Slow FTTP (500) speeds

[DigitalFM150]

Do you have any SkyQ boxes connected via Ethernet by any chance? If so disconnect them and then retry.

I recently got a 500mb line. I have 4 SkyQ boxes connected via ethernet through a switch. For some crazy reason when the SkyQ boxes were connected my 500mb line drops to around 360mb. I connected the computer I was doing the speed test from directly to the SkyQ Router and i'm pulling 520mb!

Seems like SkyQ boxes via ethernet thottle your network! 😞

[AntonHD]

I had this problem after connect to Ultrafast 500 and was starting to think it was all a big a mistake. But I think I'm finally there. Here are my learns (which includes some drastic actions!). Before anyone starts bleating YMMV,

.

1. Q throttles BB performance. Wired, or wireless.

Having Q on your lan will introduce a number of issues, including speed restrictions. Typical FTTC speeds on the Sky router with Q connected, maybe 150 mbps. I had other issues with Q, so I didn't renew, this provided some up lift but still usually sub 250mbps on a 500mbps line. Im now on freesat with Now delivering via BB.

2. the supplied sky router isn't fit for FTTP use.

The sky router was struggling "spinning up" by which I mean, launching a streaming service typically led, where the app was esoecting strong connectivity, to a "something went wrong" error where the app was expecting strong connectivity or in the case of something like YouTube, spent up to 2 minutes buffering before launching the video.

3. A third party router solves many problems.

Having moved to a third party router, over WiFi, my pings are now routinely sub 8ms, speeds are routinely  in the range 480-510mbps. This has solved all my streaming issues. FTTP is new in my area, so this performance may drop as more users are provisioned, but just now it's perfor,img exactly as it should. This is now my (WiFi)performance on one of my Apple TVs.

I guess my - frankly depressing - conclusions are that if you want Q, there's a price to pay in terms of broadband QoS and for best BB performance, ditch her the supplied router. It seems best results for me involved removing as much sky hardware from my ecosystem as possible. I've lost a bot of faith in Sky over all this. Time was their kit was well implemented and stable, but those days seem to have gone.

[Pikapika]

What are the benefits of having sky q then? I can swap out the router but then I lose the phone line. (Admittedly I could port the number to a voip service)

So what about putting the sky q box on its own vlan where it has nothing else. 

Does adding the sky q box to the wifi instead help?

after removing the sky q box from the lan do you see normal fttp style speed tests like immediately reaching your advertised speed?

ps: thanks In advance for all your help;)

[Chrisee]

@Pikapika Sky Q boxes act as wifi mesh nodes when on a network with a Sky hub. This means devices can seamlessly roam between wifi sources as you move around your home. If you replace the Sky hub the Q boxes still contnue to broadcast a SSID but devices other than other Q boxes cannot join that service. 

Assuming you want to use wifi to connect your TV boxes and you have a third party router the main Q box will use the 2.4GHz band to link to the router and any Q minis or boosters will link to the 5GHz Sky SSID signal that box broadcasts. That signal by default will interfere with any other Wifi network on chs 36 to 52. You can set the Q boxes to use ch36 to 44 or 44 to 52 but you can only link the Q minis to the Sky signal.

This makes adding a third party wifi mesh complicated where people have Q boxes. The simplest solution is to disable wifi on the Q boxes and link them by ethernet to the new mesh nodes. Otherwise it is necessary to manage channels to avoid interference.

[Pikapika]

To be fair I am not really bothered about mini boxes and don't have any. I have already disabled the wifi on the sky router since I don't use the built in wifi. 

just want the broadband to be stable and not do this ramp up thing. It is definitely something sky related as have had Vodafone and bt and neither of them do that kind of thing. Wonder if it something to do with WANoE vs PPPoE?

[AntonHD]

That's the rub for me.

The Q boxes and the Sky hub just seem like sub standard unfinished hardware. Things that are advertised as plug and play, but really only are if you're mot fussed about underlying performance (which to be fair many customers won't be so long as box sets stream ok).

if you need top level performance, sadly, it seems you need to make compromises and employ workarounds.

[Pikapika]

Will raise it with sky support directly and if nothings moves will switch to another provider. Can't be bothered having to constantly diagnose network lag, just want it 'Simples' 🙂

[DigitalFM150]

Do you have a PC, or laptop with an Ethernet port, that you can connect directly to the SkyQ hub and rerun your speed tests? Would be interested if like me you hit full speed.

I kind of accept devices on my network will be pulling 350mb, with the pc I do all my downloading from connected directly to the hub pulling 500mb. Not great but better than the 40mb I had all round on copper.

[Skull+Treaty]

---

@Pikapika wrote:

It is definitely something sky related as have had Vodafone and bt and neither of them do that kind of thing. Wonder if it something to do with WANoE vs PPPoE?

---

WANoE is meaningless really, it just means the router is connecting via the WAN port. It's got nothing to do with PPPoA, PPPoE or any other type of protocol (Sky use 'option 61' for both FTTC and FTTP in the UK). I've not come across any other ISP using the acronym WANoE, seems others use EWAN which I had heard of.

[ArnoldStallone]

Well, in the interests of fairness, I should report that this morning my speed test showed an excellent 507mbps.  😁

Obviously, this could just be a blip (I'll keep testing) but I hope this means that Sky has resolved whatever issue was causing the problems.  Just to clarify, for anybody wondering - I haven't changed anything, it's exactly the same set-up that was producing the previously reported poor speeds.

[Pikapika]

After speaking with support they said it was due to the DLM (dynamic line management) that happens in the first 14 days. 

that said wired connection now reports 7ms ping and 150mb dl.

the curve is not quite how I would like it but not sure there is much I can do about it now. The ramp up is still there but not as obvious and in real world use I doubt it is actually noticeable. The only time I would ever see it is with Speedtest.net.

Although when the q box is not plugged directly into the sky router I don't get any of the picture thumbnails. (This will be my next issue to fix as the sooner I can bin the sky router the better)

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Pikapika wrote:

After speaking with support they said it was due to the DLM (dynamic line management) that happens in the first 14 days.

---

Worth noting that any reference to DLM with regards to a full-fibre connection is entirely bogus. 

[Pikapika]

Exactly my thoughts but you have to play the game with support. Otherwise they just can't cope with the off script users. 

Not sure what they will suggest next, although during the support calls I have to disconnect anything non sky just to prove it is nothing on the LAN side. 

[Paul+Streamers]

I'm on gigafast and top speeds of 500 , Sky are fully aware and offer no solutions 

[Chrisee]

@Paul+Streamers how are you measuring speeds? If it is over wifi and you have the SR203 standard Sky hub it only supports wifi 5 which does not support speeds much over 600Mb/s. If over a direct gigabit erhernet connection you should get 900Mb/s if you aren't that  is unusual so did Sky give you a reason?

Sky have just launched a wifi6 capable router which comes as part of the Wifi Max package which costs £10 per month although you should be ablecto get it fir £7.50 currently . This is very new and appears to have some bugs at the moment of course your devices have to support wifi 6 to get the higher speeds.