from the Safari menu), then close Safari.
    Go to Home/Library/Safari and delete the following files:
    form values
    download.plist
    Then go to Home/Library/Preferences and delete
    com.apple.Safari.plist
    Repair permissions (in Disk Utility).
    Start up Safari again, and things should have improved.

  • Very high latency over WiFi

    My Arch install has been working fine for several months, but last week my network performance suddenly became extremely poor over wireless (this is a desktop with PCI wireless card installed). Wired connections still work fine. Other computers on our wireless network have not had any problems.
    The problem is extremely high latency. If I ping google.com, I get numerous responses with times over 1000 ms, and often duplicates. Functionally, it causes websites to load slowly, and I often have to reload a site multiple times before it will fully load. If I'm signed into Google Chat, it will frquently report that I am disconnected, and then re-connect a few minutes later.
    The primary indication of the problem is that I receive the following in errors.log:
    Sep 12 11:53:21 localhost kernel: [ 776.679738] ath: Failed to stop TX DMA!
    This message seems to be loosely correlated with connectivity problems, but not always. I also occasionally receive the following; it usually seems to be after the computer has gone into hibernation:
    Sep 12 11:16:48 localhost kernel: [ 5584.707913] ath: Unable to reset hardware; reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:49 localhost kernel: [ 5585.964084] ath: Unable to reset channel (2412 MHz), reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:49 localhost kernel: [ 5585.964583] ath: Unable to set channel
    Sep 12 11:16:50 localhost kernel: [ 5586.143980] ath: Unable to reset channel (2412 MHz), reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:50 localhost kernel: [ 5586.377413] ath: Unable to reset channel (2412 MHz), reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:50 localhost kernel: [ 5586.916044] ath: Could not kill baseband RX
    When this happens, I lose all wireless connectivity until I reboot. I can't even scan for networks.
    I'm using wicd and wpa_supplicant. The problem is intermittent--sometimes everything will be speedy for an hour or two, but then it will suddenly slow down.
    If you have any idea what might be happening or how to diagnose it, I would appreciate it!

    My Arch install has been working fine for several months, but last week my network performance suddenly became extremely poor over wireless (this is a desktop with PCI wireless card installed). Wired connections still work fine. Other computers on our wireless network have not had any problems.
    The problem is extremely high latency. If I ping google.com, I get numerous responses with times over 1000 ms, and often duplicates. Functionally, it causes websites to load slowly, and I often have to reload a site multiple times before it will fully load. If I'm signed into Google Chat, it will frquently report that I am disconnected, and then re-connect a few minutes later.
    The primary indication of the problem is that I receive the following in errors.log:
    Sep 12 11:53:21 localhost kernel: [ 776.679738] ath: Failed to stop TX DMA!
    This message seems to be loosely correlated with connectivity problems, but not always. I also occasionally receive the following; it usually seems to be after the computer has gone into hibernation:
    Sep 12 11:16:48 localhost kernel: [ 5584.707913] ath: Unable to reset hardware; reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:49 localhost kernel: [ 5585.964084] ath: Unable to reset channel (2412 MHz), reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:49 localhost kernel: [ 5585.964583] ath: Unable to set channel
    Sep 12 11:16:50 localhost kernel: [ 5586.143980] ath: Unable to reset channel (2412 MHz), reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:50 localhost kernel: [ 5586.377413] ath: Unable to reset channel (2412 MHz), reset status -5
    Sep 12 11:16:50 localhost kernel: [ 5586.916044] ath: Could not kill baseband RX
    When this happens, I lose all wireless connectivity until I reboot. I can't even scan for networks.
    I'm using wicd and wpa_supplicant. The problem is intermittent--sometimes everything will be speedy for an hour or two, but then it will suddenly slow down.
    If you have any idea what might be happening or how to diagnose it, I would appreciate it!

  • Extremely slow and high latency all day.

    DSL is running extremely slow during peak hours from 12 afternoon to 12 midnight.   Lower than 50% of rated speed and high latency
    I have been frustrated with this DSL Service for months now.  I am considering contacting BBB to file a complaint and I am tired of dealing with customer service giving me the run around.  Internet is a monopoly in my area therefore verizon feels it doesn't have to do anything to keep its customers when they provide crappy service.  I am on waitlist for another internet service provider and it is going to take almost a year because of how bad the internet options are in the area and demand for better options.    I even had to pay over 100 dollars to get a truck roll come to my house to fix any issues within the house and the internet has not gotten better.  Atleast I feel I should get a refund or something.  
    Here is my speedtest result just now.  http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/2899553407
    It has been even slower at other times. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/2893509440
    Modem is Westell 6100 or something. 
    Transceiver Statistics
    Transceiver Revision:
    7.2.3.0
    Vendor ID Code:
    4
    Line Mode:
    G.DMT Mode
    Data Path:
    Interleaved
    Transceiver Information
    Downstream Path
    Upstream Path
    DSL Speed (Kbits/Sec)
    3360
    864
    Margin (dB)
    15.5
    13.0
    Line Attenuation (dB)
    21.5
    13.0
    Transmit Power (dBm)
    7.6
    11.9
    Giganews line info
    news.giganews.com
    traceroute to {edited for privacy}, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
    1 gw1-g-vlan201.dca.giganews.com (216.196.98.4) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
    2 ash-bb1-link.telia.net (213.248.70.241) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
    3 TenGigE0-2-0-0.GW1.IAD8.ALTER.NET (63.125.125.41) 3 ms GigabitEthernet2-0-0.GW8.IAD8.ALTER.NET (63.65.76.189) 3 ms TenGigE0-2-0-0.GW1.IAD8.ALTER.NET (63.125.125.41) 3 ms
    4 P1-8-0-0.LSANCA-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (130.81.151.237) 72 ms 72 ms 72 ms
    5 P9-3.LSANCA-LCR-01.verizon-gni.net (130.81.193.123) 75 ms P8-0.LSANCA-DSL-44.verizon-gni.net (130.81.35.133) 75 ms 76 ms
    6 * * *
    7 * * *
    8 * * *
    9 * * *
    10 * * *
    11 * * *
    12 * * *
    13 * * *
    14 * * *
    15 * * *
    16 * * Max number of unresponsive hops reached (firewall or filter?)
    news-europe.giganews.com
    traceroute to {edited for privacy}, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
    1 vl201.gw1.ams.giganews.com (216.196.110.3) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
    2 te7-8.ccr01.ams05.atlas.cogentco.com (149.11.104.17) 0 ms te7-7.ccr01.ams05.atlas.cogentco.com (149.11.104.9) 0 ms te7-8.ccr01.ams05.atlas.cogentco.com (149.11.104.17) 0 ms
    3 te0-7-0-16.ccr21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.72.42) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
    4 te0-3-0-0.ccr21.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.48.141) 8 ms 8 ms te0-2-0-0.ccr21.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.158) 8 ms
    5 te0-7-0-4.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.84.125) 90 ms te0-0-0-4.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.84.129) 90 ms *
    6 te0-3-0-6.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.41.5) 96 ms te0-0-0-2.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.25.238) 96 ms te0-2-0-7.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.41.1) 96 ms
    7 be2042.ccr21.iad02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.126) 97 ms 97 ms 97 ms
    8 uunet.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.13.138) 99 ms verizon.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.226) 105 ms 105 ms
    9 P0-8-0-0.LSANCA-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.29.127) 177 ms 178 ms P1-0-0-0.LSANCA-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (130.81.199.39) 174 ms
    10 P8-0.LSANCA-DSL-44.verizon-gni.net (130.81.35.133) 175 ms P9-3.LSANCA-LCR-02.verizon-gni.net (130.81.193.109) 187 ms 182 ms
    11 * * *
    12 * * *
    13 * * *
    14 * * *
    15 * * *
    16 * * *
    17 * * *
    18 * * *
    19 * * *
    20 * * *
    21 * Max number of unresponsive hops reached (firewall or filter?)
    Here is what ICSI Netalyzer Results have stated.  
    Network Access Link Properties + –
    Network performance (?): Latency: 580 ms, Loss: 15.5% –
    The round-trip time (RTT) between your computer and our server is 580 ms, which is somewhat high. This may be due to a variety of factors, including distance between your computer and our server, a slow network link, or other network traffic.
    We recorded a packet loss of 16%. This loss is very significant and will lead to serious performance problems. It could be due either to very high load on our servers due to a large number of visitors, or problems in your network. Of the packet loss, at least 14.0% of the packets appear to have been lost on the path from your computer to our servers.
    TCP connection setup latency (?): 720ms –
    The time it takes for your computer to set up a TCP connection with our server is 720 ms, which is quite high. This may be due to a variety of factors, including a significant distance between your computer and our server, a particularly slow or poor network link, or problems in your network.
    Background measurement of network health (?): 3 transient outages, longest: 0.8 seconds –
    During most of Netalyzr's execution, the client continuously measures the state of the network in the background, looking for short outages. During testing, the client observed 3 such outages. The longest outage lasted for 0.8 seconds. This suggests a general problem with the network where connectivity is intermittent. This loss might also cause some of Netalyzr's other tests to produce incorrect results.
    Network bandwidth (?): Upload 700 Kbit/s, Download 2.3 Mbit/s +
    Network buffer measurements (?): Uplink 5400 ms, Downlink 1200 ms –
    We estimate your uplink as having 5400 ms of buffering. This is quite high, and you may experience substantial disruption to your network performance when performing interactive tasks such as web-surfing while simultaneously conducting large uploads. With such a buffer, real-time applications such as games or audio chat can work quite poorly when conducting large uploads at the same time.
    We estimate your downlink as having 1200 ms of buffering. This is quite high, and you may experience substantial disruption to your network performance when performing interactive tasks such as web-surfing while simultaneously conducting large downloads. With such a buffer, real-time applications such as games or audio chat can work quite poorly when conducting large downloads at the same time.
    HTTP Tests + –
    Address-based HTTP proxy detection (?): OK +
    Content-based HTTP proxy detection (?): OK +
    HTTP proxy detection via malformed requests (?): OK +
    Filetype-based filtering (?): OK +
    HTTP caching behavior (?): OK +
    JavaScript-based tests (?): OK +
    DNS Tests + –
    Restricted domain DNS lookup (?): OK +
    Unrestricted domain DNS lookup (?): OK +
    DNS resolver address (?): OK +
    DNS resolver properties (?): Lookup latency 520 ms +
    Direct probing of DNS resolvers (?): +
    DNS glue policy (?): OK +
    DNS resolver port randomization (?): OK +
    DNS lookups of popular domains (?): OK +
    DNS external proxy (?): OK +
    DNS results wildcarding (?): Warning –
    Your ISP's DNS server returns IP addresses even for domain names which should not resolve. Instead of an error, the DNS server returns an address of 199.101.28.20, which resolves to search.dnsassist.verizon.net. You can inspect the resulting HTML content here.
    There are several possible explanations for this behavior. The most likely cause is that the ISP is attempting to profit from customer's typos by presenting advertisements in response to bad requests, but it could also be due to an error or misconfiguration in the DNS server.
    The big problem with this behavior is that it can potentially break any network application which relies on DNS properly returning an error when a name does not exist.
    The following lists your DNS server's behavior in more detail.
    Please help.  I am so frustrated I literally have fights with my family over internet problems.  I am right now looking for other options and even starting to think about paying over 100 a month for dedicated line or T1 if they can service my area.  

    Not a single response from Verizon on this? And after you posted the tests & information they will need? I think I may have to make a service choice soon. Its bad enough Verizon can't post a simple email address for our support, they have removed Usenet access, removed access to our websites (I use HTML so their sitebuilder is useless)... Sheeshe...

  • Very high latency on my MBP 3,1 (mid 2007) with airport extreme card 0x168C

    Hi
    I wanted to let you know that i filled a bug report concerning a problem involving a MacBookPro3,1 and my airport extreme card (AirPort Extreme (0x168C, 0x87) Firmware Version 1.4.16.2)
    If you've got any feedback, please feel free to share it with me.
    Here's the bug report:
    Hello
    I'm experiencing very high latency on my MBP when connected using Wi-Fi in my living room and I believe this is a software bug.
    This is the trace of my ping test to my router (5m from me):
    macbookpro:~ laurent$ ping 192.168.0.254
    PING 192.168.0.254 (192.168.0.254): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=1536.229 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=536.642 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=3444.466 ms (DUP!)
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2547.260 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=2671.552 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1671.272 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=2619.991 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=1619.350 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=2362.474 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1362.662 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=363.461 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=1407.557 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=1020.437 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.254: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=119.570 ms
    ^C
    --- 192.168.0.254 ping statistics ---
    14 packets transmitted, 13 packets received, +1 duplicates, 7% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 119.570/1663.066/3444.466/937.468 ms
    These are the details of my network when alt clicking on the network icon:
    ca:69:50:37:c7:b2
    Channel: 5
    RSSI: -54
    Transmit Rate: 54
    I'm using Channel 5 where my router is the only device available (checked with iStumbler and KissMac).
    I compared these results with another computer sitting at the same place:
    This is the trace of my ping test to my router using a PC laptop:
    C:\Documents and Settings\Laurent>ping -t 192.168.0.254
    Envoi d'une requête 'ping' sur 192.168.0.254 avec 32 octets de données :
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=2 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=2 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=3 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=4 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=3 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=4 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=2 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=3 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=3 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=6 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=4 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=8 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=4 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=4 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=4 ms TTL=64
    Réponse de 192.168.0.254 : octets=32 temps=1 ms TTL=64
    Statistiques Ping pour 192.168.0.254:
    Paquets : envoyés = 16, reçus = 16, perdus = 0 (perte 0%),
    Durée approximative des boucles en millisecondes :
    Minimum = 1ms, Maximum = 8ms, Moyenne = 3ms
    (PC: Win XP SP3 with Linksys Wi-Fi card)
    Obviously, my Mac has very high latency where my PC works as expected.
    I tried resetting the PRAM, but i didn't affect my results.
    I tried updating Airport with the latest AirPort Client Update (http://support.apple.com/downloads/AirPortClient_Update_for_MacBook_and_MacBookPro), but my hardware wasn't eligible for that update (Mid 2007 MacBookPro).
    I believe this isn't a hardware bug because i get acceptable ping results when next to my router or in other rooms of my flat.
    Can you help me with that bug ?
    Regards,
    Laurent
    Hardware Overview:
    Model Name: MacBook Pro
    Model Identifier: MacBookPro3,1
    Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
    Processor Speed: 2.2 GHz
    Number Of Processors: 1
    Total Number Of Cores: 2
    L2 Cache: 4 MB
    Memory: 2 GB
    Bus Speed: 800 MHz
    Boot ROM Version: MBP31.0070.B07
    SMC Version (system): 1.16f11
    Serial Number (system): W874551DX91
    Hardware UUID: 00000000-0000-1000-8000-001B63B19195
    Sudden Motion Sensor:
    State: Enabled
    AirPort:
    Type: AirPort
    Hardware: AirPort
    BSD Device Name: en1
    IPv4 Addresses: 192.168.0.2
    IPv4:
    Addresses: 192.168.0.2
    Configuration Method: DHCP
    Interface Name: en1
    NetworkSignature: IPv4.Router=192.168.0.254;IPv4.RouterHardwareAddress=00:07:cb:3e:04:ef
    Router: 192.168.0.254
    Subnet Masks: 255.255.255.0
    DNS:
    Server Addresses: 212.27.40.241, 212.27.40.240
    DHCP Server Responses:
    Domain Name Servers: 212.27.40.241,212.27.40.240
    Lease Duration (seconds): 0
    DHCP Message Type: 0x05
    Routers: 192.168.0.254
    Server Identifier: 192.168.0.254
    Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.0
    Proxies:
    Exceptions List: *.local, 169.254/16
    FTP Passive Mode: Yes
    Ethernet:
    MAC Address: 00:1e:52:72:05:2c
    Media Options:
    Media Subtype: Auto Select
    AirPort Card Information:
    Wireless Card Type: AirPort Extreme (0x168C, 0x87)
    Wireless Card Locale: Worldwide
    Wireless Card Firmware Version: 1.4.16.2
    Current Wireless Network: kalamar
    Wireless Channel: 5

    Ok, I must have jinxed myself.
    High latency with my Negear WPN824v3. As previously mentioned, the other wireless computers connect fine. Latency remains regardless of the power connected or not.
    Please advise.
    PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=11.607 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=7280.106 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=9209.019 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=8237.475 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=7262.603 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=4313.763 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=3336.361 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=2339.579 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=1344.110 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=345.132 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=1191.119 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=3969.730 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=3992.111 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=3692.648 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=2927.634 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=2130.216 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=1437.424 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=2385.203 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=1393.622 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=396.783 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=1.295 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=115.793 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=3.137 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=26 ttl=64 time=10.240 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=27 ttl=64 time=2.709 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=9.958 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=29 ttl=64 time=1818.371 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=30 ttl=64 time=1470.613 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=31 ttl=64 time=472.520 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=32 ttl=64 time=2255.417 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=33 ttl=64 time=18198.039 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=34 ttl=64 time=23288.761 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=35 ttl=64 time=25150.840 ms
    64 bytes from 192.168.0.1: icmp_seq=36 ttl=64 time=26813.832 ms
    ^C
    --- 192.168.0.1 ping statistics ---
    63 packets transmitted, 34 packets received, 46% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.295/4906.111/26813.832/7241.136 ms

  • Updating to 10.6.7 Destroy's WiFi...(Very High Latency)

    Updating to 10.6.7 seems to have made my wireless connections useless. everything was fine at 10.6.6... After upgrading to 10.6.7 I noticed terrible latency and lag while playing an online game. I looked at the server list for the game and did a refresh, all the servers normally listing 30-90ms were now in the hundreds. 500ms...800ms...etc... I thought it was nothing.. tried basic troubleshooting steps and determined that it wasn't just the online game. I started looking at the connection.
    Ping reply's online were returning very bad response times.. so I said OK, I'll ping the gateway here and see.. cause that I know I should be getting <1ms or slightly higher... it was also extremely high.. 345...800...750 etc....
    After some more basic troubleshooting I determined that it had to be the recently installed OS update... finding no solution to the issue online I decided to do a backup and reinstall OS X.
    I did a fresh install of OS X the network was back to normal... I downloaded 10.6.7 combo update and installed it... wireless was destroyed again...it has to be the update....
    I did yet another fresh install of OS X.. this time I installed the 10.6.6 combo update and all the other software updates except for 10.6.7... the wireless is perfectly fine!
    I am left with the only conclusion that the 10.6.7 update destroy's wifi from a latency standpoint.. making it useless to me for the most part.. even for basic surfing... I had no issues with connecting to the wireless.. just that it was basically useless after 10.6.7. I am on an iMac 24" Intel Core2 Duo model.
    Anyone else having this issue or know a solution? For now I will just be leaving 10.6.7 alone.

    Welcome to Apple Discussions!
    10.6.7 does nothing to my WiFi latency. My suggestion is to check if your router's firmware is up to date, and known to be 10.6.7 compatible. Just because it is 10.6 to 10.6.6 compatible does not mean it is 10.6.7 compatible. I have Apple's airport extreme base station with 802.11n. Check also if you are proxies, or have certain firewall ports enabled on the System Preferences -> Security & Sharing that might interfere with the router's own firewall ports. If you have stated DNS numbers in Apple menu -> System preferences -> Network, make sure they are also stated on the router's own setup page, or remove DNS numbers from both, as those can contribute to latency under certain conditions. I have an iMac 5,1 and my WiFi is doing great, even when running a VPN over VirtualBox with Windows XP. Double check the games in question have been tested with 10.6.7. They may have their own configuration issues. If the game uses Flash, make sure the version of Adobe Flash you are using has been tested with 10.6.7 by contacting Adobe.

  • High latency problems with HH5/BT inifinty 2

    Hello all!
    I'm not really tech savy, so will explain this as best as possible. I'm basically having constantly high latency with it spiking for no reason, even though all my speeds (up and down) are fast and fine. This is also a wired connection running Cata6 cables.
    When I first had my internet installed I was running around 18ms constantly. After around 6 months or so, this then increased to around 35ms. Now its normally running around 45ms, with it constantly spiking for no reason what so ever (over 100ms). I've repeatedly reset the router (both through the reset button and just unplugging the power cable). Both my download speeds and upload speeds are both great (will post the test results at the end). I've even restored factory settings.
    I've had this latest speed & problem for now around 5 days and I can't clear it with anyway I know how. I called the tech team yesterday and was on the line for over thirty minutes with me explaining the problem to them, but the person on the other end was extremely rude and unhelpful (pretty useless being honest). He reset the router from his end and said there was no problems with it and that BT won't help me any further. He went on to say thats just the internet for you, which I know it isn't. In particular, its mostly affecting my online gaming. I know its nothing to do with the games servers as I house share with a person who's ISP is Virgin Media and they have zero problems playing the same game as me, even though their internet speeds aren't as fast as mine. I know it's not just the system I use. The problem is the same with my laptop, PC, smartphones, PS4 and smart TV.
    It's now getting to a point when its becoming pointless having BT installed and its getting near the last straw where I really am just going to cut the service off as its awful.
    Does anyone by anychance know how to solve this? If it also helps I live in London, East to be exact.
    My speeds are:- Download Speed (Mbps):  73.11
                            Upload Speed (Mbps): 11.63
                            Ping Latency (ms): 43.00
    Thanks to anyone that replies.

    Forgot to mention that other users of the hub5a have recommeded setting the DCHP to 21 days , which I think is the max to see if that helps?
    Although its does sound  like somethings up if its dropping line connnection.
    Have you been through the usual checks & tests rigmarole to rule out an openreach vist?
    https://www.bt.com/consumerFaultTracking/public/faults/reporting.do?pageId=21
    http://www.homeandwork.openreach.co.uk/problems-with-your-phone-or-broadband/search.aspx
    17070 quiet line test 
    https://support.zen.co.uk/kb/Knowledgebase/Performing-a-Quiet-Line-Test    {How to guide}
    Might highlight something thats not the usual hh5a mischief.

  • High latency to LA riot games servers

    Hi,
    I have been facing some very annoying latency issues with my FiOS service when playing league of legends.  I usually have a 90ms-100ms ping in this game, which is bearable, but occasionally (once or twice a week) it will jump to as high as 160-180ms.  I have pinged their servers directly from the router when the problem exists and those numbers are consistent with what I see on my desktop and laptop, so its not an internal network issue.  I dont have any speed issues or ping spikes, and most local pings test fine during this time.  I ran a trace for both periods and noticed some heavy latency within what seems to be the verizon network, and was wondering if something can be done about this??  
    during high latencies: 
    tracert 216.52.241.254
    Tracing route to riotgames-17.ext1.lax.pnap.net [216.52.241.254] over a maximum of 30 hops:
    1 4 ms 3 ms 3 ms Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
    2 13 ms 8 ms 31 ms L100.CMDNNJ-VFTTP-54.verizon-gni.net [71.168.228.1]
    3 15 ms 11 ms 14 ms G0-3-5-7.CMDNNJ-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net [130.81.188.204]
    4 26 ms 26 ms 26 ms xe-4-1-8-0.NY5030-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.84]
    5 146 ms * 146 ms 0.xe-2-0-0.XL4.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.2.86]
    6 148 ms 146 ms 146 ms POS7-0-0.GW3.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.112.109]
    7 178 ms 174 ms 196 ms internapGIGE-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.236.110]
    8 178 ms 173 ms 173 ms riotgames-17.ext1.lax.pnap.net [216.52.241.254]
    normal period: 
    tracert 216.52.241.254
    Tracing route to riotgames-17.ext1.lax.pnap.net [216.52.241.254]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
    1 3 ms 5 ms 3 ms Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
    2 11 ms 9 ms 9 ms L100.CMDNNJ-VFTTP-54.verizon-gni.net [71.168.228.1]
    3 16 ms 15 ms 14 ms G0-3-5-7.CMDNNJ-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net [130.81.188.204]
    4 29 ms 28 ms 26 ms xe-4-1-8-0.NY5030-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.84]
    5 107 ms 106 ms 109 ms 0.xe-2-0-0.XL4.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.2.86]
    6 113 ms 111 ms 108 ms POS7-0-0.GW3.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.112.109]
    7 117 ms 120 ms 118 ms internapGIGE-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.236.110]
    8 120 ms 125 ms 120 ms riotgames-17.ext1.lax.pnap.net [216.52.241.254]

    Not sure where you are located but yes we have been experiencing the same issues here for the last couple of days as well here in the Southbay area of SoCal.  It was really bad with latency about two months ago and it was better for about 3 weeks until 2 days ago then the same problem started all over again.  Tech support, customer service nor the Premium Tech Support service will be of any help since we tried all of that with numerous calls and many hours on the phone with the same reply: "everything tested ok on our end" and "it isn't a problem with Verizon". Well, we don't have a problem with internet for anything other than online gaming especially with League of Legends.  We've narrowed it down to a particular server which is not owned by Verizon.  Our tracert shows that we have over 30 hops at times and one of the servers which is not owned by Verizon seems to be the problem.  Verizon tech support said that it is not their problem to deal with after so many hops...so the plea or the question to have them do something about it is falling on deaf ears.  Extremely frustrating!!!  Don't know what to tell you at this point other than we are looking at other options for ISP.
    The last we heard from a tech support person was that he would elevate the request to have their networking people look into contacting the owner of the server that is causing the problem.  Haven't heard a peep back from anyone and it has been weeks.  Sad to say but nobody at Verizon is interested in checking into this problem that I have seen so many other customers complain about.  Guess it's beyond the normal "power off your router" kind of tech support and nobody gives a hoot!!!

  • Time Capsule high latency (ping) when using WDS

    Hi!
    I have this WDS configuration.
    An Airport Extreme 802.11g connected to my cable modem as WDS main
    A Time Capsule as WDS remote.
    Both are using channel 1 with WPA/WPA2 Personal.
    I can access the Internet. Printers and AirTunes work fine. But I have some high latency when pinging the ISP modem on 10.0.0.1 from any device connected through the Time Capsule.
    More specifically when I am connected to Airport Extreme 802.11g the ping looks fine: within 1-10 ms. Both if I am directly connected to the Extreme with a cable or wireless.
    BUT when I am on Time capsule (both wired or wireless) my latency time looks very awkward ranging from 1 to 1500 ms.
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=35.074 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=291.896 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1292.345 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.495 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.435 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=1.461 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=1.471 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=1960.883 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=960.775 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=186.944 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=1.460 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=977.690 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=1.529 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=1002.142 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=2002.976 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=1.806 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=1002.782 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=1.533 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=1.565 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=1002.137 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=1.446 ms
    64 bytes from 10.0.0.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=22.602 ms
    All packets get there but they are terribly delayed causing bad communication while using Skype or SIP telephone from my laptop and imac when connected through the Time Machine.
    I have tried to change the multicast rate on both of them but with no success... still bad latency
    Do you have any suggestion?

    I have found the solution.
    I post it here so it might help someone.
    The issue is: even if you are in WDS don't use the WAN port in the Time Capsule.
    Leave that one empty and use the other 3 LAN ports... and it will make your Time Capsule work perfectly!
    The weird ping result in my previous msg were produced by a computer connected into the WAN port on my TM set into WDS. The port works and behave as a LAN port actually but it's not working properly. Avoid using it!

  • I feel 8.02 is less responsive and has higher latency!

    After installing 8.02 and 10.5.3, Logic feels less snappy, has higher latency and has graphical glicthes when a big project is loaded.
    Also, when recording in loop mode and when the playback cursor goes back to the beginning of the loop, the recorded notes are all messed up (like Ableton Live)
    Also, when dragging a selection in the arranger, the (dragged) selection jumps all the way up or down? (bug?)
    8.02 has various other tiny glitches.
    Also, the Sculpture synth uses way more CPU since the update!
    Good thing: projects load up extremely fast
    I have no problems with the Overload Message but then again, I never saw them, ever in 8.0 or 8.01
    I did a repair permission before and after each update (update OSX, Logic and Apogee Duet) and flashed the PRAM after all the updates.
    I do not use third party plugins.
    What am I doing wrong? Because I read all good things about the new Apple updates. However, I am not experiencing them, except for the faster loading times

    I have the same latency problem since updating, and only in Logic (not Cubase). I reduced the midi latency when I uncheck, "Universal Track Mode," which is supposed to remain checked, in Audio pref., and turning off any sends on that track while recording.
    Now there's a whole new problem of rerouting outputs to high number Double busses (bus 29-30) that never existed before when I reopen a project or start a new one from a template.

  • Extremely high memory usage on ideapad u310

    Hi all,
    I've got a problem with my ideapad u310 touch running windows 8.1. When doing completely nothing (just staring at the desktop with no programs running) my laptop uses ~55% of ram. I find this extremely high, when i open a few chrome tabs and listen to some music, maybe open a powerpoint it even rises to 80+%. My Medion erazer laptop(also running 8.1) with 4GB ram uses ~65% with the same usage and ~35% while doing nothing. I deleted almost every lenovo programm except energy management and OneKey recovery and i disabled as much programs as possible on startup but there's almost no difference.
    Now, I don't really care about the high percentages but what I do care about is that it gets extremely slow when 80% of the ram is in use. Does anybody know what i can do about this? I already tried the refresh windows option but that didn't help. Or am I just stuck with a device that has very very very poor multitasking performance.

    hi spromper,
    Welcome to Lenovo Community Forums!
    Opening Task Manager will show you which application utilizes the RAM.
    Also Doing a clean boot will help on freeing up RAM
    http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929135
    Hope this helps
    Cheers!
    Did someone help you today? Press the star on the left to thank them with a Kudo!
    If you find a post helpful and it answers your question, please mark it as an "Accepted Solution"! This will help the rest of the Community with similar issues identify the verified solution and benefit from it.
    Follow @LenovoForums on Twitter!

  • Extremely high memory usage after upgrading to Firefox 12

    After I upgraded to Firefox 12, I began frequently experiencing Firefox memory usage ballooning extremely high (2-3GB after a few minutes of light browsing). Sometimes it will drop back down to a more reasonable level (a few hundred MB), sometimes it hangs (presumably while trying to garbage collect everything), and sometimes it crashes. Usually the crashing thread cannot be determined, but when it can be, it is in the garbage collection code ( [https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/report/list?signature=js%3A%3Agc%3A%3AMarkChildren%28JSTracer*%2C+js%3A%3Atypes%3A%3ATypeObject*%29] ).
    I was able to capture an about:memory report when Firefox had gotten to about 1.5 GB and have attached an image.
    A couple of things I've tried. I have lots of tabs open (though the Don't load tabs until selected option is enabled), so I copied my profile, kept all my extensions enabled, but closed all my tabs. I then left a page open to http://news.google.com/ and it ran fine for several days, whereas my original profile crashes multiple times a day.
    I also tried disabling most of my extensions, leaving the following extensions that I refuse to browse without:
    Adblock Plus
    BetterPrivacy
    NoScript
    PasswordMaker
    Perspectives
    Priv3
    However, the problem still happened in that case.
    Don't know if any of this helps or not. I'm looking forward to trying Firefox 13 when it comes out.

    hello, thanks for reporting back with detailed information.
    from a brief look at your extensions i don't recognize any known (to me at least) memory leaking ones. in the last weeks there were also reports about the java plugin causing high memory consumption in combination with firefox 12 - in case you have it installed in firefox > addons > plugins try disabling it for a few days & test how firefox is behaving with many tabs.
    & although probably not related to the memory problems you could update your graphics driver to get better results with hardware acceleration in firefox - this is the latest driver by intel for your model & os:
    [http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Detail_Desc.aspx?agr=Y&DwnldID=21135&lang=eng&OSVersion=Windows%207%20%2864-bit%29*&DownloadType=Drivers]

  • Windows 7 and Networks with High Latency

    We are currently trying to rollout Windows 7 on our network to replace XP but have encountered an issue whereby we have remote clients that access the network over high-latency satallite links (BGAN and Vocality/Satellite). The latency of the links (based
    on ping results) can be 600ms for Vocality and 1-3s for BGANs.
    The particular services that don't work are a full motion video solution using TVI Viewer 7.9.1 and Outlook 2003 or 2007. These work fine on Windows XP. Shares can be accessed but are significantly slower than XP and ping does respond fine.
    Windows 7 is running on Panasonic Toughbook CF52 and CF74 and I've tested in with a vanilla install with no updates and not on the Domain (2008R2 native) to eliminate GPO interference and tried it with all MS updates as of about 2 months ago.
    I've tried removing the extra services on the network card (Topology Discovery, ipv6 and QoS), updated to the latest NIC drivers from Panasonic and drivers from Intel themselves. Reduced the MTU to as low as 500 and increased the Frame size (I forget what
    to but was following a guide for slow links).
    I've successfully replicated the issue on out development system using a satallite simulator.
    Windows 7 with Outlook and TVI work fine on our network when connected via the LAN, ADSL, 3G and WiFi.
    I'm currently analysing Wireshark captures but they don't seem any different to the XP ones.
    Any help would be much appreciated.

    Hi,
    I noticed that your issue just happened when you use satellite transmission connection.
    The fact is that this kind of connection in Windows 7 use TCP protocol. Transmission Control Protocol ( TCP ) under ideal conditions can provide reliable data delivery, but it is inherent in the existence of a throughput bottleneck, with the emergence on
    the long-distance WAN packet loss and latency increases, the bottleneck is becoming more prominent and serious. In satellite networks with high loss, effective throughput may be as low as 0.1% - 10% of available bandwidth.
    However, FASP can be the solution.
    FASP
    http://asperasoft.com/technology/transport/fasp/#overview-464
    This response contains a reference to a third party World Wide Web site. Microsoft is providing this information as a convenience to you. Microsoft does not control these sites and has not tested any software or information found on these sites; therefore,
    Microsoft cannot make any representations regarding the quality, safety, or suitability of any software or information found there. There are inherent dangers in the use of any software found on the Internet, and Microsoft cautions you to make sure that you
    completely understand the risk before retrieving any software from the Internet.
    Thanks for your understanding. 

Maybe you are looking for

  • HP Smart Web Printing & Firefox 3.0.1

    Hi Just started experimenting with "Green Printing" solutions. Has anyone managed to get HP Smart Web Printing working with Firefox 3.0.1? Thanks Gavin

  • Directory path not working in CS6

    I have an extension that I am updating for Dreamweaver CS6. Here's the link on Adobe: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm?event=extensionDetail&extid=2430523 The gist is during install it provides the user with the option select a custom

  • ITunes 9.0.2 Unable to place podcasts in a playlist in custom order

    In previous versions of iTunes it was possible to arrange podcasts in a playlist in the order in which I wished to listen by dragging and dropping items into the desired order in list view. This disappeared in iTunes 9 but it was still possible using

  • Very high latency in fetching static files

    Problem : Really high latency in fetching static files upon first request. Environment : Weblogic V8.1 App Server and Web Server running using jdk1.4.2_13 Mem Setting: -Xmx2048M -XX:MaxPermSize=1024M Situaton: Restart the weblogic server, fetch a sta

  • Forbid a user group to modify an specific metadata field??

    Is it possible to forbid a user group to MODIFY an specific metadata field or group of fields? I know you can create a new metadata SET and forbid the user group to modify the entire set, but what about groups or fields?? Any help is welcome