Community Forum

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

Regular Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users


Almighty188 wrote:
So those with the same issue should comment in the thread so at least it shows it's not a isolated incident which will also help support handle other isolated issues instead of a issue that effects everyone.

 


 

 

 

This is me in the South Bay / Silicon Valley. It's not an isolated incident for Almighty188 only. Ping times always fluctuate. This was one of the better results I obtain tonight. In the past I have gotten pings times a little below 100ms -- e.g. 92 or 93ms -- but most of the time it's above 100ms. 

 

 

Screenshot_20180111-173020_1.jpg

It would be nice to have faster latency times. Actually what I find interesting about the traceroute results is the fact that XM doesn't route its traffic over it's own comcast backbone routes. Our results seem to show it's all routed over Verizon lines. If any MVNO, I would have figured XM would be the one that would route its own backend traffic as it has the infrastructure in place to do so.

Official Employee

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

Thanks for posting your results, Lakino. Those traceroutes are correct. They are done via Verizon's backbone just as other MVNOs do the same on their parent backbones. 

 

 

Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users


ComcastKenF wrote:

Thanks for posting your results, Lakino. Those traceroutes are correct. They are done via Verizon's backbone just as other MVNOs do the same on their parent backbones. 

 

 


Have a question ComcastKenF, who actually owns/runs the APN Server in this case as there are different type of MVNO's. 

MVNOs are distinguished by their commitment to owning and managing the operational components of the MVNO business model, consisting of:

Access to basic network infrastructure, like base stations, transceivers, home location registers, or switching centres.
Service packaging, pricing, and billing systems, including value-added services like voicemail or missed call notifications.
Consumer-facing aspects like sales, marketing, and customer relationship management activities like customer care or dispute resolution.
Because MVNOs are effectively defined by their lack of spectrum licenses, an MVNO necessarily will need to have agreements in place to access the network of at least one MNO. The type of MVNO is determined by how "thick" or "thin" of a technological layer an MVNO adds over its access to its host MNO's network.


Branded reseller

Sometimes referred to as a "Skinny MVNO", as the reseller almost totally relies on the MNO's facilities. They do not own any network elements, but may own and operate their own customer care, marketing, and sales operations.

Service Provider

Sometimes referred to as a "Light MVNO". The service provider operates its own customer support, marketing, sales and distribution operations, and has the ability to set its tariffs independently from the retail prices set by the MNO.

 

Enhanced Service Provider

Sometimes referred to as a "Thick MVNO". The MVNO manages a more complete technical implementations with its own infrastructure which allows the MVNO more control over its offerings. These MVNOs have a heavier focus on branding, customer-ownership, and differentiation through added services like data and SIM applications.

 

Full MVNO

These MVNOs have a network implementation operating essentially the same technology as a mobile network operator. Full MVNOs only lack their own radio networks.

Official Employee

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

 

Almighty188, hmmm I do not know which type of MVNO XFINITY Mobile is. I recommend calling XFINITY Mobile to find out which exactly. 

 

Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

Thanks Ken, anyway you can ask around and find out as you work for the company so it's easier for you to get the actual answer instead of talking to someone who will give a random answer.

Official Employee

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

I'll let you know what I get. 

 

KenF

Official Employee

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

Thanks Ken, anyway you can ask around and find out as you work for the company so it's easier for you to get the actual answer instead of talking to someone who will give a random answer.

I asked around and was given this link: https://www.xfinity.com/mobile/policies. 

 

My team deals mostly with service issues and concerns on social media and the forums. If you have any service related concerns, our Forums team will help.  

Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

My hunch is that XM is trying to be an Enhanced or Full MVNO since so many technical features are broken for customers.

Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users


ComcastKenF wrote:

Thanks Ken, anyway you can ask around and find out as you work for the company so it's easier for you to get the actual answer instead of talking to someone who will give a random answer.

I asked around and was given this link: https://www.xfinity.com/mobile/policies. 

 

My team deals mostly with service issues and concerns on social media and the forums. If you have any service related concerns, our Forums team will help.  


Thanks Ken, except the policies won't really get anywhere as we already know what the policy says and that is roundtrip latency at 100ms or less.  I thought this was the forums so where is the forums team and we are talking about service issues as posted on the original thread except all users still have not gotten what is stated in policy as far as performance specifications as it is not even meeting the minimum so this should be escalated to the proper department.

Official Employee

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

Almighty188, I am a member of the forums team. Your question on the type of MVNO we are is not a service related issue. Your concerns of latency are so I encourage you to reach out to XFINITY Mobile regarding that issue. I have reached out to tier 2 regarding latency concerns and they have educated me that latency is dependent on the proximity to the nearest tower. 

 

KenF

Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users


ComcastKenF wrote:

Almighty188, I am a member of the forums team. Your question on the type of MVNO we are is not a service related issue. Your concerns of latency are so I encourage you to reach out to XFINITY Mobile regarding that issue. I have reached out to tier 2 regarding latency concerns and they have educated me that latency is dependent on the proximity to the nearest tower. 

 

KenF


The questions are related as the type of MVNO dictates who runs the APN Server which is the root of the service issue.  Reaching out to XFINITY Mobile personally would not have a effect since if others have the problem, it would work better if it was presented as a group so it's not a isolated issue.  I hate to tell you but your tier 2 is wrong as the latency issue is caused by the APN used as the Verizon APN has no such issues connected to the same towers, I have been with Verizon Wireless since GTE MobileNet from 1989 to September 9, 2017 so I have the actual stats and data and I have also used the Verizon default APN (VZWINTERNET) from September 9-13, 2017 using the same exact LG G3 Verizon Wireless VS986 on XFinity Mobile which did not have the issue until the VZWINTERNET APN was blocked as the latency is caused by the internet routing as I live in the Silicon Valley which has UUNet (AS701) - which is currently owned by Verizon Communications but formerly was part of MCI WorldComm and independent before WorldComm bought it.  This is covered in great detail in the other thread at:
https://forums.xfinity.com/t5/Xfinity-Mobile/XFinity-Mobile-data-network-latency-not-within-publishe...


I am connected to the exact same Verizon Wireless towers as there are exactly 4 surrounding me and being 5,000-6,000 feet from each one but due to the APN used as remember the phone has to route through the APN Server defined, this is what happens:

 

With the VZWINTERNET APN: It will route and connect to the same Verizon Wireless APN server that Verizon Wireless customers are using and the latency will be under 100ms because it will also connect with UUNet aka ALTERNET.NET in the San Francisco Bay Area which will meet what is stated in policy.

 

With the COMCAST.RSLR.VZWENTP (COMCAST - VeriZon Wireless EnterPrise ReSeLleR) APN: it will need to connect to the APN which is far away elsewhere and then connect then connect with either UUNet (AS701) aka ALTERNET.NET or XO Communications (AS2828) xo.net which is also Verizon Communications owned but XO Communications was formed when it was then known as NextLink Communications after they bought out Concentric Network Corporation tier 1 backbone network in one of the following cities which is the cause of the latency:

Dallas, TX
Houston, TX

Atlanta, GA

Chicago, IL

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN


A good example would be routing to Google, because of the geographical location of the APN - it will always route to the nearest Google server for www.google.com so instead of the one in SIlicon Valley, CA - it would basically be connected to the Google server closest to the city of the UUNet or XO Communications gateway above which adds to the latency since the longer physical distance, the higher the latency which is the reason the latency is not met.


Another good example is if I am trying to connect to a local website in the San Francisco Bay Area such as the XFinity Help and Support Forums which is hosted by lithium, with VZWINTERNET as the APN, it will have a less than 100ms latency and meet the policy because the connection would be local.  However, with COMCAST.RSLR.VZWENTP as the APN, what would happen is that it will have to route through the APN which no one really knows the location of and then it has to go to one of the cities mentioned above, and then it will have to send the same acknowledgement (ACK) packet back so instead of traveling the 50 miles, it is now traveling atleast 1400+ miles if not more.

Furthermore, I own and operate a Internet Service Provider for the last 25 years and before that, ran one of the tier 1 backbones when even Comcast did not have a Internet backbone but was using Excite@Home. 

This is clearly a service issue and a engineering issue that needs to be addressed and resolved regardless what tier 2 thinks as tier 2 obviously doesn't run a network, otherwise XFinity Mobile would not be using Verizon Wireless.  That is why just like the Sprint commericial in the 1980s, everything should be in writing and when what is in writing is not meant, that is already a material breach of agreement.  

Individuals can call tier 2 all they want and will they get the problem fixed?  My vote would be no but when it is posted in writing and other people with the same problem also step forward, then it can be presented with data that a x amount of people have the problem based on the other responses so that XFInity Mobile won't look at it as no one else has the problem.  It's almost like a individual can go file a lawsuit against x company which is large and has unlimited resources, the chances of the individual winning is slim and the legal costs will be high for the individual while a class action lawsuit will have a higher chance of winning and the legal costs are already factored in as part of the award so there are no real losses for the individuals.


I realize Ken, you are a Comcast employee but the whole purpose of forums is for discussion of problems and also, other people might not be aware of the issues and the best thing you can do is escalate the thread so someone who actually knows what they are talking about can address and resolve the issue.  Remember XFINITY Mobile is a new player in the Wireless Communications market and it's better to fix problems to gain new customers from both new signups and the competition than have something inferior causing lost of existing customers and a bad reputation which would make others steer away and go elsewhere.  Otherwise, if issues and problems are not to be discussed, then what is the point of having the forums, Comcast might as well just shut it down and save money as even it costs money to maintain since obviously, Comcast does not run the forums either as this is hosted at lithium and their network and not Comcast's. 

Besides that, since Comcast/XFinity Mobile is a MVNO and basically a customer of Verizon Wireless, they are also not delivering per their agreement with Comcast Corporation and Comcast should ask Verizon Wireless to resolve the issue or else compensate Comcast for failing to meeting the Service Level Agreement as the Verizon Wireless policy also says round trip latency of 100ms or less which is where Comcast originally copied that statement from as it is even on a official Verizon Wireless document as can be seen here:

https://www.verizonwireless.com/support/broadband-services/

There has also been discussion of this issue on:
http://howardforums.com/showthread.php/1895598-Comcast-Details-Mobile-Phone-Service-as-Xfinity-Mobil...

Please note it is far cheaper to fix the problem as complaints to the FCC will most likely require Comcast Coporation doing business as XFINITY Mobile to remedy the problem as well as get fined as FCC Complaints are usually only needed when the company itself is unwilling to remedy the problem in a competent manner, not to mention that sooner or later, a Class Action lawsuit will filed on the behalf of current and former customers of XFinity Mobile which will also cost Comcast Corporation.  By either ignoring or not admitting to the issue is the same as 100% in full agreement with everything that was said and a waiver of all rights of objection.  

 

Contributor

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

      Almighty188      I'm so glad we have you to explain issues to Comcast/Xfinity here.  THANK YOU!

Official Employee

Re: XFinity Mobile data network latency not within published specs for many users

 

Almighty188, thanks for your feedback. I'll be sharing this with our engineers. 

 

KenF