News:

On Tuesday September 6th the forum will be down for maintenance from 9:30 PM to 11:59 PM PDT

Main Menu

Should the internet connection light be on green on my Obi unit?

Started by otherwhirl, January 15, 2012, 02:18:01 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

otherwhirl

Seems like I used to see it on (or at least blinking more frequently...)

Folks have been complaining to me that my calls sound choppy.

I have high speed 20mbps (yeah right! f'n' comcast! NEVER accurate...)

My Obi 110 was working awesome (up until I started bragging to others :-\)

Need to get this resolved.

Any helpful feedback is appreciated.

RonR

The second LED from the left on the OBi indicates Ethernet port activity.  It blinks occasionally when there is no call in progress and blinks fairly steadily when there is one.

Is the sound choppy when calling the echo test at : **9 222 222 222

otherwhirl

Hi,

yes, so when I did the echoe test. There is a slight delay and it cuts out here and there.

is my internet speed the culprit? again sorry ass comcast is charging me for 20mbps. high speed plan
the speed test clearly show it aint happening.

what's even more "interesting" is how much slower my speeds show on their own speedtest site:
http://speedtest.comcast.net/






help please guys


Quote from: RonR on January 15, 2012, 02:27:57 PM
The second LED from the left on the OBi indicates Ethernet port activity.  It blinks occasionally when there is no call in progress and blinks fairly steadily when there is one.

Is the sound choppy when calling the echo test at : **9 222 222 222


RonR

Rather than insufficient bandwidth, I'd suspect packet loss or jitter.

From a DOS box, run:

ping -n 100 74.125.157.125

When it completes, you should see something like:

Ping statistics for 74.125.157.125:
    Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 100, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 50ms, Maximum = 55ms, Average = 52ms

There should be no packets lost and the difference between Minimum, Maximim, and Average round trip times should be small.

otherwhirl

man you are talking Greek to me :-\

"From a DOS box, run:"  I'm on a Mac for starters. Is there a tutorial for what you are describing?

Thanks

Quote from: RonR on January 15, 2012, 04:06:56 PM
Rather than insufficient bandwidth, I'd suspect packet loss or jitter.

From a DOS box, run:

ping -n 100 74.125.157.125

When it completes, you should see something like:

Ping statistics for 74.125.157.125:
    Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 100, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 50ms, Maximum = 55ms, Average = 52ms

There should be no packets lost and the difference between Minimum, Maximim, and Average round trip times should be small.


RevKev

Open "Network Utility" - it's in "Applications", "Utilities".
Click on the "Ping" tab.
Paste "74.125.157.125" into the box.
Click the "Ping" button.

Here's my results for comparison:

Ping has started...

PING 74.125.157.125 (74.125.157.125): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=37.504 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=39.581 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=34.731 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=37.382 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=35.448 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=36.678 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=37.899 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=36.804 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=39.458 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=38.111 ms

--- 74.125.157.125 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 34.731/37.360/39.581/1.468 ms

otherwhirl

Ok guys,

Here's the verdict on my Ping results:

Ping has started ...

PING 192.168.1.142 (192.168.1.142): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.161 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.162 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.204 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.160 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.169 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.169 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.269 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.171 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms

--- 192.168.1.142 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.160/0.180/0.269/0.032 ms


Does this look good or bad?  ???

RonR

Your latency (ping time) is pretty high (greater than 100 ms) and worse, there's a lot of jitter in it (160 ms - 269 ms).

It would be better to have a larger sampling (run 100 consecutive pings instead of 10).

otherwhirl

Ok Ron,

I'll run it now.
Thanks!

Quote from: RonR on January 15, 2012, 07:12:12 PM
Your latency (ping time) is pretty high (greater than 100 ms) and worse, there's a lot of jitter in it (160 ms - 269 ms).

It would be better to have a larger sampling (run 100 consecutive pings instead of 10).


otherwhirl

Here's my latest ping results (100)

What kind of times should I be shooting for with my Obi110 system?

Who and/or what is responsible for this crazy latency I am experiencing?

What's the solution?

Thanks :-[


Ping has started ...

PING 192.168.1.142 (192.168.1.142): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.463 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.169 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.169 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.170 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.229 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.162 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.171 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.167 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.173 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.170 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=0.167 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.163 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=0.185 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=0.163 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=0.155 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=3.924 ms Oh HELL NO!   :o
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=0.162 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=26 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=27 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=0.239 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=29 ttl=64 time=0.163 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=30 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=31 ttl=64 time=0.177 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=32 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=33 ttl=64 time=0.170 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=34 ttl=64 time=0.278 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=35 ttl=64 time=0.322 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=36 ttl=64 time=0.293 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=37 ttl=64 time=0.179 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=38 ttl=64 time=0.186 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=39 ttl=64 time=0.174 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=40 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=41 ttl=64 time=0.294 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=42 ttl=64 time=1.459 ms  This is Ridiculous! >:(
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=43 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=44 ttl=64 time=0.260 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=45 ttl=64 time=0.267 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=46 ttl=64 time=0.321 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=47 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=48 ttl=64 time=0.274 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=49 ttl=64 time=0.170 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=50 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=51 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=52 ttl=64 time=0.265 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=53 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=54 ttl=64 time=0.224 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=55 ttl=64 time=0.218 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=56 ttl=64 time=0.177 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=57 ttl=64 time=0.841 ms  WTF??? >:(
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=58 ttl=64 time=0.202 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=59 ttl=64 time=0.193 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=60 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=61 ttl=64 time=0.177 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=62 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=63 ttl=64 time=0.169 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=64 ttl=64 time=0.281 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=65 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=66 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=67 ttl=64 time=0.172 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=68 ttl=64 time=0.285 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=69 ttl=64 time=0.178 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=70 ttl=64 time=0.148 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=71 ttl=64 time=0.629 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=72 ttl=64 time=0.174 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=73 ttl=64 time=0.185 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=74 ttl=64 time=0.163 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=75 ttl=64 time=0.153 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=76 ttl=64 time=0.262 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=77 ttl=64 time=0.173 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=78 ttl=64 time=0.174 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=79 ttl=64 time=0.161 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=80 ttl=64 time=0.164 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=81 ttl=64 time=0.174 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=82 ttl=64 time=0.181 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=83 ttl=64 time=0.159 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=84 ttl=64 time=0.162 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=85 ttl=64 time=0.179 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=86 ttl=64 time=0.179 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=87 ttl=64 time=0.170 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=88 ttl=64 time=0.250 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=89 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=90 ttl=64 time=0.273 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=91 ttl=64 time=0.168 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=92 ttl=64 time=0.165 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=93 ttl=64 time=0.161 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=94 ttl=64 time=0.167 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=95 ttl=64 time=0.260 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=96 ttl=64 time=0.161 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=97 ttl=64 time=0.183 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=98 ttl=64 time=0.171 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.142: icmp_seq=99 ttl=64 time=0.166 ms

--- 192.168.1.142 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.148/0.258/3.924/0.400 ms

RonR

I didn't notice in your previous post that your weren't pinging 74.125.157.125 (Google Voice).  Plus I didn't notice the decimal points and ms notation -- shame on me!.

What is 192.168.1.142?  It's probably something on your LAN.

Is this a wireless connection?  If so, that could account for some of your hiccups.

otherwhirl

Hmmm... Ohh my bad! So I should have been pinging '74.125.157.125 '?

Yeah the '192.168.1.142?' is my IP (well I changed a couple of digits for privacy sake posting here in the forum)


I do in fact have a wireless router, however I am plugged in via ethernet connection between my Obi and the wireless router, which is of course plugged in directly via ethernet as well to the modem.

My Modem is a  Ubee D3.0
My Wireless router is the Cisco Linksys E2500

Just last week my connection was MUCH better than it currently is. WTF?

So shall I now re-run my Ping test this time using '74.125.157.125 ' with it set for 100 pings?

Quote from: RonR on January 15, 2012, 08:53:27 PM
I didn't notice in your previous post that your weren't pinging 74.125.157.125 (Google Voice).  Plus I didn't notice the decimal points and ms notation -- shame on me!.

What is 192.168.1.142?  It's probably something on your LAN.

Is this a wireless connection?  If so, that could account for some of your hiccups.



RonR

Quote from: otherwhirl on January 15, 2012, 09:15:36 PM
So shall I now re-run my Ping test this time using '74.125.157.125 ' with it set for 100 pings?

Yes, please.  I'll pay closer attention this time.   :-[

otherwhirl

Hey Ron here's the latest:

Ping has started ...

PING 74.125.157.125 (74.125.157.125): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=0 ttl=49 time=72.290 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=77.449 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=76.602 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=3 ttl=49 time=75.319 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=93.813 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=5 ttl=49 time=75.658 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=75.812 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=7 ttl=51 time=78.112 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=8 ttl=51 time=79.799 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=9 ttl=51 time=72.775 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=10 ttl=51 time=74.972 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=11 ttl=51 time=74.463 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=12 ttl=51 time=72.622 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=13 ttl=51 time=78.296 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=14 ttl=51 time=75.928 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=15 ttl=51 time=78.275 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=16 ttl=49 time=74.604 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=17 ttl=51 time=74.170 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=18 ttl=51 time=88.404 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=19 ttl=51 time=76.265 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=20 ttl=51 time=75.711 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=21 ttl=51 time=78.399 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=22 ttl=51 time=79.854 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=23 ttl=51 time=76.815 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=24 ttl=49 time=71.985 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=25 ttl=51 time=116.599 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=26 ttl=51 time=76.518 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=27 ttl=51 time=75.437 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=75.542 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=29 ttl=51 time=83.228 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=30 ttl=51 time=88.842 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=31 ttl=51 time=79.687 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=32 ttl=49 time=81.520 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=33 ttl=49 time=81.914 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=34 ttl=51 time=82.257 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=35 ttl=51 time=77.627 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=36 ttl=51 time=94.213 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=37 ttl=51 time=104.394 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=38 ttl=51 time=79.526 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=39 ttl=51 time=72.461 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=40 ttl=51 time=72.412 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=41 ttl=51 time=76.721 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=42 ttl=51 time=91.435 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=43 ttl=49 time=79.268 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=44 ttl=51 time=79.028 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=45 ttl=51 time=73.337 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=46 ttl=51 time=99.576 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=47 ttl=51 time=107.461 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=48 ttl=51 time=79.494 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=49 ttl=51 time=81.115 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=50 ttl=51 time=94.140 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=51 ttl=51 time=73.357 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=52 ttl=51 time=77.171 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=53 ttl=51 time=519.729 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=54 ttl=51 time=77.285 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=55 ttl=51 time=76.454 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=56 ttl=51 time=75.838 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=57 ttl=49 time=81.383 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=58 ttl=51 time=78.110 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=59 ttl=51 time=75.983 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=60 ttl=51 time=79.752 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=61 ttl=51 time=81.047 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=62 ttl=51 time=86.096 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=63 ttl=51 time=75.597 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=64 ttl=51 time=71.353 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=65 ttl=51 time=79.303 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=66 ttl=51 time=75.192 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=67 ttl=51 time=81.358 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=68 ttl=51 time=76.950 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=69 ttl=49 time=149.095 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=71 ttl=51 time=95.448 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=72 ttl=51 time=83.366 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=73 ttl=51 time=73.762 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=74 ttl=51 time=84.068 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=75 ttl=51 time=99.423 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=76 ttl=51 time=81.401 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=78 ttl=51 time=282.699 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=79 ttl=51 time=74.138 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=80 ttl=49 time=75.573 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=81 ttl=49 time=76.764 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=82 ttl=49 time=74.663 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=83 ttl=49 time=78.304 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=84 ttl=51 time=571.314 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=85 ttl=51 time=79.360 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=86 ttl=51 time=75.321 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=87 ttl=51 time=80.087 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=88 ttl=49 time=77.822 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=89 ttl=51 time=87.318 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=90 ttl=51 time=80.052 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=91 ttl=51 time=82.884 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=92 ttl=51 time=75.601 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=93 ttl=51 time=75.774 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=94 ttl=51 time=79.244 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=95 ttl=51 time=74.286 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=96 ttl=51 time=75.709 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=97 ttl=51 time=74.134 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=98 ttl=51 time=77.470 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.157.125: icmp_seq=99 ttl=51 time=80.454 ms

--- 74.125.157.125 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 98 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 71.353/92.343/571.314/69.374 ms

RonR

Quote from: otherwhirl on January 15, 2012, 09:50:29 PM
--- 74.125.157.125 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 98 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 71.353/92.343/571.314/69.374 ms

There's a 2% packet loss.  If it's consistent, that's not great.

There's also some nasty jumps in latency: 519.729 ms / 282.699 ms / 571.314 ms

These could be causing some of your audio interruptions.

It's worth a call to your ISP to get it cleaned up and see if it eliminates the audio issues.

otherwhirl

So what exactly do I say to these guys? And how can I explain this in lamen's terms?

Quote from: RonR on January 15, 2012, 09:58:04 PM
Quote from: otherwhirl on January 15, 2012, 09:50:29 PM
--- 74.125.157.125 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 98 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 71.353/92.343/571.314/69.374 ms

There's a 2% packet loss.  If it's consistent, that's not great.

There's also some nasty jumps in latency: 519.729 ms / 282.699 ms / 571.314 ms

These could be causing some of your audio interruptions.

It's worth a call to your ISP to get it cleaned up and see if it eliminates the audio issues.


RonR

Quote from: otherwhirl on January 15, 2012, 10:01:52 PM
So what exactly do I say to these guys? And how can I explain this in lamen's terms?

Simply tell them you're experiencing some packet loss and latency spikes that's causing problems with your VoIP telephone service.

Before you call them, you might want to run the same ping test to your default gateway's IP address (the first hop of your ISP's network - it should be listed in your router's status).  There's a good chance the problem will show up there, and if so, most likely indicates an issue between your cable modem and the headend it communicates with.  If that's not the case, you could do a tracert (trace route) to 74.125.157.125 and ping each successive hop to try and determine where the problem starts.

otherwhirl

Thanks Ron,

Your feedback has been helpful.

i'm curious to know if I just plugged directly into the Obi from the modem if that might also be helpful in troubleshooting to narrow down the issue?
Also what's the chance my router could be the culprit?

Quote from: RonR on January 15, 2012, 10:11:38 PM
Quote from: otherwhirl on January 15, 2012, 10:01:52 PM
So what exactly do I say to these guys? And how can I explain this in lamen's terms?

Simply tell them you're experiencing some packet loss and latency spikes that's causing problems with your VoIP telephone service.

Before you call them, you might want to run the same ping test to your default gateway's IP address (the first hop of your ISP's network - it should be listed in your router's status).  There's a good chance the problem will show up there, and if so, most likely indicates an issue between your cable modem and the headend it communicates with.  If that's not the case, you could do a tracert (trace route) to 74.125.157.125 and ping each successive hop to try and determine where the problem starts.


RonR

Quote from: otherwhirl on January 15, 2012, 10:46:05 PM
i'm curious to know if I just plugged directly into the Obi from the modem if that might also be helpful in troubleshooting to narrow down the issue?
Also what's the chance my router could be the culprit?

Anything's possible.  The more you know what is and what isn't suspect, the better off you are.