Comcast vs. Vonage

Posts: 2 · New Forum Member Joined: Mar 21, 2006 Posts: 2

I totally agree with UMP25. There is absolutely no way comcast would be able to do anything to your Vonage connection. I just quit working for Comcast in October. I worked in the CHSI department (comcast high speed internet). There's no tool or function we could use to effect Vonage. They would have to search for and block every Vonage IP address in order to do that. NO WAY. I have comcast Home Networking and I had Comcast digital voice.(CDV/VOIP) CDV ****. It doesn't even work half the time. Most areas can't even check voicemail online. I finally got rid of it which is why I'm looking to get Vonage. I just wanted to know if anyone that has a Comcast Home Networking Gateway has any trouble using the Vonage router with it?

Posts: 26 · Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 9:23 pm Post subject: Re: No Conspiracy

Kiddawg wrote:

I totally agree with UMP25. There is absolutely no way comcast would be able to do anything to your Vonage connection. I just quit working for Comcast in October. I worked in the CHSI department (comcast high speed internet). There's no tool or function we could use to effect Vonage. They would have to search for and block every Vonage IP address in order to do that. NO WAY. I have comcast Home Networking and I had Comcast digital voice.(CDV/VOIP) CDV ****. It doesn't even work half the time. Most areas can't even check voicemail online. I finally got rid of it which is why I'm looking to get Vonage. I just wanted to know if anyone that has a Comcast Home Networking Gateway has any trouble using the Vonage router with it?

"ABSOLUTELY NO WAY"? Then how do yo explain what Madison River did, and why they paid a fine? See:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257175A1.pdf
Yes it is possible, and has been done before by others. Perhaps you do not have the skills, but others do and have don it

If you would read the whole forum, you have read the links quoting many experts saying that it is possible. If you would have read just a couple of days worth, you could have avoided foot in mouth syndrome
.
Wink

Posts: 44 · Full Forum Member Joined: Feb 21, 2006 Posts: 44

Kiddawg wrote:

I totally agree with UMP25. There is absolutely no way comcast would be able to do anything to your Vonage connection. I just quit working for Comcast in October. I worked in the CHSI department (comcast high speed internet). There's no tool or function we could use to effect Vonage. They would have to search for and block every Vonage IP address in order to do that. NO WAY. I have comcast Home Networking and I had Comcast digital voice.(CDV/VOIP) CDV ****. It doesn't even work half the time. Most areas can't even check voicemail online. I finally got rid of it which is why I'm looking to get Vonage. I just wanted to know if anyone that has a Comcast Home Networking Gateway has any trouble using the Vonage router with it?

Without making any unfounded and wild accusations...your claim is nonsense!

Even something as simple as setting a static route through a known bottleneck could be done easily.

From the existing evidence, the problem appears to be either a problem with the backbone leading to Vonage or inadequate Internet bandwidth in the Vonage infrastructure. Without access to the routers along the line, it's simply impossible to say.

The fact that either side tries to play the card of charging extra for end users actually using the bandwidth they are purchasing will ultimately stifle Internet innovation unless rejected by users.

Posts: 292 · Vonage Forum Master Joined: Oct 08, 2004 Posts: 292

BigDaveB wrote:

...From the existing evidence, the problem appears to be either a problem with the backbone leading to Vonage or inadequate Internet bandwidth in the Vonage infrastructure...

Ah, that is not entirely true. You seemed to have missed this post with Full Documentation and Illustrations

Posts: 44 · Full Forum Member Joined: Feb 21, 2006 Posts: 44

LuisPR wrote:

Ah, that is not entirely true. You seemed to have missed this post with Full Documentation and Illustrations

Show me evidence that uses the same final hop to Vonage outside of Comcast and we can talk.

Don't mistake me for defending Comcast. If you've read the entire thread, my position is pretty clear. For the sake of those who haven't: It shouldn't be up to users who are paying for BOTH services and bandwidth to debug the issue while both providers accuse the other.

It would be trivial to configure routers to render ICMP statistics meaningless as compared to Voip packets.. Compound that by ICMP traffic filtered based on bandwidth while many in the midwest are all forced to initiate pings and traceroutes, possiblity of misconfigured routers, etc. and most of the ranting is meaningless babble.

If a meaningful protocol is implemented and supported by all providers that captures the entire route to and from a server, those of us with some knowledge could offer help in debugging issues. If providers are willing to configure routers to intentionally misrepresent network performance, end users are left to have these BS arguments.

p.s. I won't be lending much credence to users with a post count of one chiming in on this issue.

Posts: 199 · Vonage Forum Master Joined: Mar 26, 2005 Posts: 199

I think what BigDave has said makes sense.

I've been with Vonage with one year now and am leaving. I'd prefer to stay and support Vonage. But I cannot continue to pay for the quality of service I've had during this same time. Problems continue and I've checked both ends with Vonage and Comcast. I finally through in the towel and for me that's not easy to do.

I am switching to Comcast Digital Voice. It will be interesting to see if my problems go away. I'm told they use a secure connection and that they set their phone service to a high priority. Based on what I've read I can see why it may work better. But, like BigDave said,

"If a meaningful protocol is implemented and supported by all providers that captures the entire route to and from a server, those of us with some knowledge could offer help in debugging issues. If providers are willing to configure routers to intentionally misrepresent network performance, end users are left to have these BS arguments. "

Simply put. I don't see why this shouldn't work as there seem to be people that are very happy with Vonage. As for me I'm tired of beating my head against the wall.

Posts: 409 · Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:21 am Post subject:

SBMongoos wrote:

I think what BigDave has said makes sense.

I've been with Vonage with one year now and am leaving. I'd prefer to stay and support Vonage. But I cannot continue to pay for the quality of service I've had during this same time. Problems continue and I've checked both ends with Vonage and Comcast. I finally through in the towel and for me that's not easy to do.

I am switching to Comcast Digital Voice. It will be interesting to see if my problems go away. I'm told they use a secure connection and that they set their phone service to a high priority. Based on what I've read I can see why it may work better. But, like BigDave said,

"If a meaningful protocol is implemented and supported by all providers that captures the entire route to and from a server, those of us with some knowledge could offer help in debugging issues. If providers are willing to configure routers to intentionally misrepresent network performance, end users are left to have these BS arguments. "

Simply put. I don't see why this shouldn't work as there seem to be people that are very happy with Vonage. As for me I'm tired of beating my head against the wall.

Very well put Applause

Posts: 8 · Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:28 am Post subject:

As end users there is very little we can do to help pinpoint where packet loss is occurring along the path. Modern Internet routers separate the control plane from the forwarding plane.

PINGs will test the robustness of the forwarding plane from end-to-end and show that there is packet loss some place along the path. The problem is determining where it is happening.

Traceroute will show the path that a packet will take by querying the control plane along the path. The problem is that most router control planes are protected against DoS attacks using some mechanism to limit ICMP packets or filter them entirely. The other problem is that the control plane uususallyputs handling ICMP requests as a very low priority task. You really want your routers handling routing updates and maintaining routing protocol peers and adjacencies before handling traceroutes.

Our only recourse is to run PINGs to show there is packet loss, run traceroute to determine the path, and then call our ISP to have them look at the interfaces along the forwarding path to determine where the drops are occurring. If it is not in their network, they need to work with their upstream provider to figure it out. I know this is suboptimal, but it is what we have to work with.

Posts: 409 · Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:19 pm Post subject:

TerryM wrote:

As end users there is very little we can do to help pinpoint where packet loss is occurring along the path. Modern Internet routers separate the control plane from the forwarding plane.

PINGs will test the robustness of the forwarding plane from end-to-end and show that there is packet loss some place along the path. The problem is determining where it is happening.

Traceroute will show the path that a packet will take by querying the control plane along the path. The problem is that most router control planes are protected against DoS attacks using some mechanism to limit ICMP packets or filter them entirely. The other problem is that the control plane uususallyputs handling ICMP requests as a very low priority task. You really want your routers handling routing updates and maintaining routing protocol peers and adjacencies before handling traceroutes.

Our only recourse is to run PINGs to show there is packet loss, run traceroute to determine the path, and then call our ISP to have them look at the interfaces along the forwarding path to determine where the drops are occurring. If it is not in their network, they need to work with their upstream provider to figure it out. I know this is suboptimal, but it is what we have to work with.

I pinpointed my packet loss, Don't know why others can't seem to do this.

Then I forwarded my packet loss information along with the Domains that are dropping them to my cable companies corporate office to have them rectify why there technicians can't fix this.

hmmmmm maybe if I changed my username to George or Tom my posts might be taken more seriously.......... Wink

Posts: 8 · Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:12 pm Post subject:

maryjane wrote:

I pinpointed my packet loss, Don't know why others can't seem to do this.

Then I forwarded my packet loss information along with the Domains that are dropping them to my cable companies corporate office to have them rectify why there technicians can't fix this.

hmmmmm maybe if I changed my username to George or Tom my posts might be taken more seriously.......... Wink

The point I was trying to make is that traceroute is not a reliable indicator of forwarding plane problems because routers can be set up to either throttle or discard ICMP messages. It can be used as a good place to start looking. I guess I mean that we can use these tools to help our ISP determine the problem. I don't work for Comcast or any other service provider. I don't make assumptions based on screen names as you can make them whatever you want... Very Happy