# VOD poll to provide useful data



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Trying this again. Hey, it worked!

This will give a correlation between the modem types and VOD performance so we can see if it is an issue with gateways or not.


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

Cable modem (OWNED) ZOOM-5341J & ASUS RT-N66U -wired


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I'm not going to vote because I don't have Directv any longer.

But in the 3 years doing Directv on demand, (November 2014 switched back to cable) I've used both methods and neither was any better than the other.

1:Arris modem, Trendnet 450 dual band router.

2:Motorola Surfboard Modem, with Trendnet 450, then switched to Netgear dual band 600
(NEEDED WIDER WIFI RANGE)

3: Motorola SB modem router combo. Garbage, wanted in all in one unit, had 3 service calls kept dropping wifi.

4: Arris DG1660 Dual band modem router combo.
Works fantastic, great range, and no dropouts from wifi ever.

All of these were in use at the time I've had Directv , And Not 1 of these changes made a difference with downloading on demand still hit or miss.

2 CCK were used, as well as no CCK and using only eithernet.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Ubee DDM3521 Modem......Cisco Linksys E2000 Router......Time Warner Cable.


----------



## Guesst925XTU (Jan 29, 2004)

No problems with Netgear Nighthawk R7000 router & VersaLink 7500 gateway (in modem only mode).


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Motorola SB6141 modem and Netgear R7000 router.


----------



## nuspieds (Aug 9, 2008)

All's well here with my Netgear R8000 and Arris DG1670 (modem-only mode).


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

MysteryMan said:


> Ubee DDM3521 Modem......Cisco Linksys E2000 Router......*Time Warner Cable*.


From my experience the only difference was the ISP.
Suddenlink was anything but, while AT&T DSL and U-verse was rock solid.
Vyve broadband isn't as bad as Suddenlink, but doesn't look to be as good as AT&T/U-verse was.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

No problems. Arris Cable modem and Apple latest Gen Airport Extreme... Optimum Online 100/35 service


----------



## PCampbell (Nov 18, 2006)

Mine works well with Uverse 2Wire gateway. I just do not find it to be all that useful.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

My VoD doesn't work well because I'm stucked with crapy Verizon DSL service.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Drucifer said:


> My VoD doesn't work well because I'm stucked with crapy Verizon DSL service.


I went from 3 mbps DSL to 30 MBPS cable and it didn't improve one bit.
I think the problems lie within the receivers.


----------



## Phil T (Mar 25, 2002)

Centurylink 40mb DSL service with Apple Time Capsule as router and Technicolor C2000T modem in bridge mode.

Never had a problem but the last movie I downloaded seemed a little slow, about real time.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I went from 3 mbps DSL to 30 MBPS cable and it didn't improve one bit.
> I think the problems lie within the receivers.


I went from 3 to 6 to 12 and saw improvement each time, so whatever "the problem is", it doesn't seem to be inherent in the receivers.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

Comcast. I guess it's a gateway - it's what they brought when they installed it. The Directv installer connected it directv to the modem/gateway/whatever it's called (tall thing with blinking and solid lights that has the Xfinity logo). The VOD works but it usually takes literally hours to download a regular show and can take a day or two to download a movie. A handful of times, a movie did download faster, it was ready after downloading overnight. Other Internet-based streaming services like Netflix, YouTube, etc etc etc work either instantly or within seconds. 

In NC, I had Time Warner Cable (two separate units that they brought and installed and took back when I got rid of them) and AT&T U-Verse (whatever they gave me to hook up, they didn't want it back so I still have it.. I think) with Directv and VOD was exactly the same. I have had three receivers - HR24, HR34, and now HR44 and the VOD was slow with all units.

The last time I used start over, it was 8:11 when I started it over. Movie was 2 hours (8-10) and on Comedy Central. The movie started playing around 8:40 and interrupted itself briefly two times toward the end of the movie to catch up.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> I went from 3 to 6 to 12 and saw improvement each time, so whatever "the problem is", it doesn't seem to be inherent in the receivers.


That's good, but not the case here. Apparently not the case for many others either.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> That's good, but not the case here. Apparently not the case for many others either.


I've read enough posts/threads here to know things aren't equal for all.

I have yet to know why. :shrug:
Is it their ISP as was my problem? :shrug:
Is it that what they are trying to download isn't the same as what I did? :shrug:
Have folks actually timed or measured their download speed/rate :shrug:


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> I've read enough posts/threads here to know things aren't equal for all.
> 
> I have yet to know why. :shrug:
> Is it their ISP as was my problem? :shrug:
> ...


I've noticed improvements in streaming video from amazon, netflix ,and HBO GO even using Directv log in.

But to download anything off premium channels in HD, would take hours. Seems like my system was limited by some sort of means. 
I'm going to say directv equipment, because nothing else had issues.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I've noticed improvements in streaming video from amazon, netflix ,and HBO GO even using Directv log in.
> But to download anything off premium channels in HD, would take hours.


Just from this reply there is a difference in bitrates.
All the streaming services use a much lower bit-rate.
"NetFlix" maxes @ 5800 kb/s where DirecTV VOD "normally" is around 9 Mb/s and can be 16 Mb/s

DirecTV "Video OnDemand" would be better titled "Video On Request" due to the bitrate and storing to disk.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Just from this reply there is a difference in bitrates.
> All the streaming services use a much lower bit-rate.
> "NetFlix" maxes @ 5800 kb/s where DirecTV VOD "normally" is around 9 Mb/s and can be 16 Mb/s
> 
> DirecTV "Video OnDemand" would be better titled "Video On Request" due to the bitrate and storing to disk.


As others said, I've also planned ahead when doing Directv on demand.
You do what you have to use what you want.
But that doesn't mean it's not a flawed system. People shouldn't need 100 MBPS to take at vantage of Directv on demand. 
That's just ridiculous.

And I'm not saying that's what your implying.

But a few others are.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I still have yet to hear about DISH on demand? 
Is there no one whom knows?
Where's Harsh,James,Stewart?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> As others said, I've also planned ahead when doing Directv on demand.
> You do what you have to use what you want.
> But that doesn't mean it's not a flawed system. People shouldn't need 100 MBPS to take at vantage of Directv on demand.
> That's just ridiculous.
> ...


Since I think the highest out of DirecTV is around 12 Mb/s, and my "tested" 11 Mb/s U-who would pretty much handle "live" HD, anything above 12 isn't being used by DirecTV.
DirecTV VOD is pretty long in the tooth by now and the streaming services have far surpassed them for "live" HD.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I still have yet to hear about DISH on demand?
> Is there no one whom knows?
> Where's Harsh,James,Stewart?


We nailed them to the cross a while back :rolling:


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

damondlt said:


> I still have yet to hear about DISH on demand?
> Is there no one whom knows?
> Where's Harsh,James,Stewart?


In the past year that I've had the HWS I've never had an issue with watching VOD during the download. No buffering or stutters. During that time I was first on a 12/1 DSL line, and now on a 50/5 cable line.

I also had a Genie. I had some buffering and stuttering issues if I wanted to 'watch now', but no consistency. Sometimes flawless, sometimes not.

Both the Genie and HWS were hard wired to the router, an Apple Airport Extreme when I'm on the cable modem. When I had the DSL they were wired to an Airport Extreme that was extending the network to the master Airport Extreme.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

If the delivery is capped by Directv at 12 Mb/s and the bit rate can run as high as 16 Mb/s, it's no wonder delivery isn't smooth and just reaffirms, no matter how some try to spin it, Directv will never be able to deliver consistent VOD, if those numbers are correct.



veryoldschool said:


> Since I think the highest out of DirecTV is around 12 Mb/s, and my "tested" 11 Mb/s U-who would pretty much handle "live" HD, anything above 12 isn't being used by DirecTV.
> DirecTV VOD is pretty long in the tooth by now and the streaming services have far surpassed them for "live" HD.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

raott said:


> If the delivery is capped by Directv at 12 Mb/s and the bit rate can run as high as 16 MB/s, it's no wonder delivery isn't smooth and just reaffirms, no matter how some try to spin it, Directv will never be able to deliver consistent VOD, if those numbers are correct.


yes I agree!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> In the past year that I've had the HWS I've never had an issue with watching VOD during the download. No buffering or stutters. During that time I was first on a 12/1 DSL line, and now on a 50/5 cable line.


It must be very good, I've yet seen a complaint thread about DISH on demand.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

raott said:


> If the delivery is capped by Directv at 12 Mb/s and the bit rate can run as high as 16 Mb/s, it's no wonder delivery isn't smooth and just reaffirms, no matter how some try to spin it, Directv will never be able to deliver consistent VOD, if those numbers are correct.


The end of post 19 addresses my thoughts/feelings on this.

Do remember this has been around for something like 7-8 years and doesn't reduce resolution like Netflix does at times.

*With no intention of upsetting anyone:*

With VOD being *free*, if it doesn't work to your liking look for something else that does.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

damondlt said:


> I still have yet to hear about DISH on demand?
> Is there no one whom knows?
> Where's Harsh,James,Stewart?


What do you want to know and why are you asking about DISH in a DirecTV forum?
(It sounds like a trap to me. )



damondlt said:


> It must be very good, I've yet seen a complaint thread about DISH on demand.


I believe you have your answer. As for me, I rarely use Internet based VOD (I watch satellite delivered pre-downloaded content more often, or linear channel recordings). The few shows I have downloaded in HD seem to come quickly and play well. But I normally download now and "watch later" and not try to watch the show as it buffers. (I am probably not a good person to ask about on demand ... but you asked me by name, so I'll be polite.)


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> With VOD being *free*, if it doesn't work to your liking look for something else that does.


Uh, no. VOD isn't free on any pay service, it is part and parcel of the package you pay for.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> What do you want to know and why are you asking about DISH in a DirecTV forum?(It sounds like a trap to me. ) I believe you have your answer. As for me, I rarely use Internet based VOD (I watch satellite delivered pre-downloaded content more often, or linear channel recordings). The few shows I have downloaded in HD seem to come quickly and play well. But I normally download now and "watch later" and not try to watch the show as it buffers. (I am probably not a good person to ask about on demand ... but you asked me by name, so I'll be polite.)


Again stop trying to turn nothing into something, I asked the question because it's obviously satellite based just like directv.
So if one has issues and one doesn't using the same network connections then there is an obvious pattern in relationship to the HRs.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> The end of post 19 addresses my thoughts/feelings on this.
> 
> Do remember this has been around for something like 7-8 years and doesn't reduce resolution like Netflix does at times.
> 
> ...


It's not upsetting to me, but in all fairness that's not what I would consider a good answer to finding a solution.

That's more like a dog with his tail between his legs.

As I stated , when I had Directv, I went the HBO go route, among other streaming providers.

But not everyone should have to go these routes, when they pay for the same services and are deprived of a fully functional service.

It clear to me ,there are many random issues based on the threads at DBSTALK alone.
I would like to find and research a solution to an issues that bugged the crap out of me while subscribing to directv.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

damondlt said:


> Again stop trying to turn nothing into something, I asked the question because it's obviously satellite based just like directv.
> So if one has issues and one doesn't using the same network connections then there is an obvious pattern in relationship to the HRs.


DIRECTV on demand is not done through the satellite when you go to a channel and request something. You also stated that you feel the issue is that DIRECTV can limit it to 12mb/s when they broadcast at 16mb/s. There are many factors that are going to go into this which will make what you have said not really relevant to any solution. You're just wanting something to be wrong with DIRECTV equipment like always.

The amount of variables in this scenario are going to make any real troubleshooting be half guesses at best. There are also variables that cannot be known to people outside of DIRECTV.

If I had to bet I would bet that people having an issue have something setup that is causing the problem. It could be a QoS rule, throttled from an ISP, or just an incorrect network setup since people have almost no idea how networks really work due to "plug n play" . There could be external factors from the house like trying to access the most popular show and the servers can't keep up, accessing a data center through a interconnect which can't handle it. At the end of the day I would focus on the internal network settings and run some tests to verify what is really going on. With that said the majority of people really won't have a clue and will just speculate like you are.

Also the choices are incomplete. For example I use both what you call a gateway and a modem/router combination. I'm in the minority of having 2 internet connections but I don't have problems with either one. It's also possible some have a "gateway" as you're calling it but the routing is disabled for LAN through a router but the wifi is turned on through the cable modem.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

damondlt said:


> I asked the question because it's obviously satellite based just like directv.


If the VOD being complained about is "satellite based" as you claim then why is the poll asking about customer's Internet connection?



Shades228 said:


> DIRECTV on demand is not done through the satellite when you go to a channel and request something.


There is the answer for damindlt. The VOD customers are having problem with is Internet based.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

VOS is the one who gave those numbers, I have no reason to doubt them. Simple math, if the capped bandwidth is less than the required bit rate, there will be times VOD will not keep up at a 1:1 rate. That doesn't even factor in server load on Directv's end where it can't meet the 12 Mb/s. This is one factor that explains the variation in experience.

The frustration for many is those with excellent bandwidth, who have no issues with any other streaming service, have issues (or had since I quit using it a long time ago given the inconsistency and poorly designed UI) with Directv's implementation.

It is almost comical the amount of posts some on here have spinning this as everything except a Directv problem.



Shades228 said:


> DIRECTV on demand is not done through the satellite when you go to a channel and request something. You also stated that you feel the issue is that DIRECTV can limit it to 12mb/s when they broadcast at 16mb/s. There are many factors that are going to go into this which will make what you have said not really relevant to any solution. You're just wanting something to be wrong with DIRECTV equipment like always.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> DIRECTV on demand is not done through the satellite when you go to a channel and request something. You also stated that you feel the issue is that DIRECTV can limit it to 12mb/s when they broadcast at 16mb/s. There are many factors that are going to go into this which will make what you have said not really relevant to any solution. You're just wanting something to be wrong with DIRECTV equipment like always.
> 
> The amount of variables in this scenario are going to make any real troubleshooting be half guesses at best. There are also variables that cannot be known to people outside of DIRECTV.
> 
> ...


Awesome, well said!


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

What is comical is folks trying to blame DIRECTV® for their poor network implementation. And is also comical how folks are trying to spin VOS post, but they keep comparing streaming services to DIRECTV® and they are not even close in bitrate.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

peds48 said:


> What is comical is folks trying to blame DIRECTV® for their poor network implementation. And is also comical how folks are trying to spin VOS post, but they keep comparing streaming services to DIRECTV® and they are not even close in bitrate.


I've had very slow downloads before and mine is almost always fine. In fact for myself it's uncommon enough that when it happens I really take notice.

The problem with this whole thread is that it is without context. To validate information it would need to be quantified. There's no definition as to what is broken. Some people say it's slow. That needs to be defined. Is slow that you cannot watch it real time? if that's the case is it designed to be watched real time? If real time is not the measurement then what is? Is it that it should not take longer than 50% more than the time it would be to watch the show? Then you have to start tracking to see how many times it fails to meet the measurement that is established. While someone is having an issue you would need to ask someone else to test it to validate if it's on the "server" side. If the same behavior exists for multiple people then that would establish an external issue. Unless those people are using the same ISP, and/or internet connection hardware. Times would need to be logged, as with any provider people are going to have business models that make sense from cost effectiveness so high volume times could be a factor, and so on.

If you really wanted to "test" this you could do the following.

Title:
Behavior Identified:
Time download requested:
Any other DOD titles being downloaded on another receiver?
ISP:
Modem/Router:
Speed:
Speed Test at time of error:
City:

Then post that into a thread and have others test it. Ideally people would have the same isp and be in the same market. This would reduce a decent amount of variables for the ISP portion.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

You seem to think you are the expert on this. Please tell us: 1) Where the servers are located 2) Do different servers serve different parts of the country 3) Is the bandwidth on the server capped, if so, what is the cap (if it is different from what VOS quoted) 4) What is the average bit rate for a show and for a movie



peds48 said:


> What is comical is folks trying to blame DIRECTV® for their poor network implementation. And is also comical how folks are trying to spin VOS post, but they keep comparing streaming services to DIRECTV® and they are not even close in bitrate.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James and Shades
I know it goes though the internet , what I was saying is so does Dish networks. Both companies are satellite based companies. 
Yes we are all aware some of the contents are uploaded by satellite. 
But the stuff that isn't apparently doesn't download or stream consistent. 
Both companies are satellite companies is what I meant. 
All the VOD is from Satellite based company. The delivery methods are the same.
Internet 

And if Dish works consistent, and Directv doesnt? Then tell me why the HR should not be held responsible.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

raott said:


> VOS is the one who gave those numbers, I have no reason to doubt them. Simple math, if the capped bandwidth is less than the required bit rate, there will be times VOD will not keep up at a 1:1 rate. That doesn't even factor in server load on Directv's end where it can't meet the 12 Mb/s. This is one factor that explains the variation in experience.
> 
> The frustration for many is those with excellent bandwidth, who have no issues with any other streaming service, have issues (or had since I quit using it a long time ago given the inconsistency and poorly designed UI) with Directv's implementation.
> 
> It is almost comical the amount of posts some on here have spinning this as everything except a Directv problem.


Yes exactly, like when I said they Directv and Dish are both satellite based.

They turned that into me saying all the OnDemand is through satellite.

That is Not what I said.
I said Dish and Directv are both satellite based,

Meaning the company , not the delivery. 
Anyone who is really reading any of these post, are well aware I did not say the content is streamed through satellite.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

James Long said:


> If the VOD being complained about is "satellite based" as you claim then why is the poll asking about customer's Internet connection? There is the answer for damindlt. The VOD customers are having problem with is Internet based.


Wow, thanks for the spin, You can go back to the dish thread.

Clearly that's not what I said.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

raott said:


> You seem to think you are the expert on this. Please tell us: 1) Where the servers are located 2) Do different servers serve different parts of the country 3) Is the bandwidth on the server capped, if so, what is the cap (if it is different from what VOS quoted) 4) What is the average bit rate for a show and for a movie


Nope, no expert at all and never have said or claimed to be one. just stating my findings and experience with such service.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

raott said:


> ) 4) What is the average bit rate for a show and for a movie


VOS posted some interesting numbers!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

damondlt said:


> James and Shades
> I know it goes though the internet , what I was saying is so does Dish networks. Both companies are satellite based companies.
> Yes we are all aware some of the contents are uploaded by satellite.
> But the stuff that isn't apparently doesn't download or stream consistent.
> ...


Unless both companies are using the same exact CND's and network routes to provide the content you can't make that conclusion.

Maybe instead of asking the question of what hardware is being used it should be what geographical area are you located if having slow performance to see if that's a common point of issue?


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

RAD said:


> Unless both companies are using the same exact CND's and network routes to provide the content you can't make that conclusion.
> 
> Maybe instead of asking the question of what hardware is being used it should be what geographical area are you located if having slow performance to see if that's a common point of issue?


If streaming from all other sources than D* is working just fine, then the problem IS D*. It is just that simple. Regardless of all the techno babble being spewed here, that is the fact.
With a solid 50/5 service that most often goes higher, there is no reason other than D*'s equipment for the issue to be as prevalent as it is. And it doesn't matter if it is the unit in the house or at D*'s streaming location, the problem is D*s.
That said, when I had D* (HR24, HR44), I just set them up to get overnight and watched the next day as it wasn't all that important to watch 'now' with the probability that I would have a glitch while doing so was so high.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

damondlt said:


> Yes exactly, like when I said they Directv and Dish are both satellite based.
> 
> They turned that into me saying all the OnDemand is through satellite.
> 
> ...


I second this. Anyone who thinks that you said that VOD is delivered through satellite clearly isn't reading what you wrote. Same as NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS asked!!


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

peds48 said:


> What is comical is folks trying to blame DIRECTV® for their poor network implementation. And is also comical how folks are trying to spin VOS post, but they keep comparing streaming services to DIRECTV® and they are not even close in bitrate.


I have a solid network implementation, but the fact is that DirecTV chose a VOD infrastructure which isn't as robust as almost all other video streaming services to handle the inconsistencies which appear at times in a real world end-to-end connection. I don't doubt that it "works" for most people, but that doesn't mean it's a robust system.

As far as a gateway causing a problem, what are the specific protocol settings in a gateway which can affect DirecTV VOD? And how do changing those settings affect packet delivery in a positive or negative way?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> If streaming from all other sources than D* is working just fine, then the problem IS D*. It is just that simple. Regardless of all the techno babble being spewed here, that is the fact.
> With a solid 50/5 service that most often goes higher, there is no reason other than D*'s equipment for the issue to be as prevalent as it is. And it doesn't matter if it is the unit in the house or at D*'s streaming location, the problem is D*s.
> That said, when I had D* (HR24, HR44), I just set them up to get overnight and watched the next day as it wasn't all that important to watch 'now' with the probability that I would have a glitch while doing so was so high.


Agree, which is why Dish members were asked. 
If Dish suffers from the same issues , Then we can say definitively it's home Networking issues or Internet provider issues .
Until then, right now its a Directv issue, But what is causing it? Until I see solid evidence its not HR related, then we'll count out Directv equipment.
But there is absolutely nothing to discard it.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

ejbvt said:


> I second this. Anyone who thinks that you said that VOD is delivered through satellite clearly isn't reading what you wrote. Same as NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS asked!!


Thanks. :righton:


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

lparsons21 said:


> If streaming from all other sources than D* is working just fine, then the problem IS D*. It is just that simple. Regardless of all the techno babble being spewed here, that is the fact.


No, it's not that simple. Unless you know that ALL other sources are getting their content from the exact same server farm then you can't say it's a D* problem with 100% certainty, too many other factors that can be the cause of the problem. Yes, it might be the CDN that's providing the VOD content for you has issues causing the problem but when others with the same hardware can use Watch Now (and I could before TWC upgraded my service from 30Mbps to 50Mbps service) while others can't points me to something in the network path and not the DVR.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

RAD said:


> Maybe instead of asking the question of what hardware is being used it should be what geographical area are you located if having slow performance to see if that's a common point of issue?


Again all these are being asked.
But there is no pattern other than HRs are not consistent, or Directvs delivery isn't.
Its already been stated. a Guy from NY city is Flawless LOL, but another guy from NY city is Not.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

RAD said:


> No, it's not that simple. Unless you know that ALL other sources are getting their content from the exact same server farm then you can't say it's a D* problem with 100% certainty, too many other factors that can be the cause of the problem. Yes, it might be the CDN that's providing the VOD content for you has issues causing the problem but when others with the same hardware can use Watch Now (and I could before TWC upgraded my service from 30Mbps to 50Mbps service) while others can't points me to something in the network path and not the DVR.


So your saying its the Directv servers?

Again, everyone with issues reports they have NOT 1 other Streaming or Networking issue at all, Except Directv On Demand?

So why would one not start the troubleshooting with Directv?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I've read enough posts/threads here to know things aren't equal for all.
> 
> I have yet to know why. :shrug:
> Is it their ISP as was my problem? :shrug:
> ...


I measured my speed at the modem yesterday. Above 100 down. Still don't use VoD because of the various problems with it. Speed in downloading is not one of my problems with it.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

RAD said:


> No, it's not that simple. Unless you know that ALL other sources are getting their content from the exact same server farm then you can't say it's a D* problem with 100% certainty, too many other factors that can be the cause of the problem. Yes, it might be the CDN that's providing the VOD content for you has issues causing the problem but when others with the same hardware can use Watch Now (and I could before TWC upgraded my service from 30Mbps to 50Mbps service) while others can't points me to something in the network path and not the DVR.


Actually it is that simple!
For whatever reason, the streams from D* are not being done well enough to give the nearly flawless service virtually all other streaming providers are giving. Doesn't matter what it is, the others figured out how to get their streaming service to work nearly flawless and D* did not.
In my case the HR24 and later the HR44 were connected to an Apple Airport Extreme with Ethernet cable and the AE was connected to the cable modem via Ethernet cable. No wireless involved and Apple's Airports are superb routers even if not quite as configurable as some others.
The facts on the ground are that all other streaming services work flawlessly and with my BluRay player, PS3, Dish HWS, and Apple TV in this very setup.
The only equipment to have any issues at all was the HR24 and later HR44.
As an end user, all the technobabble has no meaning nor application, that is for the geeks at the other end of the stick to worry about. I only care that it work properly. In D*'s case it seems that no small number of end users do not see that result.

Now back to the technobabble about how...???


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> Actually it is that simple!
> For whatever reason, the streams from D* are not being done well enough to give the nearly flawless service virtually all other streaming providers are giving. Doesn't matter what it is, the others figured out how to get their streaming service to work nearly flawless and D* did not.
> In my case the HR24 and later the HR44 were connected to an Apple Airport Extreme with Ethernet cable and the AE was connected to the cable modem via Ethernet cable. No wireless involved and Apple's Airports are superb routers even if not quite as configurable as some others.
> The facts on the ground are that all other streaming services work flawlessly and with my BluRay player, PS3, Dish HWS, and Apple TV in this very setup.
> ...


Agree 100%


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Agree 100%


Thanks. Let me add a little tidbit.
On the Hopper w/Sling is a slow running Netflix app, and even that streams flawlessly!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> I measured my speed at the modem yesterday. Above 100 down. Still don't use VoD because of the various problems with it. Speed in downloading is not one of my problems with it.
> 
> Rich


What's the various issues Rich?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> The end of post 19 addresses my thoughts/feelings on this.
> 
> Do remember this has been around for something like 7-8 years and doesn't reduce resolution like Netflix does at times.
> 
> ...


So much out there, why not?

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> Thanks. Let me add a little tidbit.
> On the Hopper w/Sling is a slow running Netflix app, and even that streams flawlessly!


Yep so is my LG blu ray player, slow to load, but still stream flawless.

I would hate to see a Netflix app in an HR.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Yep so is my LG blu ray player, slow to load, but still stream flawless.
> 
> I would hate to see a Netflix app in an HR.


The HR44 should be able to handles it I would think. But anything else brings up an ugly picture in my mind, one involving throwing the remote out the window as it SLOWWWWLLLLYYYY does something!!


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> The HR44 should be able to handles it I would think. But anything else brings up an ugly picture in my mind, one involving throwing the remote out the window as it SLOWWWWLLLLYYYY does something!!


Agree.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> What's the various issues Rich?


So many. Sound dropouts that caused me to rearrange my HRs so that I have a 24-100 in the 3 rooms that I use to watch TV. Why do the 24-100s not have sound dropouts when my 500s and 200 and my 20-700 do have dropouts? I thought that solution (moving the 24-100s into rooms where I might watch VoD) might be the answer. Then the 20-700 wouldn't download a whole season. Just stopped downloading after two episodes. Then I downloaded a series and the episodes were out of order. Another time I tried to DL a series and many episodes were just missing. After a while I just gave up and spent the money on 3 Firebox TVs that work much better.

Gotta admit, I don't know who I'm agreeing with or disagreeing with, but if the 24-100s don't have sound problems and the rest of my HRs do, there's gotta be something wrong with all but the 24-100s in respect to the audio dropouts at least, no?

Another thought, why would anyone use Watch Now when with a bit of patience you can DL a half hour of any VoD content at a higher resolution and watch that?

Rich


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

What about Pandora and YouTube on the Directv receivers? I can use both flawlessly, but the YouTube app does not show even half of the options that are found on the smart TV YouTube app, my Android YouTube app, and the actual YouTube website. There is no buffering on either app, unlike VOD.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> Uh, no. VOD isn't free on any pay service, it is part and parcel of the package you pay for.


"Well" my bill didn't go up when VOD was added, so that's what was meant.
If you could get a discount for not using VOD, "then" it might be different.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Yep so is my LG blu ray player, slow to load, but still stream flawless.
> 
> _*I would hate to see a Netflix app in an HR.*_


Wouldn't bother me. I just wouldn't use it. Don't use any of the apps on the HRs. All I ever wanted from D* was a DVR that worked correctly. I have 12 of them that work well as DVRs and use many other ways to stream content.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> "Well" my bill didn't go up when VOD was added, so that's what was meant.
> If you could get a discount for not using VOD, "then" it might be different.


Serious question: When did VoD first appear? I can't remember it not being an option.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> So many. Sound dropouts that caused me to rearrange my HRs so that I have a 24-100 in the 3 rooms that I use to watch TV. Why do the 24-100s not have sound dropouts when my 500s and 200 and my 20-700 do have dropouts? I thought that solution (moving the 24-100s into rooms where I might watch VoD) might be the answer. Then the 20-700 wouldn't download a whole season. Just stopped downloading after two episodes. Then I downloaded a series and the episodes were out of order. Another time I tried to DL a series and many episodes were just missing. After a while I just gave up and spent the money on 3 Firebox TVs that work much better.
> 
> Gotta admit, I don't know who I'm agreeing with or disagreeing with, but if the 24-100s don't have sound problems and the rest of my HRs do, there's gotta be something wrong with all but the 24-100s in respect to the audio dropouts at least, no?
> 
> ...


Agree, the audio issue are also common, but not really talk about here, but that's just one of many Flaws with the end result download.

That's why I laugh when People claim it works flawless. 
Slow downloads are just the start, there are other threads that discuss 5he other issues that are clearly present.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> "Well" my bill didn't go up when VOD was added, so that's what was meant.
> If you could get a discount for not using VOD, "then" it might be different.


Uh, no... 
It was a service they added that did not show a specific value to charge you, but you are paying for it. It is all part of your subscription package pricing.
Only the company line might be 'well it is free', but it isn't. Just because they don't have a line item you see doesn't change that!!


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> Uh, no...
> It was a service they added that did not show a specific value to charge you, but you are paying for it. It is all part of your subscription package pricing.
> Only the company line might be 'well it is free', but it isn't. Just because they don't have a line item you see doesn't change that!!


Here's another way to look at it. Package 'a' lists all the channels, but doesn't list the charge being made for each channel. VOD is an unlisted 'channel'!!  
How's that??


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> It's not upsetting to me, but in all fairness that's not what I would consider a good answer to finding a solution.


It's hard to fix a problem you don't have.
"The only" problem I ever had was directly related to my ISP.
DirecTV doesn't own/control the delivery system and in my case with Suddenlink they clearly "choked" DirecTV and not other sites.

Comcrap and Netflix when through something similar last year until Netflix offer Comcrap more money.

We really do need net neutrality to get the ISPs out of the loop.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> Serious question: When did VoD first appear? I can't remember it not being an option.
> 
> Rich


At least 7 years.
I've used it before I've had Swim and CCKs.

For the longest time it wasn't advertised as heavily as in the last 5 years.

I was doing VOD with Ethernet plugged into the back of my HR22.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

There's no indication anywhere that I've read that Mediacom is doing any throttling of an individual entity, and for the months I've had them, I've not seen anything that would lead me to believe that they are.
All will be perfect I'm sure when my Tivo Roamio Plus arrives and Mediacom gets their cable TV activated on it, right??


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Reading this thread, those that don't like (or don't have) DirecTV think there's a crisis with VOD.

Looking at the poll above, 79% of the bit-heads at DBSTalk (including me!) don't have a problem with VOD downloads.

And anyone that thinks it's a HR problem hasn't looked at the poll numbers.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

dennisj00 said:


> Reading this thread, those that don't like (or don't have) DirecTV think there's a crisis with VOD.
> 
> Looking at the poll above, 79% of the bit-heads at DBSTalk (including me!) don't have a problem with VOD downloads.
> 
> And anyone that thinks it's a HR problem hasn't looked at the poll numbers.


No one thinks it a crisis, but why not fix a flawed system?

Sorry But polls at DBSTalk are always Pro Directv.

You could start a poll about a Directv Price increase, and Directv DBS'ers will be all for it.

Look at the numbers in Dish General Verses Directv General forums.


----------



## samrs (May 30, 2004)

> Serious question: When did VoD first appear? I can't remember it not being an option.
> 
> Rich


Earl first talked about it here.

http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/89467-directv-on-demand-dbstalks-first-look/


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> If streaming from all other sources than D* is working just fine, then the problem IS D*. It is just that simple.


While DirecTV can have its problems, given my own experience with Suddenlink AND AT&T DSL "AT THE SAME TIME", no it isn't "that simple".

Suddenlink was taking 20+ hours and AT&T was taking 2 min for every 1 min *of THE SAME program*.

I couldn't get any closer to apples to apples.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> If you really wanted to "test" this you could do the following.
> 
> Title:
> Behavior Identified:
> ...


This seems to be the only serious methodology.
Without something close to this everyone is merely posting their opinion without ANY serious data to back it up.

My problem with Suddenlink may NOT be the problem others have with VOD, but I was able to prove mine was Suddenlink by having a second ISP and comparing the two at the same time with the same program.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> While DirecTV can have its problems, given my own experience with Suddenlink AND AT&T DSL "AT THE SAME TIME", no it isn't "that simple".
> 
> Suddenlink was taking 20+ hours and AT&T was taking 2 min for every 1 min *of THE SAME program*.
> 
> I couldn't get any closer to apples to apples.


I had 12/1 DSL and switched to Cable (Mediacom) when I had both the HR44 & HWS. With both internet services, the results were the same. Everything BUT the HR44 streamed with virtually no issues. I did and do live streams practically every day right now too.
Here's a typical streaming use:
HWS tagging the Playon server in house and streaming something from there. Perfect nearly every time.
BluRay Player tagging the Playon server getting The CW show in HD, perfect nearly every time.
AppleTV or HWS for Netflix, perfect nearly every time.
BluRay Player for Amazon Prime videos, perfect nearly every time.
The HR44 when I had it worked perfectly if I chose to 'watch later', which is what I usually did. Let it do its thing overnight. The few times I tried 'watch now' it would invariably have some glitch or the other. Didn't give it much thought then as it wasn't generally the way I used it any way. Had this thread not come up, I still wouldn't have given it much thought.
As you can see, the only thing that glitched with any regularity was the D* equipment. Everything else was nearly flawless. So regardless of all other considerations, in my mind the issue is D*'s to fix.
And to the poll, this site is very pro D* and I have no issues with that. But I've learned to take many things posted here with a huge grain of salt when it comes to the 'greatness' that is D* since all to often, the glowing reports just don't turn out to be all that reality based imo.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> This seems to be the only serious methodology.
> Without something close to this everyone is merely posting their opinion without ANY serious data to back it up.
> 
> My problem with Suddenlink may NOT be the problem others have with VOD, but I was able to prove mine was Suddenlink by having a second ISP and comparing the two at the same time with the same program.


I agree with that, I'll post my Sisters HR44 specs and I'll even record the process on my phone. Set up another thread with just specs.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

damondlt said:


> No one thinks it a crisis, but why not fix a flawed system?
> 
> Sorry But polls at DBSTalk are always Pro Directv.
> 
> ...


And looking at these poll numbers, we can't identify the 21% so YOU could have voted in this one!!

With probably 10 million HR customers (and multiple HRs) don't you think it would be a bigger problem if it were the HR?

While they probably should go to a distributed network source, does it really make $$ sense?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> I had 12/1 DSL and switched to Cable (Mediacom) when I had both the HR44 & HWS. With both internet services, the results were the same. Everything BUT the HR44 streamed with virtually no issues. I did and do live streams practically every day right now too.
> Here's a typical streaming use:
> HWS tagging the Playon server in house and streaming something from there. Perfect nearly every time.
> BluRay Player tagging the Playon server getting The CW show in HD, perfect nearly every time.
> ...


Absolutely 100% fantastic post.
Most people just get used to the way you have to do things with directv, until finally you think it's normal.

It's when you use something else and you realize the things that may have seemed a little odd or flawed, Really are real issues.

I know people whom had Directv since 1995
These people have never used another providers equipment, Ever! 
I've had 12 years off and On Directv services. 
The first Time I realized Directv's equipment isn't that Great started in 2007 when I gave Dish Networks VIP 622,612,and finally the 722 a 3 year trial.
Up until then I was convinced them HR20 and 22s were normal.
And VOD was a slow painful issue even then.
And while Dish had less VOD at that time, It still worked flawless.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> As you can see, the only thing that glitched with any regularity was the D* equipment. Everything else was nearly flawless. So regardless of all other considerations, in my mind the issue is D*'s to fix.
> And to the poll, this site is very pro D* and I have no issues with that. But I've learned to take many things posted here with a huge grain of salt when it comes to the 'greatness' that is D* since all to often, the glowing reports just don't turn out to be all that reality based imo.


I try to stick with "data" and skip drinking the Kool-aid, "but yeah" some posters seem to think DirecTV is their first born. :eek2: :lol:

DirecTV OnDemand isn't really a streaming service [or why they use a hard disk for storage].
I've got 3 devices that stream, right next to each other, and I can't get the same performance with all my apps on all three. :rotfl:

DirecTV's bit-rate and lack of variable resolution is both their weakness & strength.

I hate it when Netflix looks like crap and I find the resolution is 280 before rebuilding back to 1080.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

dennisj00 said:


> And looking at these poll numbers, we can't identify the 21% so YOU could have voted in this one!!
> 
> With probably 10 million HR customers (and multiple HRs) don't you think it would be a bigger problem if it were the HR?
> 
> While they probably should go to a distributed network source, does it really make $$ sense?


Dennis, I said in my very first post why I didn't and why I wasn't casting a vote.
I don't believe I have the reputation of being a lier.

BECAUSE I'm NOT!!!

Anyway, you can also point the finger at the people whom voted Yes it works flawless, when they know it doesn't just to not bad mouth or go against Directv.

They would rather take a stance than help find a solution.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

samrs said:


> Earl first talked about it here.
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/topic/89467-directv-on-demand-dbstalks-first-look/


Huh. Been around almost as long as the 20-700s. I really haven't had much reason to use it. Kinda surprised me when I did and saw the flaws.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

A long time back, when I had 3/1 DSL, streaming was an 'iffy' situation. Sometimes fine, sometimes not. The 'not' usually meaning buffering. And the best quality was very good SD or maybe a little better.

Now the streaming is all great, I don't even think about it. It is just that good. Of course some of the apps to do it with are a bit slow in getting things going, but once the stream starts is completes with some rare glitches not often enough to even remember the last one. The only real downside to streaming on some channels is I can't skip ads! 

The honest fact is that this discussion has been fun!! And if I were to return to D* I would get the VOD via overnight download just as I did before. It is still what I do when I want to record via Playon/Playlater though I could do it during the day just as easily since 50/5 internet gives me plenty of 'headroom'.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> A long time back, when I had 3/1 DSL, streaming was an 'iffy' situation. Sometimes fine, sometimes not. The 'not' usually meaning buffering. And the best quality was very good SD or maybe a little better.
> Now the streaming is all great, I don't even think about it. It is just that good. Of course some of the apps to do it with are a bit slow in getting things going, but once the stream starts is completes with some rare glitches not often enough to even remember the last one. The only real downside to streaming on some channels is I can't skip ads!
> The honest fact is that this discussion has been fun!! And if I were to return to D* I would get the VOD via overnight download just as I did before. It is still what I do when I want to record via Playon/Playlater though I could do it during the day just as easily since 50/5 internet gives me plenty of 'headroom'.


Problem is , It will cost me another $120 to have 100 MBPS service on top of my Directv bill.
And for what? No reason them speeds should be required for it to function properly. 
Netflix 4K only requires 25 Mbps
1080p is less than 7.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Problem is , It will cost me another $120 to have 100 MBPS service on top of my Directv bill.
> And for what? No reason them speeds should be required for it to function properly.
> Netflix 4K only requires 25 Mbps
> 1080p is less than 7.


Geez, I thought $79 a month was a lot for 100 down. I have that from Cablevision and have absolutely no problems with any streaming app except for Showtime Anytime. That kinda judders. Not like you see on LCDs when watching sports, but a smoother judder that you really have to see to appreciate (or get annoyed by).

Rich


----------



## samrs (May 30, 2004)

damondlt said:


> Dennis, I said in my very first post why I didn't and why I wasn't casting a vote.
> I don't believe I have the reputation of being a lier.
> 
> BECAUSE I'm NOT!!!
> ...


My VOD works well and I have a separate modem and router. (20 votes [47.62%])
Percentage of vote: 47.62%

Where does it say Flawless?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

samrs said:


> My VOD works well and I have a separate modem and router. (20 votes [47.62%])
> Percentage of vote: 47.62%
> 
> Where does it say Flawless


Not sure what your asking?
I don't think you were the only one who voted.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> Geez, I thought $79 a month was a lot for 100 down. I have that from Cablevision and have absolutely no problems with any streaming app except for Showtime Anytime. That kinda judders. Not like you see on LCDs when watching sports, but a smoother judder that you really have to see to appreciate (or get annoyed by).
> 
> Rich


Mediacom is a really flakey company! Hard to get them to tell you what their 'retail' is, they sure as hell don't publish it! And all deals are done by phone! You can start a signup online sometimes, but in the end the deal isn't done until you are on the phone. And they don't email the deal after you agree either.

I haven't looked at Showtime Anytime in a very long time, and won't have that as a benefit until my Mediacom service is active, but when I did I don't remember any real issues with them.


----------



## samrs (May 30, 2004)

damondlt said:


> Not sure what your asking?
> I don't think you were the only one who voted.


I fixed it.

For what its worth mine works well.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

damondlt said:


> All the VOD is from Satellite based company. The delivery methods are the same.


The content is from a CDN that has been contracted to deliver content for the provider. Using the term "satellite based VOD" only adds confusion. It does not matter what the primary business the provider is in, What matters is the CDN chosen to provide content, the equipment provided to retrieve the content and display it and the customers own Internet connection and equipment used to connect the CDN to the receiver.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Yet you've spent the better part of two threads preaching to anyone and everyone why this isn't a Directv issue.



peds48 said:


> Nope, no expert at all and never have said or claimed to be one. just stating my findings and experience with such service.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

To answer the question from 55 posts ago, to me, "slow" means "can't keep up with real time" in particular, with Watch Now and start over. 

If they aren't going to work on perfecting the start over streams, stop advertising it so heavily! I would actually find that feature useful, if it worked. I do have 3M DSL but just last night streamed a movie on Netflix in 720p and the only time it went down was when I did a speed test during it to see how much bandwidth it was using. 

If Netflix and other companies can figure out how to stream in HD with 3 Mbps DSL, I think D* can. especially since they advertise only 2 Mbps is required.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

mrknowitall526 said:


> To answer the question from 55 posts ago, to me, "slow" means "can't keep up with real time" in particular, with Watch Now and start over.
> 
> If they aren't going to work on perfecting the start over streams, stop advertising it so heavily! I would actually find that feature useful, if it worked. I do have 3M DSL but just last night streamed a movie on Netflix in 720p and the only time it went down was when I did a speed test during it to see how much bandwidth it was using.
> 
> If Netflix and other companies can figure out how to stream in HD with 3 Mbps DSL, I think D* can. especially since they advertise only 2 Mbps is required.


I'd imagine the 2 Mb/s advertised is for SD.

With a 3 Mb/s connection you'll never be happy with DirecTV and HD because they don't degrade resolution [other than 1080 being dropped to 720 for watch now].


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Exactly, Netflix, Hulu and others use dynamic streaming so the bitrate and resolution change in real time based on the quality of your connection, so it works on something as slow as a 2G cellular connection. That's not what DirecTV's VOD is, it's basically streaming an entire recording file to your DVR.

Like others said there's alot of other factors at play. i.e. last year when Verizon was being stubborn and letting any traffic coming from Cogent suffer unless they pay them:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/netflix-packets-being-dropped-every-day-because-verizon-wants-more-money/


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dennisj00 said:


> Reading this thread, those that don't like (or don't have) DirecTV think there's a crisis with VOD.
> 
> Looking at the poll above, 79% of the bit-heads at DBSTalk (including me!) don't have a problem with VOD downloads.
> 
> And anyone that thinks it's a HR problem hasn't looked at the poll numbers.


Thanks. At least someone is paying attention


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

peds48 said:


> Nope, no expert at all and never have said or claimed to be one. just stating my findings and experience with such service.


So claiming to be the "master technician" that you yourself admits doesn't exist doesn't mean you're saying you're the expert?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> Exactly,* Netflix*, Hulu and others use dynamic streaming so the bitrate and resolution change in real time based on the quality of your connection, so it works on something as slow as a 2G cellular connection. That's not what DirecTV's VOD is, it's basically streaming an entire recording file to your DVR.


This is Netflix:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

ejbvt said:


> So claiming to be the "master technician" that you yourself admits doesn't exist doesn't mean you're saying you're the expert?


[MOD HAT ON]
This isn't of any use/help to this thread.
If you feel you need to pursue this use PMs
[/MOD HAT OFF]


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

dennisj00 said:


> Reading this thread, those that don't like (or don't have) DirecTV think there's a crisis with VOD.
> 
> Looking at the poll above, 79% of the bit-heads at DBSTalk (including me!) don't have a problem with VOD downloads.
> 
> And anyone that thinks it's a HR problem hasn't looked at the poll numbers.


Really? This is the type of crap that doesn't get stuff solved.

I have Directv. I love Directv. That doesn't mean it's perfect. I don't use the on-demand very often. The main reason I don't is that it is too slow.

Still nothing about settings to try.
Still nothing about why it's slow.
Still nothing about why other services work.
Still nothing about Pandora/You Tube.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Post/complain about the topic and not the members "please".


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

raott said:


> Yet you've spent the better part of two threads preaching to anyone and everyone why this isn't a Directv issue.


And the "numbers" seem to agree with me....


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

peds48 said:


> And the "numbers" seem to agree with me....


You said 99%. So ... no they don't.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

ejbvt said:


> Still nothing about why it's slow.
> Still nothing about why other services work.
> Still nothing about Pandora/You Tube.


Read my post earlier, as well as VOS's image replying to it. All those other services uses dynamic bitrate streaming where the bitrate and resolution change in real time based on the quality of your connection. DirecTV's VOD is basically streaming a recording file to your DVR.

If you don't understand the second part of my post, it's how the internet functions. It's not a direct connection between DirecTV, your ISP and your modem, in between there's 3rd party CDNs and backbone providers. Some ISPs demand the CDNs and backbone providers pay them money or they'll just make the connection to them suffer by refusing to expand the capacity to them.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

ejbvt said:


> You said 99%. So ... no they don't.


Again, I ask the question. Did all 23 MIL subs voted? If the answer is not, don't hold me responsible. But the numbers are in fact leaning on my favor....


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

ejbvt said:


> Really? So peds and friends can trash the rest of us and I can't call him what he called himself?


I have never trashed any of you. All I have been saying is that is not DIRECTV® issue, is a user issue with calling anyone names.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

peds48 said:


> All I have been saying is that is not DIRECTV® issue,....


They can have a server problem or bad file, but "most of the time" I don't think it is a DirecTV issue.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

KyL416 said:


> Read my post earlier, as well as VOS's image replying to it. All those other services uses dynamic bitrate streaming where the bitrate and resolution change in real time based on the quality of your connection. DirecTV's VOD is basically streaming a recording file to your DVR.
> 
> If you don't understand the second part of my post, it's how the internet functions. It's not a direct connection between DirecTV, your ISP and your modem, in between there's 3rd party CDNs and backbone providers. Some ISPs demand the CDNs and backbone providers pay them money or they'll just make the connection to them suffer by refusing to expand the capacity to them.


And back to the technobabble.

In English, what can I do to make my VOD faster and actually be on-demand? If every other Internet-based service works flawlessly, why doesn't Directv? I don't care about all the blah blah.

If something claims to be on-demand, it should be just that. If I have to fiddle with settings, it doesn't work. If it DOES work for 99.999% of customers, it doesn't work for the rest. I am thinking that the numbers are more 50-50. Like it's been said before, what percentage of the 75% who vote that "it works fine" know what other providers offer? It's another case of "I've had Directv for years" fanboiz who think their experience is the only experience. If you've never seen VOD actually be on-demand, you would think what we have is "Fine." This is exactly the same as those who defend the HR34 - it's a buggy piece of junk. Just like Directv On-Demand.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

See also: http://forums.directv.com/search.jspa?q=slow+on+demand


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

ejbvt said:


> And back to the technobabble.
> 
> In English, what can I do to make my VOD faster and actually be on-demand? If every other Internet-based service works flawlessly, why doesn't Directv? I don't care about all the blah blah.
> 
> If something claims to be on-demand, it should be just that. If I have to fiddle with settings, it doesn't work. If it DOES work for 99.999% of customers, it doesn't work for the rest. I am thinking that the numbers are more 50-50. Like it's been said before, what percentage of the 75% who vote that "it works fine" know what other providers offer? It's another case of "I've had Directv for years" fanboiz who think their experience is the only experience. If you've never seen VOD actually be on-demand, you would think what we have is "Fine." This is exactly the same as those who defend the HR34 - it's a buggy piece of junk. Just like Directv On-Demand.


If you don't understand what's going on how can you find the answer you're looking for?

DirecTV "OnDemand" has NEVER quite been "on demand" for all.
Cable has offered on demand and given they also own the pipe can offer true on demand.

DirecTV has always required some buffering.
Depending on your connection speed and the program you want, the time required before you can watch varies.

THIS ISN'T Netflix.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> Read my post earlier, as well as VOS's image replying to it. All those other services uses dynamic bitrate streaming where the bitrate and resolution change in real time based on the quality of your connection. DirecTV's VOD is basically streaming a recording file to your DVR.


IOW those other services figured out what it took to get great service streaming over the internet, and then came up with the solution to the issue. D* decided not to.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

lparsons21 said:


> IOW those other services figured out what it took to get great service streaming over the internet, and then came up with the solution to the issue. D* decided not to.


and keep in mind that streaming is their SOLE business, so anything less than perfection can be catathrophic to them. VOD for DirecTV is an added service value.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> IOW those other services figured out what it took to get great service streaming over the internet, and then came up with the solution to the issue. D* decided not to.


There is another view:
Netflix chose to degrade PQ for the sake of streaming and DirecTV played to their strength [of the SAT feed] and chose to buffer longer for better PQ.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> DirecTV "OnDemand" has NEVER quite been "on demand" for all.
> Cable has offered on demand and given they also own the pipe can offer true on demand.


Cable's VOD is essentially a dedicated channel your settop controls in real time and works with non-DVRs. Since each node is only served by a small number of subscribers it doesn't take up that much bandwidth.

Satellite has one headend in the sky that serves all 20 million+ subscribers x whatever number of receivers they have. DirecTV could never offer VOD the way cable does, even if they had the satellite capacity to do so, the latency from the satellite delay would have problems for fast forward, rewind and pause.

After the content leaves DirecTV's servers they have no control over what happens when it comes to speed at latency. That's up to the CDN, backbone providers and your ISP, if your ISP makes sure there's enough capacity to handle the traffic being sent to their subscribers there's no problem, but if they just let it bottleneck until the CDN or backbone provider pays them money to add more capacity then you get problems. (It's kind of what this Net Neutrality thing is about)


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

veryoldschool said:


> If you don't understand what's going on how can you find the answer you're looking for?
> 
> DirecTV "OnDemand" has NEVER quite been "on demand" for all.
> Cable has offered on demand and given they also own the pipe can offer true on demand.
> ...


The issue is that I shouldn't have to understand Internet. It should just work. Or, they shouldn't offer it.

So, AGAIN, for those saying it "works fine" - does it? Is it supposed to take hours to download a movie? If I knew how, I could steal a movie off pirate bay or whatever faster than Directv VOD. I don't understand or care about stealing from pirate bay, so don't accuse me of stealing movies. However, if they're both downloaded, shouldn't they take about the same amount of time? It shouldn't be called on-demand if it isn't. VOD isn't that important to me. Sunday Ticket is. As long as that works, I am cool. But, when I do need VOD, I expect it to work. Downloading something at a slower rate than dial-up isn't on-demand.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

ejbvt said:


> The issue is that I shouldn't have to understand Internet. It should just work. Or, they shouldn't offer it.
> 
> So, AGAIN, for those saying it "works fine" - does it? Is it supposed to take hours to download a movie?


As pointed out in the first look, VOD is supposed to be about real time or a little bit faster, and this has always ben my experience.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

ejbvt said:


> The issue is that I shouldn't have to understand Internet.


If you don't care about why it's happening or don't want to take the time to understand how it works, you shouldn't be dismissing the posts by people who are trying to tell you why this happens or explaining the differences between Netflix and VOD.

DirecTV is at the mercy of the ISP and backbone connections. There's NOTHING they can do about it, they're not going to get rid of it because some ISPs want to double dip and take your money to provide a service and then take more money from CDNs and backbones to provide that service reliably.

The differences between Netflix and DirecTV have been explained multiple times in this thread.

Torrents are a completely different style of traffic, with well seeded torrent you're connecting directly to multiple people and the tracker determines who has the best connection to you to deliver the content the fastest. However if you're one of the first ones to download that torrent, it can be hours before you get it.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

ejbvt said:


> So, AGAIN, for those saying it "works fine" - does it?
> Is it supposed to take hours to download a movie?


Yes it works fine.
Time for downloading will vary, "but" there is a general rule of thumb:
HD "normally" is around 9 Mb/s, so if your connection can support that, you'll have 1:1 [download time to program length].

This isn't 100% as I couldn't "watch now" a concert off the 101 with a connection "that worked".
It turned out its bit-rate was closer to 16 Mb/s, and DirecTV caps their side at around 12 Mb/s
In cases like this you need to let it buffer longer and DirecTV has color coded the recording in the play list to reflect this with red/yellow/green


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

VOS, can you please repeat this post about 10x's so that some here can finally understand that there can be times that the issue is with Directv?

IMO, the servers should be "capped" at greater than 12 to allow more overhead for higher bandwidth intense content. I don't know how much content is near the 9 and how much is greater, but if the "average" is 9, capping at 12 seems to be really pushing it if you want to compete and offer video that is truly on demand like your competition.



veryoldschool said:


> Yes it works fine.
> Time for downloading will vary, "but" there is a general rule of thumb:
> HD "normally" is around 9 Mb/s, so if your connection can support that, you'll have 1:1 [download time to program length].
> 
> ...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> If you don't care about why it's happening or don't want to take the time to understand how it works, you shouldn't be dismissing the posts by people who are trying to tell you why this happens or explaining the differences between Netflix and VOD.


How do you explain to someone who see these being the same that they aren't?

Yes they both can go to the store for milk. :rolling:


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Yes, the Pinto is Directv on demand
The Ferrari is everyone else's on Demand

LMAO Ha Ha Ha

I finally understand! Ha Ha Ha Ha


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Yes, the Pinto is Directv on demand
> The Ferrari is everyone else's on Demand
> 
> LMAO Ha Ha Ha
> ...


"Got Milk?" :rolling:


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

peds48 said:


> and keep in mind that streaming is their SOLE business, so anything less than perfection can be catathrophic to them. VOD for DirecTV is an added service value.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


And is one feature being touted in a current ad. You know, the 'start from beginning' or whatever it is being called.
The oddity is that Dish is in exactly the same boat as Direct when it comes to VOD, yet Dish's is nearly flawless. You almost never hear complaints about it that are shared by a significant number. But in this polling about 20% are showing that they think there are issues.


----------



## PCampbell (Nov 18, 2006)

For me it works well and most of the time fast, the real problem for me is content. Directv VOD content does not come close to cable.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

I deleted the off topic comments and personal posts. If you have an issue please report it and avoid replying to them, it takes a long time to clean out the off topic clutter.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

peds48 said:


> What is comical is folks trying to blame DIRECTV® for their poor network implementation. And is also comical how folks are trying to spin VOS post, but they keep comparing streaming services to DIRECTV® and they are not even close in bitrate.


What is comical is someone continual telling people the problem is how their networks are configured without giving them any practical advice on how to configure their newtorks to make VOD work.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

dennisj00 said:


> Reading this thread, those that don't like (or don't have) DirecTV think there's a crisis with VOD.
> 
> Looking at the poll above, 79% of the bit-heads at DBSTalk (including me!) don't have a problem with VOD downloads.
> 
> And anyone that thinks it's a HR problem hasn't looked at the poll numbers.


So you think it's acceptable that it doesn't work for 20% of customers?


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

peds48 said:


> Again, I ask the question. Did all 23 MIL subs voted? If the answer is not, don't hold me responsible. But the numbers are in fact leaning on my favor....


Again, you said VOD works for 99% of people. How do you figure 80% = 99%? And you've mentioned you're an installer. If only 80% of your installations worked, you'd get fired.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> So you think it's acceptable that it doesn't work for 20% of customers?


no is not, but when it works for the majority of folks, it makes you wonder where the problem lies.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

veryoldschool said:


> If you don't understand what's going on how can you find the answer you're looking for?
> 
> DirecTV "OnDemand" has NEVER quite been "on demand" for all.
> Cable has offered on demand and given they also own the pipe can offer true on demand.
> ...


There is a difference between requiring "some buffering", and taking 4.5 hours to download a 44 minute show at the low HD setting.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> Again, you said VOD works for 99% of people. How do you figure 80% = 99%? And you've mentioned you're an installer. If only 80% of your installations worked, you'd get fired.


again, did 23 MIL subs voted on that poll? if the naswer is no, the metrics have not been met. but I am way getting there

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> There is a difference between requiring "some buffering", and taking 4.5 hours to download a 44 minute show at the low HD setting.


That sure sounds like the ISP problem/issue I had.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

damondlt said:


> Yes, the Pinto is Directv on demand
> The Ferrari is everyone else's on Demand
> 
> LMAO Ha Ha Ha
> ...


"And I'm 'I tried to use DirecTV's VOD' Rob Lowe."


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

We're getting back into going after members and not the topic.

I'll close this thread in an instant if you *ALL* don't play nice!!!!!


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

veryoldschool said:


> That sure sounds like the ISP problem/issue I had.


And how did you get it resolved? I've called my ISP (CenturyLink) and they insist that it's nothing on their end.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

peds48 said:


> again, did 23 MIL subs voted on that poll? if the naswer is no, the metrics have not been met. but I am way getting there
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Right, there are millions of people who didn't vote who might be having problems that we don't know about.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> And how did you get it resolved? I've called my ISP (CenturyLink) and they insist that it's nothing on their end.


In my case I changed ISPs.

BTW I heard the same thing from Suddenlink, but they and I both knew this wasn't true.

The regional manager was to come by to check on things, "but" blew me off when he heard I has a second ISP for A/B comparison.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> Right, there are millions of people who didn't vote who might be having problems that we don't know about.


And the same can be claimed for those who don't have a problem, making this all pointless.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

veryoldschool said:


> And the same can be claimed for those who don't have a problem, making this all pointless.


Right, all we have to go on is what people have posted. We can't assume that it doesn't work well for the people who haven't posted any more than we can assume none of them have a problem.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

I have had three ISPs in 2 different locations - all are the same, slow, unreliable VOD.

I hope this doesn't get deleted - it doesn't....

[Mod Edit] We don't like to delete so I've edited it instead.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> Right, all we have to go on is what people have posted. We can't assume that it works fine for the people who haven't posted any more than we can assume none of them have a problem.


Correct, we can't assume for those who don't vote, but there is a trend that indicates that the system works "as advertised" for the vast majority of subs


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

peds48 said:


> Correct, we can't assume for those who don't vote, but there is a trend that indicates that the system works "as advertised" for the vast majority of subs


That doesn't mean it works at an acceptable level. Again, if an installer was only successful with 80% of his installations, the argument "It works as advertised for the vast majority" wouldn't save his job.

Look, I'm tired of going around in circles. You think that because it works acceptable for 80% of people that means that it is clearly not a problem with anything on DirecTV's end, and 80% success is an acceptable level of service. I think that because it doesn't work for 20% of people that indicates that it probably is a problem on DTV's side, and a 20% problem rate is not an acceptable level of service.

You're not going to change your mind until a poll shows it doesn't work for 75% of people. I'm not going to change my mind until someone provides configuration settings that make my VOD work. Let's move on with our lives.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

dbronstein said:


> You're not going to change your mind until a poll shows it doesn't work for 75% of people. I'm not going to change my mind until someone provides configuration settings that make my VOD work. Let's move on with our lives.


Read my earlier posts, after it leaves DirecTV's data center they have no control of what happens between the CDN, the backbone and your ISP. Some ISPs refuse to upgrade their connections to CDNs and other backbone providers unless they pay them more money, resulting in a bottleneck for any traffic coming from them. The only thing you can do is hope net neutrality passes banning that practice, or if it's an option where you live switch ISPs and hope that ISP doesn't do the same thing.

Speedtests, asking for people configurations and other things won't really indicate anything. A much better test would be to have people run traceroutes to whatever domain DirecTV uses for VOD and see where the latency problems start happening.


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

We're still waiting for an explanation of exactly how someone's internal network settings affect DirecTV's VOD packet delivery. Can anyone answer this fundamental question? Answer this question and this entire thread probably ends.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> That doesn't mean it works at an acceptable level. Again, if an installer was only successful with 80% of his installations, the argument "It works as advertised for the vast majority" wouldn't save his job.
> 
> Look, I'm tired of going around in circles. You think that because it works acceptable for 80% of people that means that it is clearly not a problem with anything on DirecTV's end, and 80% success is an acceptable level of service. I think that because it doesn't work for 20% of people that indicates that it probably is a problem on DTV's side, and a 20% problem rate is not an acceptable level of service.
> 
> You're not going to change your mind until a poll shows it doesn't work for 75% of people. I'm not going to change my mind until someone provides configuration settings that make my VOD work. Let's move on with our lives.


But if it did not work for 90% of folks, then you cold argue it was on DIRECTV®'s end. Since is the opposite, it means well, the opposite. Is not on DIRECTV® end.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

pdxBeav said:


> We're still waiting for an explanation of exactly how someone's internal network settings affect DirecTV's VOD packet delivery. Can anyone answer this fundamental question? Answer this question and this entire thread probably ends.


The only way it would affect delivery is if you have a crappy router that can't handle heavy traffic or it has some bad QOS settings.

You can have the best router out there or have your modem connected directly to your receiver, but you'll still have problems if at the other end of the modem is an ISP who's refusing to expand capacity to that CDN or backbone provider until they pay them.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

pdxBeav said:


> We're still waiting for an explanation of exactly how someone's internal network settings affect DirecTV's VOD packet delivery. Can anyone answer this fundamental question? Answer this question and this entire thread probably ends.


Your internal network may only be part of the problem, as kyl416 points out, once it leaves DIRECTV® servers or distribution system, DIRECTV® looses control of its content delivery.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

KyL416 said:


> Speedtests, asking for people configurations and other things won't really indicate anything. A much better test would be to have people run traceroutes to whatever domain DirecTV uses for VOD and see where the latency problems start happening.


If someone can provide that information I will run a traceroute and post the results.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

peds48 said:


> But if it did not work for 90% of folks, then you cold argue it was on DIRECTV®'s end. Since is the opposite, it means well, the opposite. Is not on DIRECTV® end.


This reply is laughable for so many reasons.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> This reply is laughable for so many reasons.


is comical that to think that because a handful of subs have issues with the an specific service, the system does not work for everybody, where stats show otherwise. Many folks have issues with the regualar service more than they do with VOD, and to label the service useless, is well, very comical....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

I'll try to get it later tonight when no one else is online since I need to reconfigure the network to capture the DNS requests the receiver makes.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Roughly 20% having problems is far from a 'handful', it is a significant number no matter the hand waving.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

dbronstein said:


> If someone can provide that information I will run a traceroute and post the results.


I'd gladly do the same!


----------



## 456521 (Jul 6, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> The only way it would affect delivery is if you have a crappy router that can't handle heavy traffic or it has some bad QOS settings.
> 
> You can have the best router out there or have your modem connected directly to your receiver, but you'll still have problems if at the other end of the modem is an ISP who's refusing to expand capacity to that CDN or backbone provider until they pay them.


But what are some examples of "bad QOS settings"? And what about a router makes it so it can't handle heavy traffic? What are the symptoms of it not being able to handle heavy traffic? Loss of packets? Would this explain why other services work fine, but not DirecTV's?

I agree that not all routers are created equal, but pretty much all modern routers can handle anything DirecTV delivers.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

pdxBeav said:


> What are the symptoms of it not being able to handle heavy traffic? Loss of packets?


Loss of packets, high latency, connection lockups when you're using bandwidth heavy applications for an extended time like torrenting or downloading games from Steam.



> Would this explain why other services work fine, but not DirecTV's?


Other services like Netflix use dynamic streaming, basically the video is delivered segments 5-10 seconds long and the bitrate and resolution of those segments vary in real time based on the quality of your connection so it can compensate for it. DirecTV On Demand downloads one giant recording file to your hard drive.

Also, I tried getting the domain to run the traceroute on, but I couldn't get it tonight. (I'm probaly going to have to hookup my receiver directly to my laptop as a router to get the specific DNS request) I was able to discover that they use Edgecast's CDN network to deliver the VOD content.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

lparsons21 said:


> Roughly 20% having problems is far from a 'handful', it is a significant number no matter the hand waving.


This is probably the worst place to poll "average" customer's.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> This is probably the worst place to poll "average" customer's.


Absolutely!


----------



## fleckrj (Sep 4, 2009)

An interesting poll would be to look at how well VOD works by ISP. 

I have AT&T 6Mb DSL. They supplied a gateway, but the wireless portion of the router was too weak to cover my entire house, and it did not play well with a Netgear router that I am using as a bridge. I disabled the router function on the gateway, so now it serves only as a modem. I have a Netgear router and a second Netgear bridge. I use a wireless DECA that is in the same room as one of the Netgear routers. I do not use VOD very often, but when I do, I have never had any problems, nor has the download ever been slow enough to cause a delay in the start of the program or a delay during playback while the download to catches up (i.e., it has never been slower than real time).


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Just for fun I just downloaded Blade Runner from HBO through my Genie. It took about an hour and a half and I had an average DL speed of 1.3 MBps or 1309 kbps for those who are used to kbps. Now I don't have per minute data but this is on average with my normal expectations.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> Just for fun I just downloaded Blade Runner from HBO through my Genie. It took about an hour and a half and I had an average DL speed of 1.3 MBps or 1309 kbps for those who are used to kbps. Now I don't have per minute data but this is on average with my normal expectations.


What is your real internet speed?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

damondlt said:


> What is your real internet speed?


50mbps or 6.25MBps as that's what I rated the download in.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> This is probably the worst place to poll "average" customer's.


True. We here are fans of sat and tv in general and truly representative of the general population. But since this is the only poll we have, we are forced to make some value out of it. 
I think the majority of users don't do VOD, PPV or 'start from beginning' all that often. Those that do I would expect to fall in line with the polling results.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

lparsons21 said:


> True. We here are fans of sat and tv in general and truly representative of the general population. But since this is the only poll we have, we are forced to make some value out of it.
> I think the majority of users don't do VOD, PPV or 'start from beginning' all that often. Those that do I would expect to fall in line with the polling results.


Rather than go off on a tangent I think we're just going to have to disagree on just about everything you posted.

Now for those that say they have a problem you could try the following.I know what I do and you believe what you do. Luckily you're with DISH so you don't have to worry about this thread.

Get Microsoft Network Manager here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=4865
Install it and then configure it so you can capture what goes on with your receiver. Go to HBO and download Bladerunner. As it's been confirmed that the file is ok and theoretically there's not an issue server side getting it you could see what port range the requests are coming from.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> Rather than go off on a tangent I think we're just going to have to disagree on just about everything you posted.
> 
> Now for those that say they have a problem you could try the following.I know what I do and you believe what you do. Luckily you're with DISH so you don't have to worry about this thread.
> 
> ...


Ooops, I meant to say 'not truly representative'! My bad, it is what I get when I post before the 2nd cuppa!! 

You are correct, I am with Dish right now, but a couple months ago or thereabouts I had an HR44 and had used it for about a year before cancelling service. Not because of VOD or 'watch from start'. And I am switching to cable and Tivo here very shortly. But I do have long experience with both D* and E* and will continue to comment when I think I have something to add.
But let me be clear, if I were with D* this still wouldn't be a huge issue because I would just set VOD and PPV to do their thing overnight and not worry about it. If this thread didn't exist, I would never have noticed enough to care. As it is, it didn't work well on 2 different ISP's, one at 12/1 the other at 50/5, so the issue isn't the ISP and isn't the network in my house because ALL other streamers work without the glitches with some very rare exceptions.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

Shades228 said:


> Just for fun I just downloaded Blade Runner from HBO through my Genie. It took about an hour and a half and I had an average DL speed of 1.3 MBps or 1309 kbps for those who are used to kbps. Now I don't have per minute data but this is on average with my normal expectations.


1.3 MB/s does not equal 1309 kbps. 1309 kbps / 1024 kbps = 1.27 Mbps. MB/s is larger by a factor of 8. 1 Byte = 8 bits


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Mediacom is a really flakey company! Hard to get them to tell you what their 'retail' is, they sure as hell don't publish it! And all deals are done by phone! You can start a signup online sometimes, but in the end the deal isn't done until you are on the phone. And they don't email the deal after you agree either.
> 
> I haven't looked at_* Showtime Anytime*_ in a very long time, and won't have that as a benefit until my Mediacom service is active, but when I did I don't remember any real issues with them.


Doesn't have 5.1 sound either.

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

fleckrj said:


> An interesting poll would be to look at how well VOD works by ISP.


Another data point would be time of day too.

My problems with Suddenlink were "so bad" I could tell when the kids came home from school and my neighbors went to church.
I had "full speed" at 2 AM but not at any "normal time".
As I worked with Suddenlink and their techs, they managed to "fool" speedtest so it always showed full speed [where it use to show the actual choking state].
A Microsoft service pack [250+ MB] would download fine while an SD VOD could take hours.

There could be something other than the ISPs "messing with" the VOD delivery "but" I spent close to a year working with Suddenlink and found how they use/did all sorts of things to it.
Once I switched ISPs I've NEVER looked back from three different locations.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ejbvt said:


> _*And back to the technobabble.*_
> 
> In English, what can I do to make my VOD faster and actually be on-demand? If every other Internet-based service works flawlessly, why doesn't Directv? I don't care about all the blah blah.
> 
> If something claims to be on-demand, it should be just that. If I have to fiddle with settings, it doesn't work. If it DOES work for 99.999% of customers, it doesn't work for the rest. I am thinking that the numbers are more 50-50. Like it's been said before, what percentage of the 75% who vote that "it works fine" know what other providers offer? It's another case of "I've had Directv for years" fanboiz who think their experience is the only experience. If you've never seen VOD actually be on-demand, you would think what we have is "Fine." This is exactly the same as those who defend the HR34 - it's a buggy piece of junk. Just like Directv On-Demand.


Something we have to endure on the forum and can't do anything about. I do end up looking a lot of the stuff I don't understand and that does help, but retaining that knowledge over time is hard.

Thing is, if you truly want to help people, you should really dumb down the posts so that those of us that aren't techno-geeks can easily understand what you're (not referring to you in this post, of course. I suffer thru just as you do) trying to say. I realize it's a hard thing to do, I've taught at a college and I had to go thru the dumbing down experience there. You have to teach at a level that people can understand or you come across as...babbling.

I actually saw a post today where someone explained an acronym without being asked to. That should be standard practice.

Rich


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

FYI if someone does actually choose to do some trouble shooting you can check to see if you're ports are being blocked by going here:

https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?rh1dkyd2

If you enter the port number and hit submit it will return one of 3 options.

Open- It's usable
Closed - Not usable
Stealth - ISP Blocked

I noticed that my DoD request went out on multiple ports as it requested a new file segment. If I was a betting man I would say this is where the most common breakdown is happening. Either from the ISP or router settings.


----------



## jerrylove56 (Jun 15, 2008)

I have given up on DTV ever getting VOD "fixed". (About like their "Channels I Get" function.) Amazes me that Netflix and Amazon services are built on streaming and does pretty good. Even streaming sticks are out performing DTV. Makes no sense.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ejbvt said:


> The issue is that I shouldn't have to understand Internet. It should just work. Or, they shouldn't offer it.
> 
> So, AGAIN, for those saying it "works fine" - does it? Is it supposed to take hours to download a movie? If I knew how, I could steal a movie off pirate bay or whatever faster than Directv VOD. I don't understand or care about stealing from pirate bay, so don't accuse me of stealing movies. However, if they're both downloaded, shouldn't they take about the same amount of time? It shouldn't be called on-demand if it isn't. VOD isn't that important to me. Sunday Ticket is. As long as that works, I am cool. _*But, when I do need VOD, I expect it to work.*_ Downloading something at a slower rate than dial-up isn't on-demand.


You just have to get over this. It's always been like this and probably it's the best they can do. Using Watch Now is a dismal thing to do, just forget about it. As _*VOS *_put it, it's not Netflix, and it's never gonna be Netflix. I try to avoid using it as much as possible, but when I do need it (can't remember the last time I _really needed_ it) I expect it to be a PITA.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> 50mbps or 6.25MBps as that's what I rated the download in.


So would it be the same if a customer has 10 MBPS service?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Looks like it's time to "mind your Ps & Qs".

Mb/s = Megabit per second
MBPS= Megabyte per second

ISPs are rated in bits/second


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> That sure sounds like the ISP problem/issue I had.


Me too. Just like the OOMA caused.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dbronstein said:


> Right, all we have to go on is what people have posted. We can't assume that it doesn't work well for the people who haven't posted any more than we can assume none of them have a problem.


On top of that, you have to factor in the anomaly thing. We are anomalies. Don't even consider thinking that the great percentage of D* users knows as much as we do.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

peds48 said:


> is comical that to think that because a handful of subs have issues with the an specific service, the system does not work for everybody, where stats show otherwise. Many folks have issues with the regualar service more than they do with VOD, and to label the service useless, is well, very comical....
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I wouldn't call it useless, practically useless would be a better phrase. I didn't spend $300 on streaming boxes because D*'s VoD works correctly all the time. And it's got nothing to do with my (and your) ISP. With at least 100 down and nothing else going on in the house, it simply should work better. I think this whole thread is built around Watch Now not being really Watch Now. Ignore that and all you've got to complain about are the missing episodes and the jumbled listings that result in a web search to determine the proper order of episodes. And the audio dropouts that have to be D*'s fault or my 24-100s wouldn't be drop free. There are some problems with VoD that have to be D*'s fault.

Rich


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Shades228 said:


> FYI if someone does actually choose to do some trouble shooting you can check to see if you're ports are being blocked by going here:
> 
> https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?rh1dkyd2
> 
> ...


I would love to do some troubleshooting but nobody seems to be willing to post what I should do to troubleshoot other than I should buy a new router for no reason other than "you don't know if it will work until you try it."

What port numbers should I check with this? I've posted previously that I've found old posts referencing setting port forwarding for the Genie and I was told that you don't need to do it for VOD.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

I just tried _12 Years a Slave_ on Watch Now and it came down pretty quickly. So quickly that I could FF in just a few minutes after starting. I think the ISPs might well be the problem. I have Optimum and 100Mbs down. I could have watched the whole film without any buffering. Look to your speeds. And your ISPs.

Rich


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

I just discovered this: https://www.directv.com/networks?lpos=Header:1

It seems to have the VOD content online. I am able to watch it on my computer with about 7 seconds of buffering. I tried it on several networks and all were flawless. Trying to watch the same content on the VOD on my actual receiver is just as slow as can be.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The stuff online and on your receivers are not the same format.

DirecTV Online uses dynamic streaming similar to Netflix and other services where the video is divided into segments of 5-10 seconds in length and the bitrate and resolution of those segments vary based on the quality of your connection, and for some content they also use Hulu.

VOD is one giant recording file sent to your DVR's hard drive.


Also to clear up what a CDN is:
CDN = Content Delivery Network, basically the content is hosted on multiple servers across the country or world, the actual server you are connected to varies based on your ISP, location and how congested the traffic is. (i.e. someone with Comcast in Pennsylvania will be on different server than someone in the same town using Verizon or someone using Comcast in Washington state), during peak times the CDN might have to route you to a different server entirely. i.e. there are some peak times in the evening where Akamai's CDN ends up routing me to servers in Europe since it's overnight there and less users are accessing them.

In a perfect world ISPs would monitor these conditions, if they notice a lot of their users are accessing traffic from that CDN they would expand capacity to it. But unfortunately some ISPs took the other route and leave those connections congested until the CDN pays them, so they're taking your money for a service and refusing to provide that service reliably until someone on the other end pays them even more.


DirecTV could theoretically do dynamic streaming for Watch Now, but you run into other problems. i.e. how will receivers on native handle the resolution changing on the fly? Can receivers handle non-standard resolutions that are used by dynamic streaming (i.e. 480x270, 512x288 and 854x480)? How will AVRs handle the audio bitrate changing on the fly? Adaptive streaming uses a different format to handle close captioning, can receivers support it or are they limited to the format used by digital TV? They have to pass along the embedded signals used by Nielsen for ratings, can they continue to pass that signal along after transcoding the audio to lower bitrates?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> I would love to do some troubleshooting but nobody seems to be willing to post what I should do to troubleshoot other than I should buy a new router for no reason other than "you don't know if it will work until you try it."
> 
> What port numbers should I check with this? I've posted previously that I've found old posts referencing setting port forwarding for the Genie and I was told that you don't need to do it for VOD.


Actually I suggested something fairly simple ages ago. Bypass the router entirely and go direct from the modem to the dtv system only. then see if you have issues. That will immediately tell you if its related to your router or something in your system, or if its your internet connection and/or Directv. Once you have it narrowed down to one of those two giant possibilities, you can then narrow it down further.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Good points, Kye. Netflix, Amazon et al have their whole being tied to streaming, so they are the best of the lot. It's really an add on service for satellite companies, and not managed as well. 

For the record, I download everything that isn't already recorded, and have had very few glitches. I am in the country and top out at 3.3 mbps...(!)


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

You guys have 50 and 100 mbps sevices. 
So I'll ask again what about the guys with 10 or less.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

I have 3mbps, Watch Now plays fine for SD content, for 720p HD content I can handle it as long as I'm not doing anything else on my connection, 1080i is a no go unless I pause and let it buffer (but at that point I'm better off downloading it)


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> I have 3mbps, Watch Now plays fine for SD content, for 720p HD content I can handle it as long as I'm not doing anything else on my connection, 1080i is a no go unless I pause and let it buffer (but at that point I'm better off downloading it)


I've always had the same results as you with 15 Mbps, only thing is if downloading anything off the premium channels in HD you definitely were not going to get "watch it now" to work and the movies and even Sopranos episodes would take 2 and 3 times longer to even download, and if you were watching netflix for get it, 5 times longer.

What I don't understand is we have the 4 stream at a time plan from netflix, I've had no issues what so ever streaming Netflix off of 2 minis and Roamio plus at the same time in HD! Yes No buffering at all.
I bet I could do all 4 and no buffering issues!

That's why I'm at a loss.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

damondlt said:


> What I don't understand is we have the 4 steam at a time plan from netflix, I've had no issues what so ever streaming 2 minis and Roamio plus at the same time in HD?
> I bet I could do all 4 and no buffering issues!


Netflix uses dynamic streaming, if there's congestion instead of buffering the bitrate drops.

Last year I had a lot of problems with Netflix, which was related to Verizon's battle with Cogent. DirecTV who uses Edgecast continued to work just fine.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Okay makes sence, But I just Tried all 4 Netflix Streams off of 15 Mbps services and the are all working without any issues. Speed Test while streaming 4 HD Netflix movies.










This is my Normal speed.










And my point is 15 Mbps service has great abilities, no reason Directv should need 50 and 100 to work properly.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Actually I suggested something fairly simple ages ago. Bypass the router entirely and go direct from the modem to the dtv system only. t


The DIRECTV® receivers only work with LAN IP addresses, so a router is a must


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Rich said:


> I wouldn't call it useless, practically useless would be a better phrase. I didn't spend $300 on streaming boxes because D*'s VoD works correctly all the time. And it's got nothing to do with my (and your) ISP. With at least 100 down and nothing else going on in the house, it simply should work better. I think this whole thread is built around Watch Now not being really Watch Now. Ignore that and all you've got to complain about are the missing episodes and the jumbled listings that result in a web search to determine the proper order of episodes. And the audio dropouts that have to be D*'s fault or my 24-100s wouldn't be drop free. There are some problems with VoD that have to be D*'s fault.
> 
> Rich





Rich said:


> I just tried _12 Years a Slave_ on Watch Now and it came down pretty quickly. So quickly that I could FF in just a few minutes after starting. I think the ISPs might well be the problem. I have Optimum and 100Mbs down. I could have watched the whole film without any buffering. Look to your speeds. And your ISPs.
> 
> Rich


Change of heart?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt said:


> Okay makes sence, But I just Tried all 4 Netflix Streams off of 15 Mbps services and the are all working without any issues. Speed Test while streaming 4 HD Netflix movies.
> 
> This is my Normal speed.


And what was the resolution (overall) of those streams?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

damondlt said:


> And my point is 15 Mbps service has great abilities, no reason Directv should need 50 and 100 to work properly.


It doesn't. Even if you had one of the rare gigabit internet connections you would still have problems if your ISP let the connection to the CDN used by DirecTV suffer.

I'm guessing you have Blue Ridge who uses PenTeleData, they're one of the ISPs that have a peering agreement with Netflix's CDN so they're not at the mercy of what relationship your ISP has with other CDNs like Cogent, Level3, Limelight, Akamai and Edgecast:
https://openconnect.itp.netflix.com/

If you were to capture the IP traffic used for Netflix and run a traceroute on it you would see it hop through a URL like "gateway-t3-2-netflix-server1.spo.ptd.net"


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Peds!!
How do I determine that? I'm going to assume it's 720p -1080p.
Clearly not 4K, and if your implying Directv VOD Sopranos episodes were full res 1080p than it was the worst 1080p I've ever seen in my life.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> It doesn't. Even if you had one of the rare gigabit internet connections you would still have problems if your ISP let the connection to the CDN used by DirecTV suffer.


So how do we determine this? Call them and ask why is it when I stream DOD, it's slow? They are going to say It's a Directv issue?
Same thing Verizon is going to say when I call them.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> It doesn't. Even if you had one of the rare gigabit internet connections you would still have problems if your ISP let the connection to the CDN used by DirecTV suffer.
> 
> I'm guessing you have Blue Ridge who uses PenTeleData, they're one of the ISPs that have a peering agreement with Netflix's CDN so they're not at the mercy of what relationship your ISP has with other CDNs like Cogent, Level3, Limelight, Akamai and Edgecast:
> https://openconnect.itp.netflix.com/
> ...


You would have to give me full idiot instructions if you want me to do anything like this.

But I'm willing to do it , If it makes a difference for someone.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

I have to find the domain DirecTV uses for On Demand and you have to run a traceroute on it and see where they route your traffic. I couldn't get it last night, I'll try to capture the DNS request again tonight.

If it is a case of your ISP battling the CDN, unfortunately there's nothing you can do about it outside of switching to an ISP that doesn't have a problem. Hopefully Net Neutrality passes and bans the practice of ISPs demanding money in exchange for properly maintaining their network's connections to the CDN.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt said:


> Peds!!
> How do I determine that? I'm going to assume it's 720p -1080p.
> Clearly not 4K, and if your implying Directv VOD Sopranos episodes were full res 1080p than it was the worst 1080p I've ever seen in my life.


http://www.tvpredictions.com/answer178122313.htm


> But there's another trick you can do to monitor your picture's resolution. Netflix has a title in its catalog called, 'Example Short.23.976.'


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> I have to find the domain DirecTV uses for On Demand and you have to run a traceroute on it and see where they route your traffic. I couldn't get it last night, I'll try to capture the DNS request again tonight.
> 
> If it is a case of your ISP battling the CDN, unfortunately there's nothing you can do about it outside of switching to an ISP that doesn't have a problem. Hopefully Net Neutrality passes and bans the practice of ISPs demanding money in exchange for properly maintaining their network's connections to the CDN.


Thats cool, I would love to know what you find.

But how about a Customer that has Hughes net, or Wildblue?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

peds48 said:


> http://www.tvpredictions.com/answer178122313.htm


Netflix Claims 3 GB per hour is HD quality, 7 GB per Hour Ultra HD

They claim 5 Mbps gets you 720p, and 25 mbps gets you 4K


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt said:


> But how about a Customer that has Hughes net, or Wildblue?


They are SOL as DIRECTV® does not support satellite internet for any of their online content.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Hughesnet and Wildblue is iffy, the speed is better than a lot of rural DSL connections, but the high latency prevents you from doing anything that requires a quick response time like gaming, and the low cap prevents you from using it for any bandwidth heavy stuff. (i.e. bingewatching a show in HD on Netflix, downloading games and updates for Steam, Xbox and PlayStation, etc)

At least Netflix gives you an option to limit the bitrate, many other services that use dynamic streaming don't give you an option and deliver the video at the highest quality your speed can support, which means it goes through your cap even faster.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

peds48 said:


> They are SOL as DIRECTV® does not support satellite internet for any of their online content.


That's kind of a good thing, If I had Satellite internet, I wouldn't stream Netflix either. :nono2:

We don't have any internet providers other than Verizon DSL, Blue ridge cable, Satellite or Verizon LTE home service
, ATT LTE if I make my phone a hot spot.
So i'm trying to get a feel for what other providers do.
I'm fairly sure Kyle is in the same boat our option are slim.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

I would get Verizon or ATT LTE if it wasn't for the caps. Verizon DSL works fine with DirecTV on Demand where I live, but it's too slow for 1080i and 1080p watch now, unfortunately Verizon refuses to upgrade our area to 6mbps service. I would get Blue Ridge if it wasn't for their caps. (I use a LOT of Netflix and PC and PS4 games that frequently have patches that are over a GB in size)


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

KyL416 said:


> I would get Verizon or ATT LTE if it wasn't for the caps. Verizon DSL works fine with DirecTV on Demand where I live, but it's too slow for 1080i and 1080p watch now, unfortunately Verizon refuses to upgrade our area to 6mbps service. I would get Blue Ridge if it wasn't for their caps. (I use a LOT of Netflix and PC and PS4 games that frequently have patches that are over a GB in size)


Blue Ridge only Caps peak time 5pm to 1 am and its still 250 GB,
Off peak is unlimited for 5-100 Mbps plans

Alyssa B. says:
Internet through Blue Ridge / PenTeleData is monitored during peak time, between the hours of 5 pm and 1 am.
Alyssa B. says:
The websurfer plan allows for 150 GB upload and download.
Alyssa B. says:
All other plans (G5, G10, G15, Dream 60, Dream 100) all allow 250 GB per month.
Damon Troch says:
During peak times correct? unlimited all other times? and what happens if you go over ?
Alyssa B. says:
Yes, during peak times. Any usage between the hours of 1:01 am and 4:59 pm does not count towards your monthly bandwidth usage.
Alyssa B. says:
If you do happen to go over, you would receive a warning letter the first time. The second time you would be charged $1 per GB over.
Damon Troch says:
okay thank you.

Sorry for the off topic, but I couldn't PM KYLE.

Please continue! :up:


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> I would love to do some troubleshooting but nobody seems to be willing to post what I should do to troubleshoot other than I should buy a new router for no reason other than "you don't know if it will work until you try it."
> 
> What port numbers should I check with this? I've posted previously that I've found old posts referencing setting port forwarding for the Genie and I was told that you don't need to do it for VOD.


I posted earlier about how to get a network monitor and you can check the ports that your receiver is requesting from.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

I checked the NAT table of my router while doing some VOD, Watch Now in SD, which was fine. Did a tracert to the IP listed and at one point, way beyond my local hop to my DSLAM and CO, the pings were 700-1000ms. Couldn't tell where it was, but it was beyond the Philadelphia Verizon link that all my traffic goes through. 

Strangely enough when I did a start over stream I didn't see any IP address come up, and didn't until I went back to a VOD download.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

A traceroute is to show you where the traffic goes between you and the server. It's normal for some hops to have high pings as not every hop is configured to respond to ping requests in a timely manner since nothing is actually hosted at those hops. It's only a problem when the ping times for everything after that, including your final destination, has longer pings.

i.e. for me the ping at one hop is in the 200s, but the the final destination was less than 20


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

A high ping time wouldn't matter anyways with a download. It would just mean that the initial start would take longer but once going, unless there was a dramatic increase in latency, it wouldn't impact a download. Speed and dropped packets would be an issue for a large download but not really ping time. Ping is only important when you're looking for changes in something.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

I thought that usually a high ping "down the line" was an indicator of congestion, which would lead to slow speeds


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

KyL416 said:


> The stuff online and on your receivers are not the same format.
> 
> DirecTV Online uses dynamic streaming similar to Netflix and other services where the video is divided into segments of 5-10 seconds in length and the bitrate and resolution of those segments vary based on the quality of your connection, and for some content they also use Hulu.
> 
> ...


Thanx, that makes things much clearer. I think one of the worst things we can do in life is think because we know something everybody else must know it. I've been guilty of that.

Thanx again,

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

peds48 said:


> Change of heart?


No, just curious to see how my system handled Watch Now at this time. I gotta admit I was surprised. Still have little interest in D* Vod.

Rich


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Rich said:


> No, just curious to see how my system handled Watch Now at this time. I gotta admit I was surprised. Still have little interest in D* Vod.
> 
> Rich


The few times I used 'watch now' it seemed to work fine, it was only on longer VOD's when I would get some fairly minor glitches if I chose 'watch now'

Just got notified that my Tivo has shipped, looking forward to a really integrated media center. Because I'm not using the Mediacom provided Tivo powered unit, I don't get VOD from them but that's not a big loss imo. If I had chosen the Mediacom version (a Pace XG1) I would have lost most of the things that make Tivo popular. Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

damondlt said:


> That's kind of a good thing, If I had Satellite internet, I wouldn't stream Netflix either. :nono2:
> 
> We don't have any internet providers other than Verizon DSL, Blue ridge cable, Satellite or Verizon LTE home service
> , ATT LTE if I make my phone a hot spot.
> ...


Mine are limited too. I get Cablevision or crap. When my son's home and has his whole array on I don't see any problems with NF at all. I can't imagine what would happen if we only had 15 down.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> The few times I used 'watch now' it seemed to work fine, it was only on longer VOD's when I would get some fairly minor glitches if I chose 'watch now'
> 
> Just got notified that my Tivo has shipped, looking forward to a really integrated media center. Because I'm not using the Mediacom provided Tivo powered unit, I don't get VOD from them but that's not a big loss imo. If I had chosen the Mediacom version (a Pace XG1) I would have lost most of the things that make Tivo popular. Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation...


I wasn't concerned about the PQ yesterday when I did the Watch Now thing. I had seen the movie when it came out in BD. All I did was let it run on one HR and then checked it about 15 minutes later and the progress bar showed I could use FF if I wanted to. Now, my son wasn't home and nothing else was on except a couple laptops and one desktop. I don't know what would happen with Watch Now when he's up and running, but I will check that.

Rich


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Rich said:


> Mine are limited too. I get Cablevision or crap. When my son's home and has his whole array on I don't see any problems with NF at all. I can't imagine what would happen if we only had 15 down.
> 
> Rich


60 and 100 are available to me if I want to pay for it, but as I said I can game on line and stream 4 rooms of netflix at the same time, and that's still more than we really actually do.

Like I said alot can be done with 15 mbps.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> The few times I used 'watch now' it seemed to work fine, it was only on longer VOD's when I would get some fairly minor glitches if I chose 'watch now'
> 
> Just got notified that my Tivo has shipped, looking forward to a really integrated media center. Because I'm not using the Mediacom provided Tivo powered unit, I don't get VOD from them but that's not a big loss imo. If I had chosen the Mediacom version (a Pace XG1) I would have lost most of the things that make Tivo popular. Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation...


Pm me your thoughts vs your hopper when you get your Roamio.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

damondlt said:


> Pm me your thoughts vs your hopper when you get your Roamio.


If I remember... 
Keep in mind I'm and old goat, geezer, decrepit, take your pick.
But assuming all goes well with the changeover to Tivo/Mediacom, I do plan on doing a write up comparing Genie/Hopper/Tivo. Figure it will be at least a week after everything is up and running and possibly longer.
One thing that might slow me down is I'm confused about the open source pyTivo and Streambaby which are softwares for streaming or transferring from the PC to the Tivo from a media server. In my case Playon/Playlater.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Lol I'll remind you.
I only had a very limited chance to use a Hopper, and it was Fairly responsive, But the Roamio, Yeah awesome.
Those Minis are sweet.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

mrknowitall526 said:


> I thought that usually a high ping "down the line" was an indicator of congestion, which would lead to slow speeds


It can be if it is a consistently higher ping ... but low pings to routers in the middle then quick pings further down the line shows that those middle devices are configured to handle traffic faster than returning pings.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

I think the VOD server I'm connecting to is directvbb-vod.hls.adaptive.level3.net I ran a traceroute to it and got this (timeouts all the way to #30)

1 5 ms 6 ms 2 ms modem.Home [192.168.0.1]
2 23 ms 23 ms 22 ms hlrn-dsl-gw06.hlrn.qwest.net [207.225.112.6]
3 22 ms 22 ms 24 ms hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net [71.217.188.41]
4 24 ms 24 ms 25 ms dvr-brdr-02.inet.qwest.net [67.14.24.118]
5 23 ms 23 ms 22 ms 63.146.26.134
6 * * * Request timed out.
7 * * * Request timed out.
8 * * * Request timed out.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

dbronstein said:


> I think the VOD server I'm connecting to is directvbb-vod.hls.adaptive.level3.net


That's not the VOD server, that's the server for the streams used by the mobile apps and DirecTV Online.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Then whats the VOD server? That's the one that showed up in my router log when I started a download.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

dbronstein said:


> Then whats the VOD server? That's the one that showed up in my router log when I started a download.


I really don't think anyone knows. How many times have you (and others) asked this in several pages on 3 threads with NO response? I really don't understand why people don't believe us that VOD doesn't work as advertised. Advertising the "Start over" on TV is a dumb move, in my book - not many programs have it, and those that do it doesn't work well for everyone.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

dbronstein said:


> Then whats the VOD server? That's the one that showed up in my router log when I started a download.


Do you know how to monitor TCP traffic and spot the IP address that is sending the file and run a whois on it? It would identify the actual server your receiver is downloading from the file at the time. It's a lot easier to do with a wireless connection where you can see all the traffic on your wifi network than it is a hard wired connection. With Wireshark it would be the IP address that is sending a lot of TCP traffic to the IP address of your receiver during the download.

If it's still coming from a Level3 server, it means that DirecTV uses multiple CDNs that vary with each ISP. (i.e. I have Verizon and they send me to Edgecast's CDN) Unfortunately Level3 is hard to run a traceroute on since they prioritize traffic over ping requests so many of their hops just timeout.

Also if that is the case, no one can give a URL for everyone else to run the traceroute on, everyone would have to initiate the download and if they have the tools to do so, identify the IP address of the server they're being sent to. If there's a pattern it would help identify where the problem lies (i.e. if only ones being sent to Level 3 have a problem, or if the only ones without problems are those being sent to Edgecast).


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

I used to have HughesNet and it worked fine for DirecTV's VOD if you used it to download the show (never tried watch now). I always made sure to start the VOD late at night during the free download zone where it didn't count against your monthly allowance.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Beerstalker said:


> I used to have HughesNet and it worked fine for DirecTV's VOD if you used it to download the show (never tried watch now). I always made sure to start the VOD late at night during the free download zone where it didn't count against your monthly allowance.


Hun?? PEDS told me satellite Internet doesn't work with Directv on demand content!

But obviously it does since you used it.
????



damondlt said:


> But how about a Customer that has Hughes net, or Wildblue?


 (Peds response )
They are SOL as DIRECTV® does not support satellite internet for any of their online content.


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

Remember DirecTV not "supporting" something doesn't mean it doesn't work. They just don't recommend it (because they don't want people blaming them for going over the download limits).

But yes, when I had HughesNet about 2 or 3 years ago I did use it on occasion for VOD if I missed a recording. I definitely did not make a habit out of it.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

No one was asking about directv policy when I originally asked the question, we wanted to see how satellite Internet functioned as compared to DSL and cable.
Kyle answered with a good response, just as you Beerstalker have done.

Directv policy was never in question .
Read post 199.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

damondlt said:


> Hun?? PEDS told me satellite Internet doesn't work with Directv on demand content!
> 
> But obviously it does since you used it.
> ????
> ...


Wow, what a spin! Not supporting it does not mens it does not work. Same applies to ethernet on Genies, we all know it works, however DIRECTV® does not support such connection.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

peds48 said:


> Wow, what a spin! Not supporting it does not mens it does not work. Same applies to ethernet on Genies, we all know it works, however DIRECTV® does not support such connection.


What do you mean by this?


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

KyL416 said:


> Do you know how to monitor TCP traffic and spot the IP address that is sending the file and run a whois on it? It would identify the actual server your receiver is downloading from the file at the time. It's a lot easier to do with a wireless connection where you can see all the traffic on your wifi network than it is a hard wired connection. With Wireshark it would be the IP address that is sending a lot of TCP traffic to the IP address of your receiver during the download.
> 
> If it's still coming from a Level3 server, it means that DirecTV uses multiple CDNs that vary with each ISP. (i.e. I have Verizon and they send me to Edgecast's CDN) Unfortunately Level3 is hard to run a traceroute on since they prioritize traffic over ping requests so many of their hops just timeout.
> 
> Also if that is the case, no one can give a URL for everyone else to run the traceroute on, everyone would have to initiate the download and if they have the tools to do so, identify the IP address of the server they're being sent to. If there's a pattern it would help identify where the problem lies (i.e. if only ones being sent to Level 3 have a problem, or if the only ones without problems are those being sent to Edgecast).


I looked at the activity log on my router and that was the only address that had anything to do with DirecTV at the time I tried VOD. Nobody in the house was using mobile apps or DirecTV Online or anything else do to with DirecTV at the time, so the only conclusion is that is the server it was connecting to for the VOD.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

There's multiple things accessed as part of VOD, there's one server that returns the search results, another that gives info on the item and then the server that the file itself comes from.

Does the log show how much traffic is coming from the address or just that it was accessed? If there was a lot of traffic from it, it's the VOD server for you.

Can you try running the traceroute again but add -w 60 to the end of the command? It will increase the timeout before it gives up on a hop.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

mrknowitall526 said:


> I thought that usually a high ping "down the line" was an indicator of congestion, which would lead to slow speeds


A ping is nothing more than a request to a response and the appropriate response (ack in sonar and pong for networking). For networking purposes a ping is an IMCP request that is expecting an echo to come back. You can block ping requests and still have data transfer. While a scenario can exist that a higher ping time may indicate a congestion that is not always the case. High ping times just mean that the specific request is taking that much time. For instance satellite internet has a significantly higher median ping, which is normal, based on the technology. That doesn't mean that it will take longer to download the same amount of data. It does mean that it will take longer for the process to start. People generally confuse ping times due to traceroutes. The most important data in a traceroute is the % of dropped packets. If packets are being lost then those packets must be resent for the file to be complete or you will result in a corrupted file. Having to send packets again will slow the total time down. If too many packets fail the communication is stopped generally.

I hate doing hypothetical but I'll do so purely for illustration.

Let's say DIRECTV uses a port range of 100 - 110 (they don't I'm making this up for this example)

Let's say that something else in your home has requested port 104 and because 99% of people use upnp that port is already reserved. One of two things is going to happen. The router is going to deny the request and DIRECTV's software should compensate for it, the router drops the old forward and assigns it based on the new request, or the router has an issue with upnp causes a breakage. All 3 of these scenarios are very common. If #3 happens to you you're going to have an issue either sending the requests or getting the data back.

Let's say that everything is working fine. However port 105 is super popular and used as the default port, or port range, for P2P clients. Your ISP hating P2P clients as they congest the network intentionally throttle the bandwidth to that port or range of ports. Now you're getting connections fine and your "tests" will result in everything you expect to see. However your download speeds are throttled and you cannot test that. You go to speedtest.net and run the report, which many isps are now prioritizing the packets for because they're not stupid, and you see your max speeds. Clearly it's not your ISP and it's not your setup so it must be the server you're getting the data from.

The last scenario is that none of that is happening. Everything is perfect but maybe the servers are getting hammered during peak times, the file is corrupted, or something else at DIRECTV causes it. This however would not be 100% of the time. If it were then everyone would report this issue. If you test it with other channels, times, you may see different results. Getting Game of Thrones on opening night may be problematic, especially considering that HBO couldn't keep it's website up for the first month GoT started last year on sunday nights.

Those are just 3 of the more common scenarios. I could think of dozens more but the probability of them would be significantly less and very one off. At the end of the day unless you want to really learn about networking and start spending some serious time, as well as some money, you're going to be at the mercy of things that you won't have the ability to check.

However I believe that the largest issue with this is just lack of definition. There is not anything out there that specifically states what you should expect. DIRECTV states that if it's red then you will catch up to the download experiencing buffering, if it's yellow you may catch up to the end experiencing buffering and if it's green you will not catch up to the end so there will not be any buffering. They never state though what the time frame is that people should expect that or what the requirements are to watch it "live". People who have cable are used to having it instantly and the reasons for that don't matter. I have an expectation that I will need to wait 15 minutes before I start watching to never have a problem. Sometimes I can start right away and I never do. Other times it may take longer. Generally though I don't have any problems and use the service as I feel works. Given the lack of expectations from DIRECTV and the expectations that some people have it's not surprising that this "issue" has been around since the beginning of On Demand.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> A ping is nothing more than a request to a response and the appropriate response (ack in sonar and pong for networking). For networking purposes a ping is an IMCP request that is expecting an echo to come back. You can block ping requests and still have data transfer. While a scenario can exist that a higher ping time may indicate a congestion that is not always the case. High ping times just mean that the specific request is taking that much time. For instance satellite internet has a significantly higher median ping, which is normal, based on the technology. That doesn't mean that it will take longer to download the same amount of data. It does mean that it will take longer for the process to start. People generally confuse ping times due to traceroutes. The most important data in a traceroute is the % of dropped packets. If packets are being lost then those packets must be resent for the file to be complete or you will result in a corrupted file. Having to send packets again will slow the total time down. If too many packets fail the communication is stopped generally.
> 
> I hate doing hypothetical but I'll do so purely for illustration.
> 
> ...


Well said. Awesome.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ejbvt said:


> What do you mean by this?


I wouldn't even read this thread if it wasn't so funny... :rolling:

Rich


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

Rich said:


> I wouldn't even read this thread if it wasn't so funny... :rolling:
> 
> Rich


Thanks for the help... not.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Ok everyone, keep it Civil. Discuss the topic and not each other.

Mike


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Shades228 said:


> However I believe that the largest issue with this is just lack of definition. There is not anything out there that specifically states what you should expect. DIRECTV states that if it's red then you will catch up to the download experiencing buffering, if it's yellow you may catch up to the end experiencing buffering and if it's green you will not catch up to the end so there will not be any buffering. They never state though what the time frame is that people should expect that or what the requirements are to watch it "live". People who have cable are used to having it instantly and the reasons for that don't matter. I have an expectation that I will need to wait 15 minutes before I start watching to never have a problem. Sometimes I can start right away and I never do. Other times it may take longer. Generally though I don't have any problems and use the service as I feel works. Given the lack of expectations from DIRECTV and the expectations that some people have it's not surprising that this "issue" has been around since the beginning of On Demand.


It's called "Video on Demand" and it gives you an option to watch "now", so therefore a reasonable expectation is that I should be able to watch it live or pretty close to that. I'll agree that waiting 15 minutes is reasonable. Again, mine (and many other people's according to what I've seen posted on this forum and others) isn't even close to that. It takes over 8 hours to download a 90 minute movie. That is nowhere near "on demand" that I can watch "Now".


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I am glad it is marketed as "Video On Demand" and not "Video Now". Setting expectations is the key. It seems that DirecTV is honoring those that expect a high quality video despite their home configuration or ISP.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> It's called "Video on Demand" and it gives you an option to watch "now", so therefore a reasonable expectation is that I should be able to watch it live or pretty close to that. I'll agree that waiting 15 minutes is reasonable. Again, mine (and many other people's according to what I've seen posted on this forum and others) isn't even close to that. It takes over 8 hours to download a 90 minute movie. That is nowhere near "on demand" that I can watch "Now".


If you click watch now and it tells you that your speed is too slow then they're setting the correct expectations. I get it that you're having a problem however I've posted 3-4 different things in this thread to help potentially find where the issue is and so far no one who is having an issue has seemed to post anything about it. Also stating many is not really relevant. If you assume 19 million residential subscribers and 33% of those use on demand it would take 62,700 people just to have 1% having a problem. I'm sure there have been that many people impacted by issues but I'd say it's not probable that it's that number 100% of the time. Your time frame specified is an extreme and if constantly true you have an issue that just needs to be identified for it to be resolved.

For my example I'm saying at any given time not total people who have ever had an issue.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

James Long said:


> I am glad it is marketed as "Video On Demand" and not "Video Now". Setting expectations is the key. It seems that DirecTV is honoring those that expect a high quality video despite their home configuration or ISP.


And it takes personal planning to have no problems with VoD. You have to plan maybe two or three hours ahead!


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Shades228 said:


> I get it that you're having a problem however I've posted 3-4 different things in this thread to help potentially find where the issue is and so far no one who is having an issue has seemed to post anything about it.


Actually out of everyone in this thread saying they're having problems, dbronstein is the only one who actually posted something to help point out a cause. If he can confirm that the actual download is coming from that URL (i.e. seeing if there's heavy TCP traffic from that IP address during a download) it shows that DirecTV uses different CDNs that vary based on your location and ISP.

We just need more people to do the same and we can identify if it's isolated to those that get sent to Level 3 while those who get sent to Edgecast or another CDN don't have problems.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

KyL416 said:


> Actually out of everyone in this thread saying they're having problems, dbronstein is the only one who actually posted something to help point out a cause. If he can confirm that the actual download is coming from that URL (i.e. seeing if there's heavy TCP traffic from that IP address during a download) it shows that DirecTV uses different CDNs that vary based on your location and ISP.
> 
> We just need more people to do the same and we can identify if it's isolated to those that get sent to Level 3 while those who get sent to Edgecast or another CDN don't have problems.


I need to figure out how to do that - -should I look at the NAT table in the router when I start something downloading? And then what...do a tracert and the URL that shows up there is the correct one?


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

If your router's NAT table can report the ammount of TCP traffic it would be the IP address sending heavy traffic during the download.

If your receiver is connected via wifi, you can install Wireshark on a computer or laptop on your wireless network and capture all traffic on the network to see which IP address is sending heavy TCP traffic to the IP address of your receiver.

You can also use a laptop, set up internet connection sharing and use your laptop as a router for the receiver and use Wireshark to capture the traffic.

After you get the IP address run a whois on that IP address to see where it's hosted. You can also run a traceroute to see how many hops it takes and how direct it is. An ideal one would be from your ISP to their backbone to the CDN, if your data is routed through multiple 3rd party providers before it reaches the CDN it could be a sign of congestion.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

So after trying trying to find a way to capture traffic, this is what I did. I am posting my steps to validate that the results are (or are not) valid. I turn on internet sharing on my Mac. I connected my H44 to my Mac. So now my Mac and H44 are using the same internet connection, although my Mac is connecting to the internet via its ethernet port. I install Wireshark which then told me I needed X11. I went ahead and install that as well, after that I started to get some annoying adds on my Safari browser. trying to figure out what it was, it turn out that one of the downloads installed MacFest. I went ahead and uninstall that puppy, no more adds, hooraaah.

I then run wire shark an noticed, a huge amount of entries to 208.111.160.6. A Whois run yields that that IP address belongs to Limelight. This is their website limelight DIRECTV® appears as one of its customers.

I then run a trace route and I have provided the results below. I have no idea what they mean.

Traceroute has started&#8230;

traceroute to 208.111.160.6 (208.111.160.6), 64 hops max, 72 byte packets
1 10.0.1.1 (10.0.1.1) 0.699 ms 1.982 ms 0.688 ms
2 * * *
3 67.59.227.173 (67.59.227.173) 10.691 ms 10.112 ms 9.716 ms
4 rtr4-ge2-14.mhe.hcvlny.cv.net (167.206.35.13) 11.033 ms 11.915 ms 9.889 ms
5 451be065.cst.lightpath.net (65.19.107.101) 9.941 ms 28.483 ms
451be0c5.cst.lightpath.net (65.19.99.197) 11.471 ms
6 64.15.0.28 (64.15.0.28) 26.205 ms 10.841 ms
64.15.3.182 (64.15.3.182) 15.644 ms
7 tge15-1.fr3.lga.llnw.net (208.111.134.233) 11.708 ms
tge7-8.fr4.lga.llnw.net (69.28.152.193) 23.280 ms 19.143 ms
8 tge4-1.fr4.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.153) 20.747 ms
tge2-4.fr3.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.157) 22.253 ms
tge4-1.fr4.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.153) 19.497 ms
9 ve5.fr3.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.213) 29.388 ms
cdn-208-111-160-6.iad.llnw.net (208.111.160.6) 24.681 ms
ve5.fr3.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.213) 23.993 ms


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

BTW*, I *went to STARZ and pressed WATCH NOW on Deliver us from Evil. So far the movie has been playing for 31 minutes and it has downloaded 35%. This movie is 1h59min long according to the INFO page. It has been playing flawlessly since the begging, no buffering at all.

Update: I now have the movie running for 42 minutes and I have 45% percent dowloaded with a yellow indicator bar.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Thanks

So far we got you on Optimum in the Long Island area being sent to Limelight

Me with Verizon DSL in Northeastern Pennsylvania being sent to Edgecast

dbronstein with CenturyLink and most likely being sent to Level 3


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

I'm in Denver for whatever difference that makes. I tried again and here's what I got for the servers. My router does not provide the amount of traffic.

First, just downloading a movie to watch later:

pds.dtvce.com 
dtvsegvod.vo.llnwd.net
directv.com
stb.dtvce.com
cmc.dtvce.com

Second, trying to watch now:

pds.dtvce.com
seg-vod-akamai.directv.com.edgesuite.net
cmc.dtvce.com

So I assume the server with the data is cmc.dtvce.com since that is the last one for both attempts. I tried a traceroute with the -w 200 and got this:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms modem.Home [192.168.0.1]
2 22 ms 21 ms 21 ms hlrn-dsl-gw06.hlrn.qwest.net [207.225.112.6]
3 21 ms 22 ms 21 ms hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net [71.217.188.41]
4 56 ms * 55 ms los-edge-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.22.182]
5 57 ms 54 ms 54 ms 67.128.19.198
6 * * * Request timed out.
and timeouts the rest of the way.

I increased the timout to 10000 and got to one more server before the timeouts started.

1 38 ms 1 ms 1 ms modem.Home [192.168.0.1]
2 21 ms 21 ms 21 ms hlrn-dsl-gw06.hlrn.qwest.net [207.225.112.6]
3 21 ms 21 ms 21 ms hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net [71.217.188.41]
4 21 ms 21 ms 21 ms hlr-edge-09.inet.qwest.net [67.14.15.198]
5 42 ms 25 ms 25 ms 63-237-218-242.dia.static.qwest.net [63.237.218.242]
6 26 ms 26 ms 27 ms 10.16.254.222
7 * * * Request timed out.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

The *.dtvce.com ones are the servers for data that give the search results and program details and not the VOD download itself

The actual VOD download is coming from the following:
dtvsegvod.vo.llnwd.net (Limelight's CDN)
seg-vod-akamai.directv.com.edgesuite.net (Akamai's CDN)


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

So if I am reading (and understanding) those results correctly, it seems that "qwest" is not handling the request correctly?

In my race route, it seems the "light patch"(which I think is cable vision) handles the request properly to limelight (?)


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Lightpath is Cablevision's backbone network for the internet.

Qwest.net is CenturyLink. Some of the *.dtvce urls aren't really configured to respond to ping requests so those results are normal. He has to run it on the llnwd and edgesuite urls to see what happens after the traffic leaves Qwest.net.

It would also help to know if they're on CenturyLink's DSL network or are using their fiber service, and if it's DSL what's their speed.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

I was seeing Qwest.net stuff when I did it the other night. I have Verizon DSL also in NE PA. I'll try it again tonight and post some more results.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

I have CenturyLink DSL at 40 mps. I ran traceroutes to those other servers and here's what I got:

Tracing route to dtvsegvod.vo.llnwd.net [68.142.79.70] over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 2 ms 4 ms 1 ms modem.Home [192.168.0.1]
2 22 ms 23 ms 20 ms hlrn-dsl-gw06.hlrn.qwest.net [207.225.112.6]
3 24 ms 21 ms 36 ms hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net [71.217.188.41]
4 61 ms 55 ms 66 ms los-edge-05.inet.qwest.net [67.14.22.106]
5 78 ms 58 ms 54 ms 63.149.192.206
6 60 ms 54 ms 65 ms ve6.fr4.lax.llnw.net [69.28.171.206]
7 54 ms 91 ms 86 ms cdn-68-142-79-70.lax.llnw.net [68.142.79.70]

Trace complete.

Tracing route to a1985.w10.akamai.net [65.126.84.67] over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 3 ms 1 ms 1 ms modem.Home [192.168.0.1]
2 23 ms 27 ms 24 ms hlrn-dsl-gw06.hlrn.qwest.net [207.225.112.6]
3 22 ms 23 ms 23 ms hlrn-agw1.inet.qwest.net [71.217.188.41]
4 57 ms * 47 ms min-edge-09.inet.qwest.net [67.14.21.190]
5 46 ms 46 ms 50 ms a65-126-84-67.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [65.126.84.67]

Trace complete.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

Tried "Watch Now" on an episode of Forever on ABC (in SD), worked fine:

Tracing route to 72.21.81.253 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 441 ms 468 ms 502 ms 10.7.33.1
3 534 ms 286 ms 339 ms ge-2-2-3-0.PHIL-CORE-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.194.138]
4 98 ms 258 ms 400 ms so-7-2-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
20.138]
5 * * * Request timed out.
6 93 ms 157 ms 217 ms 0.ae2.GW1.PHIL.ALTER.NET [140.222.229.53]
7 278 ms 271 ms 181 ms Edgecast.com.customer.alter.net [63.65.185.170]

8 300 ms 299 ms 266 ms 72.21.81.253

Trace complete.

Did a start over stream of "Ancient Aliens" on ch. 271. Played for ~15 seconds and then stopped to buffer:

Tracing route to cdn-208-111-161-254.iad.llnw.net [208.111.161.254]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 536 ms 536 ms 537 ms 10.7.33.1
3 533 ms 501 ms 43 ms ge-2-2-3-0.PHIL-CORE-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.194.136]
4 496 ms 518 ms 528 ms so-7-2-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
20.136]
5 33 ms 47 ms 61 ms 0.xe-6-1-1.XL3.IAD8.ALTER.NET [152.63.3.245]
6 543 ms 549 ms 533 ms TenGigE0-6-0-3.GW1.IAD8.ALTER.NET [152.63.35.145
]
7 546 ms 544 ms 541 ms limelightnetworks.customer.alter.net [152.179.50
.10]
8 547 ms 542 ms 541 ms ve5.fr4.iad.llnw.net [69.28.171.214]
9 549 ms 533 ms 540 ms cdn-208-111-161-254.iad.llnw.net [208.111.161.25
4]

Trace complete.

**Note: these were run while watching the VOD content. Tests to the same servers after I stopped watching:

Tracing route to 72.21.81.253 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 29 ms 28 ms 28 ms 10.7.33.1
3 27 ms 27 ms 28 ms ge-2-2-3-0.PHIL-CORE-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.194.138]
4 29 ms 28 ms 27 ms so-7-2-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
20.138]
5 * * * Request timed out.
6 28 ms 27 ms 28 ms 0.ae2.GW1.PHIL.ALTER.NET [140.222.229.53]
7 28 ms 28 ms 28 ms Edgecast.com.customer.alter.net [63.65.185.170]

8 28 ms 28 ms 28 ms 72.21.81.253

Trace complete.

Tracing route to cdn-208-111-161-254.iad.llnw.net [208.111.161.254]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 37 ms 32 ms 61 ms 10.7.33.1
3 28 ms 27 ms 27 ms ge-2-2-3-0.PHIL-CORE-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.194.136]
4 57 ms 51 ms 28 ms so-7-2-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
20.136]
5 33 ms 33 ms 33 ms 0.xe-6-1-1.XL3.IAD8.ALTER.NET [152.63.3.245]
6 37 ms 42 ms 34 ms TenGigE0-6-0-1.GW1.IAD8.ALTER.NET [152.63.35.137
]
7 43 ms 34 ms 48 ms limelightnetworks.customer.alter.net [152.179.50
.10]
8 34 ms 56 ms 37 ms ve5.fr4.iad.llnw.net [69.28.171.214]
9 40 ms 40 ms 37 ms cdn-208-111-161-254.iad.llnw.net [208.111.161.25
4]

Trace complete.

Shortly after that every channel of VOD said there were no listings. 3 Mbps Verizon DSL in Eastern PA.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Yeah 3mbps is barely enough to handle start over or Watch Now with HD content, SD content should work fine for Watch Now, you might be able to handle 720p content as long as you don't do anything else on your connection.

The no VOD listings thing is them refreshing the content every few hours, they usually return after 15 minutes.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

You're right. VOD is working now ... I tried that episode of Chasing Life you mentioned, hit Watch Now and a message came up saying it needed 5.26 Mbps to play "smooth." I hit watch anyway, and it played for about 30 seconds. Then I went to TV Land and hit "Watch Now" on an episode of Hot In Cleveland - also in HD - and it played fine, and got ahead of itself. Currently at minute 6 and it has 10 minutes downloaded.

I thought all Disney content was in 720p. And TV Land is in 1080i. So it makes no sense that I could play 1080i "now" and not the 720p program?

Tested this during the above VOD download:

Tracing route to 8.254.194.30 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 548 ms 533 ms 529 ms 10.7.33.1
3 501 ms 527 ms 525 ms ge-2-2-3-0.PHIL-CORE-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.194.138]
4 527 ms 525 ms 30 ms so-7-2-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
20.138]
5 * * * Request timed out.
6 * * * Request timed out.
7 351 ms 375 ms 287 ms 0.ae2.BR2.IAD8.ALTER.NET [140.222.229.169]
8 161 ms 306 ms 345 ms ae17.edge1.washingtondc12.level3.net [4.68.62.13
7]
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 * * * Request timed out.
11 452 ms 449 ms 569 ms 8.254.194.30

Trace complete.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

For TV Land they provide a lower bitrate 720p encode for Watch Now on slower connections. If you record instead of Watch Now you get the option to download the higher quality 1080i encode.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

KyL416 said:


> For TV Land they provide a lower bitrate 720p encode for Watch Now on slower connections. If you record instead of Watch Now you get the option to download the higher quality 1080i encode.


Too bad that they don't all do that! I can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mrknowitall526 said:


> Too bad that they don't all do that! I can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080.


I didn't pay much attention to _12 Months a Slave_ as far as PQ went, but it seemed decent enough when I tried Watch Now a couple days ago. My son has his array of computers turned on now, if I can remember, I'll give it a try today. It worked pretty well with his array off the other day.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

I'm watching _12 Months a Slave_ again and I used Watch Now. It's coming down in 1080i, kinda surprised at that, and it's not buffering even tho my son's got everything turned on in his computer room. Oops just buffered. Don't know why, I could use FF right now and I'm only 12 minutes in. Don't really know if that was a buffer problem or not, the movie just stopped for a moment.

Pretty good, considering how much stuff we're using on the Net at the moment.

Rich


----------



## DavidR (Apr 23, 2006)

damondlt said:


> ... Until I see solid evidence its not HR related, then we'll count out Directv equipment.
> But there is absolutely nothing to discard it.


It's not HR related, and here's why:

The HR performs the following tasks: Receive a digital signal, decode it, write it to the internal hard drive, and send it to your viewing device. Ok, I'm simplifying, there's obviously a lot of housekeeping and plumbing going on at all times in the background, but my point still stands. From the perspective of the HR, its purpose in life is to process a digital signal, and it processes that signal the same way no matter how it was delivered. It uses the same hardware and software components to process digital signal whether it comes from satellite, ethernet, coax, or reading it off the hard drive when playing a recording. If the HR has a problem, then you would see the same symptoms manifest themselves regardless of signal source.

Having said that, I am not ruling out D* as the cause of your VOD issues. It's in the nature of how the internet works that these things are inherently very difficult to diagnose. The most I'd be willing to say is that, to the extent that D* is attempting to provide a superior PQ experience, they bear some responsibility to correctly judge whether their typical customer is going to have a good enough internet connection to support it. I don't think the folks who post on this forum are a representative sample on which to base an opinion on how whether D* is doing a good or poor job of that.

For myself, I have 45Mb/s AT&T U-verse to my home, and my HR21-100 receivers are connected to my home network via WiFi. I usually have good results with VOD. I don't try to watch real-time, but if I give about a 15 minute head start I usually have no problem at all with a 2 hour movie. Occasionally, I might have some buffering. That's when I go to the kitchen or something. Very rarely, the download is so slow that I can't watch it the same night.

Everything except VOD plays great on my HR, 99% of the time. Even if I have to wait a few hours, if I wait until VOD has finished downloading, my HR plays it flawlessly 99% of the time, and the PQ is outstanding. Do you still think the problem could be with my HR21-100? Or yours? I hope not.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

DavidR said:


> Having said that, I am not ruling out D* as the cause of your VOD issues. It's in the nature of how the internet works that these things are inherently very difficult to diagnose. The most I'd be willing to say is that, to the extent that D* is attempting to provide a superior PQ experience, they bear some responsibility to correctly judge whether their typical customer is going to have a good enough internet connection to support it. I don't think the folks who post on this forum are a representative sample on which to base an opinion on how whether D* is doing a good or poor job of that.


I have 40 mps. That should be fast enough download a 45 minute show at the lower quality option in under 4 hours.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

Does your router give you an option to see the actual IP addresses and not just the domain name? If so can you try doing a Watch Now again, if you're still having problems, can you run a traceroute to that specific IP address and not the domain name?

I've been seeing some issues with Akamai's CDN for the past few hours for a few other non-DirecTV services where each time the traffic is routed to different 3rd party providers. i.e. many of the traceroutes had traffic going through a data center in Sweden and ending up in a data center in Austria.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

No, it just shows domain names, not the IPs.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

New heights in slow downloads today. Over 6 hours to download a 45 minute show. Ridiculous.

And I tried installing MS Message Analyzer and Wireshark to monitor the network traffic and I can't figure out how to get them to work. Yes, I tried following the tutorial instructions and they aren't very clear.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Are you torturing yourself to prove a point we all believe? 

Just set your downloads to go as you turn in, voila! They're there for the next day's viewing.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

DavidR said:


> It's not HR related, and here's why:
> 
> The HR performs the following tasks: Receive a digital signal, decode it, write it to the internal hard drive, and send it to your viewing device. Ok, I'm simplifying, there's obviously a lot of housekeeping and plumbing going on at all times in the background, but my point still stands. From the perspective of the HR, its purpose in life is to process a digital signal, and it processes that signal the same way no matter how it was delivered. It uses the same hardware and software components to process digital signal whether it comes from satellite, ethernet, coax, or reading it off the hard drive when playing a recording. If the HR has a problem, then you would see the same symptoms manifest themselves regardless of signal source.
> 
> ...





Laxguy said:


> Are you torturing yourself to prove a point we all believe?
> 
> Just set your downloads to go as you turn in, voila! They're there for the next day's viewing.


So waiting a few hours or a day to watch something "on-demand" or "Watch now" is on-demand and now and you say it works fine? I think not.

Thanks for proving that the polls are a waste of time because if you think waiting 2 hours + for something that is supposed to be on-demand is "working fine" then this entire thread and the similar ones have been a waste of time.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

ejbvt said:


> So waiting a few hours or a day to watch something "on-demand" or "Watch now" is on-demand and now and you say it works fine? I think not.
> 
> Thanks for proving that the polls are a waste of time because if you think waiting 2 hours + for something that is supposed to be on-demand is "working fine" then this entire thread and the similar ones have been a waste of time.


Who else is reporting this level of extreme behavior? It's not a DIRECTV issue.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

Shades228 said:


> Who else is reporting this level of extreme behavior? It's not a DIRECTV issue.


Really?

Lots of people. Look on here, search on satguys, and Directv's own site: http://forums.directv.com/search.jspa?q=slow+on+demand


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

In the last 12 months there are 34 threads with that search you listed and I saw at least 5 that were not related to on demand.

DIRECTV has 20 mil subs, and if we remove 10% for commercial equivalents, then you're looking at 18 million. Take 50% off that don't have the required equipment and you're at 9 million. Let's say 50% of those never use on demand so you're at 4.5 million customers. If we say an acceptable rate of error is 1% then 45000 customer's could have an issue and be in acceptable ranges. At the end of the day the number is so small that it's not a huge issue. I've posted the reasons there can be issues. You can choose to believe it or not but at the end of the day it's not a huge issue for the people who use it.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

ejbvt said:


> So waiting a few hours or a day to watch something "on-demand" or "Watch now" is on-demand and now and you say it works fine? I think not.
> 
> Thanks for proving that the polls are a waste of time because if you think waiting 2 hours + for something that is supposed to be on-demand is "working fine" then this entire thread and the similar ones have been a waste of time.


I have never said it works "fine". I have suggested ways a few people might fret less and get on with things until it is fixed. 
On Demand can mean simply that the program is available at your call. "Watch Now" is more specific as to being "right now" and is misnamed for those who are having problems. For most it seems to be all right.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

ejbvt said:


> So waiting a few hours or a day to watch something "on-demand" or "Watch now" is on-demand and now and you say it works fine? I think not.
> 
> Thanks for proving that the polls are a waste of time because if you think waiting 2 hours + for something that is supposed to be on-demand is "working fine" then this entire thread and the similar ones have been a waste of time.


The fundamental problem is.....
Only those with an issue are posting.
The "silent majority" are just that [quiet].

You haven't liked hearing that most don't have a problem, so I've held off posting.

While sometimes it may be a DirecTV problem, "by and large" it normally isn't and works quite well.

Waiting hours for a show "isn't normal", and more than likely is a problem between you and DirecTV, and not anything at either end.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Laxguy said:


> Are you torturing yourself to prove a point we all believe?
> 
> Just set your downloads to go as you turn in, voila! They're there for the next day's viewing.





Laxguy said:


> I have never said it works "fine". I have suggested ways a few people might fret less and get on with things until it is fixed.
> On Demand can mean simply that the program is available at your call. "Watch Now" is more specific as to being "right now" and is misnamed for those who are having problems. For most it seems to be all right.


That's what I did with a 3 Mb/s connection and wanted HD . :up:


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> In the last 12 months there are 34 threads with that search you listed and I saw at least 5 that were not related to on demand.
> 
> DIRECTV has 20 mil subs, and if we remove 10% for commercial equivalents, then you're looking at 18 million. Take 50% off that don't have the required equipment and you're at 9 million. Let's say 50% of those never use on demand so you're at 4.5 million customers. If we say an acceptable rate of error is 1% then 45000 customer's could have an issue and be in acceptable ranges. At the end of the day the number is so small that it's not a huge issue. I've posted the reasons there can be issues. You can choose to believe it or not but at the end of the day it's not a huge issue for the people who use it.


I said the same thing many moons ago. I even gave a bigger error rate, 100,000 and even that is small potatoes. :shrug:


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

veryoldschool said:


> That's what I did with a 3 Mb/s connection and wanted HD . :up:


I have a whopping 3.3 Mbps here, and can't imagine going for less than highest pixel count available.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Laxguy said:


> I have never said it works "fine". I have suggested ways a few people might fret less and get on with things until it is fixed.
> On Demand can mean simply that the program is available at your call. "Watch Now" is more specific as to being "right now" and is misnamed for those who are having problems. For most it seems to be all right.


I'm surprised at how well Watch Now works. It certainly didn't work well at first. Again, I have to say it's all about your ISP's speed. I'm able to Watch Now on any of my 12 HRs and they all work in a similar manner. Not that I bother with it, but this thread made me curious and I don't really see how it can be an HR problem.

Rich


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Shades228 said:


> In the last 12 months there are 34 threads with that search you listed and I saw at least 5 that were not related to on demand.
> 
> DIRECTV has 20 mil subs, and if we remove 10% for commercial equivalents, then you're looking at 18 million. Take 50% off that don't have the required equipment and you're at 9 million. Let's say 50% of those never use on demand so you're at 4.5 million customers. If we say an acceptable rate of error is 1% then 45000 customer's could have an issue and be in acceptable ranges. At the end of the day the number is so small that it's not a huge issue. I've posted the reasons there can be issues. You can choose to believe it or not but at the end of the day it's not a huge issue for the people who use it.


I see the fundamental point of disagreement. You feel that 1% is an acceptable rate of error. I say it is not. Not to mention you are pulling that number out of your rear. Based on this poll, which is completely unscientific with a very small, self-selected sample size and has almost no validity, but is based on actual data unlike your number, the error rate is over 15%, or close to 700,000 customers.

We really have no idea how many customers actually have problems with it because most subscribers have no idea this forum even exists, let alone post here. I started this poll because peds48 kept insisting that the issue is related to the type of modem or gatelway that you have, so I was trying to get some data to see if there is a trend there. Based on the results, it does seem to trend in that direction, but again, these results have almost no statistical validity.

As for why I keep torturing myself with it, this time it was because Agents of Shield got effed up this week and only recorded one minute, so I had to use VOD to try to watch it. And here's the punchline: after the download took 8 hours or whatever, it turned out to be the wrong episode. The info says s2e12 with the appropriate description, but it's actually the previous episode.

I could easily post in the caller ID problem threads that caller ID works perfectly for me, so clearly it's a problem with their phone lines or something in their house and not anything to do with DirecTV. But I don't because I realize that just becuase it works great for me doesn't mean that there isn't an issue with their boxes. I have no idea how to help or troubleshoot the problem, so I'm not going to post when I have nothing constructive to add.

Thank you to those of you who tried to help.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Sorry to say that neither poll is close to scientific due to the way they are structured, as well the participants are not close to a representative sample of DIRECTV® subscribers. 

Sorry you've endured so much anguish over this.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> I see the fundamental point of disagreement. You feel that 1% is an acceptable rate of error. I say it is not.
> 
> We really have no idea how many customers actually have problems with it because most subscribers have no idea this forum even exists, let alone post here.
> 
> Thank you to those of you who tried to help.


"I think" even if it was 0.00001% and I/we were the 0.00001% we'd all feel it wasn't acceptable.

I was surprised and glad to see something more than the usual *****ing come out of this thread.

Traces of the paths to the DirecTV servers would seem to have been the most helpful and instructive.

I guess I've been lucking over the years and the two coasts and three [but not my 4th] ISPs I've had, because everyone has worked within the limits of either my connection or the limit of DirecTV's.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Laxguy said:


> Sorry to say that neither poll is close to scientific due to the way they are structured, as well the participants are not close to a representative sample of DIRECTV® subscribers.
> 
> Sorry you've endured so much anguish over this.


That's why I just said "Based on this poll, which is completely unscientific with a very small, self-selected sample size and has almost no validity,"


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Yes, but I was including the other poll. Did not mean to obviate your reply!
(probably wrong word, but I bet you get the meaning.) Apology offered!


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

No problem!


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> I see the fundamental point of disagreement. You feel that 1% is an acceptable rate of error. I say it is not. Not to mention you are pulling that number out of your rear. Based on this poll, which is completely unscientific with a very small, self-selected sample size and has almost no validity, but is based on actual data unlike your number, the error rate is over 15%, or close to 700,000 customers.
> 
> We really have no idea how many customers actually have problems with it because most subscribers have no idea this forum even exists, let alone post here. I started this poll because peds48 kept insisting that the issue is related to the type of modem or gatelway that you have, so I was trying to get some data to see if there is a trend there. Based on the results, it does seem to trend in that direction, but again, these results have almost no statistical validity.
> 
> ...


I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm stating that the error is not where people in this thread have been stating it is. I've attempted to offer ways to help isolate the issue. I know you've done some tracert but there really is just too many variables. The point I made in that post was simply that given the amount of "voice" we see about this issue and as VOS pointed out the silent majority is just that. Outside of getting another ISP for a month and testing it there's just going to be a lot of testing you would need to do in order to identify the cause.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Shades228 said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm stating that the error is not where people in this thread have been stating it is. I've attempted to offer ways to help isolate the issue. I know you've done some tracert but there really is just too many variables. The point I made in that post was simply that given the amount of "voice" we see about this issue and as VOS pointed out the silent majority is just that. Outside of getting another ISP for a month and testing it there's just going to be a lot of testing you would need to do in order to identify the cause.


How do you know the error isn't with DirecTV? There's just as much hard evidence to say it is as there isn't, which is pretty much zero on both sides. The circumstantial evidence leans towards it being with DirecTV - people in different areas of the country with different ISPs and different equipment have the problem. The only commonality is they have DirecTV equipment and are downloading from DirecTV servers.

The biggest frustration I've had with this thread and the other one, is that there have been multiple requests from different people asking what the settings should be on the genie and router, and nobody has responded. Instead, we've gotten suggestions to get a new router, install network traffic monitoring software, etc. Checking the settings seems to me to be the logical place to start and it's been totally ignored.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> How do you know the error isn't with DirecTV? There's just as much hard evidence to say it is as there isn't, which is pretty much zero on both sides. The circumstantial evidence leans towards it being with DirecTV - people in different areas of the country with different ISPs and different equipment have the problem. The only commonality is they have DirecTV equipment and are downloading from DirecTV servers.
> 
> The biggest frustration I've had with this thread and the other one, is that there have been multiple requests from different people asking what the settings should be on the genie and router, and nobody has responded. Instead, we've gotten suggestions to get a new router, install network traffic monitoring software, etc. Checking the settings seems to me to be the logical place to start and it's been totally ignored.


I can only speak from my own experience, which was two different ISPs serving the same address/location had significantly different results.
In this case there was no question that it wasn't on the DirecTV end/side.
A case that would show it to be DirecTV's problem might require two customers downloading the same program. at the same time, from two significantly different locations.
If both had the same results that would point to it being DirecTV.

If you have only one point of view, you can't determine where the problem source is, and only that you have a problem.
You may seek out others in the same situation, but that isn't any "proof" it's DirecTV, but only that they're in the same boat as you.
Genie and router settings are a red herring, as the default settings on both should/do work fine.
Installing network traffic monitoring software would help locate the problem as "more than likely" it is between the customer and DirecTV and the monitoring would show the chain, which then could be compared to other customers experiencing the same problem.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dbronstein said:


> _*How do you know the error isn't with DirecTV?*_ There's just as much hard evidence to say it is as there isn't, which is pretty much zero on both sides. The circumstantial evidence leans towards it being with DirecTV - people in different areas of the country with different ISPs and different equipment have the problem. The only commonality is they have DirecTV equipment and are downloading from DirecTV servers.
> 
> The biggest frustration I've had with this thread and the other one, is that there have been multiple requests from different people asking what the settings should be on the genie and router, and nobody has responded. Instead, we've gotten suggestions to get a new router, install network traffic monitoring software, etc. Checking the settings seems to me to be the logical place to start and it's been totally ignored.


Umm. Because I don't have any problems using Watch Now and it comes down in 1080i and 5.1 sound? What that tells me is, once again, the speed your ISP provides must have something to do with it. I just tried _2 Guns_ on Watch Now, and it's been on for about 5 minutes and I see room on the buffer to use FF. I'd think that should tell us that if you have a lot of speed down (I get a bit over 100 down) you shouldn't have any problems with it. Let me try that same movie in a regular download at the "very best resolution" and see what happens with that...When I went to the HR, I was 9 minutes into the movie and the buffer allowed me to FF to 13 minutes. I stopped recording it and started recording the same movie in the normal way and right now I can watch the movie as it comes down and I see the buffer leading the mark I'm at. It has to be all about speed from the ISP. I think that's pretty simple to understand.

Rich


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> How do you know the error isn't with DirecTV? There's just as much hard evidence to say it is as there isn't, which is pretty much zero on both sides. The circumstantial evidence leans towards it being with DirecTV - people in different areas of the country with different ISPs and different equipment have the problem. The only commonality is they have DirecTV equipment and are downloading from DirecTV servers.
> 
> The biggest frustration I've had with this thread and the other one, is that there have been multiple requests from different people asking what the settings should be on the genie and router, and nobody has responded. Instead, we've gotten suggestions to get a new router, install network traffic monitoring software, etc. Checking the settings seems to me to be the logical place to start and it's been totally ignored.


I can understand your frustration. The thing is without knowing what port ranges are being used you can't verify if your router is having a QoS conflict. If you have a modem only you could plug it right into the DIRECTV system and see if that changes the results. It may not be the router and it could be the isp throttling the ports. It could be your download speed. It could be an interconnect that your ISP is using. The list of variables is quite large. I know because of many reasons. The largest though is the simple fact that if downloads speeds were that slow for everyone who used it you would see everyone agreeing with you.


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Rich said:


> Umm. Because I don't have any problems using Watch Now and it comes down in 1080i and 5.1 sound? What that tells me is, once again, the speed your ISP provides must have something to do with it.


So all the problems people have with caller ID are clearly not DirecTV's fault because it works perfectly fine for me. That's the argument everyone is saying. "It works fine on my box."

And my download speeds consistently are over 20 mps on the speed tests. Are you saying that's not fast enough?


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Shades228 said:


> I can understand your frustration. The thing is without knowing what port ranges are being used you can't verify if your router is having a QoS conflict. If you have a modem only you could plug it right into the DIRECTV system and see if that changes the results. It may not be the router and it could be the isp throttling the ports. It could be your download speed. It could be an interconnect that your ISP is using. The list of variables is quite large. I know because of many reasons. The largest though is the simple fact that if downloads speeds were that slow for everyone who used it you would see everyone agreeing with you.


1. Several people have already said you can't connect a Genie directly to a modem. Can you or can't you?

2. Just because something works for most people doesn't mean it's not DirecTV's fault. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? The issue might not be with DirecTV, but that's not proof. Again, caller id works fine for me, therefore any problems people have with it are clearly because of their phone lines or something else in their houses..


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

veryoldschool said:


> I can only speak from my own experience, which was two different ISPs serving the same address/location had significantly different results.
> In this case there was no question that it wasn't on the DirecTV end/side.
> A case that would show it to be DirecTV's problem might require two customers downloading the same program. at the same time, from two significantly different locations.
> If both had the same results that would point to it being DirecTV.
> ...


1. Thank you for proving my point. Is it really that hard to post your settings so I can verify mine are the same?

2. I didn't say that multiple people having issues is "proof", I said it is evidence. When many people have the same problem, you look for the commonality, and in this case, the only commonality (that we can identify) is DirecTV.

3. I would be happy to do network monitoring if someone can provide some reasonably easy to follow instructions on how to do it. I tried MS network monitor and Wireshark and their instructions are impossible to follow for someone who is not a network administrator.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dbronstein said:


> So all the problems people have with caller ID are clearly not DirecTV's fault because it works perfectly fine for me. That's the argument everyone is saying. "It works fine on my box."
> 
> And my download speeds consistently are over 20 mps on the speed tests. Are you saying that's not fast enough?


I don't have any idea why you brought up Caller ID.

Before Cablevision jacked up my speed I was having difficulty using Watch Now, the few times I tried it I only got 720p. I hadn't tried it before you started this thread in quite a while. I was surprised to see it come down so quickly and even more surprised to see it in 1080i. Before they jacked up the speed, I was getting about 50-60 down and whenever I tried Watch Now, I got 720p down. So, you betcha, I'm saying it's related to the ISP's speed.

Getting back to the Caller ID. If people on the forum didn't post that they were _*not *_having problems, what would everyone think? We've been thru this before many times and it's absolutely necessary for folks to post that they are not having the problems others are. This is a concept you're gonna have to accept or you'll just keep saying the same thing over and over.

Rich


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

Rich, I don't have a problem with people posting they are not having issues. As you said, that is helpful in trying to diagnose and reslove issues. I do have a problem with people such as yourself posting "I don't have any issues so that proves the problem is not with DirecTV." Because that doesn't prove the problem isn't with DirecTV.

I keep bringing up caller ID because it's the same thing. People post that it doesn't work for them, so therefore it's clearly a problem with the Genies. Yet it works perfectly fine for me, so I can just as easily say that proves it's not a problem with the Genies. See how that works?

And you didn't answer my question on the internet speed. I get over 20 mbps down. Are you saying that is not fast enough for VOD?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> 2. I didn't say that multiple people having issues is "proof", I said it is evidence. When many people have the same problem, you look for the commonality, and in this case, the only commonality (that we can identify) is DirecTV.


But of course, the commonality is DIRECTV®, isn't this thread on a DIRECTV® based forum and based on DIRECTV® anyway...


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I've stayed pretty quiet on this thread because I haven't had any major issues with VOD downloads. I have had some issues that I reported in the proper threads with some episodes not playing properly or not being available. But that's different.

Download speeds that some of you are getting are phenomenal but the question 'Shouldn't 20Mbs, 50, pick a number' doesn't tell the whole story. While your speedtest may show that, it's rigged. It's unrealistic to expect servers halfway across the country in any direction to sustain that speed to many users.

It only takes one link in the chain to be loaded to throttle what comes to your house. A traceroute may show no problems but that just shows that packets are getting there and back, not how fast or how many repeats are necessary.

Netflix and other streamers do adaptive streaming, varying the bit rate to hopefully get the picture to you before you notice how bad it is. You also lose a lot of trickplay control in FF or RW. . . it's a guess. I've had WatchESPN go to audio only when the streaming gets bad.

VOD is a file transfer, just like you downloading something from Microsoft, Apple, or Google. If a packet doesn't make it, it gets re-requested. Stack several of those up and you get behind the curve and it buffers. You don't always notice those delays on other file transfers.

If it takes you N hours to download a 1 hour program - where N is greater than 2 or 3, you have a problem. It could be your home network has a problem, or some link along the way has a problem. But if 80% are reporting no problem, it's not a Directv problem. Remember, if your neighbor has a different ISP, you probably have different routes to any given server. One may be good, one may have problems.

Also, the internet changes - daily - and Directv may be changing, We already see that some links go to CDN locations rather than a DirecTV server. So problems that you experienced 1 month, 6 months ago aren't necessarily valid today. 

As for caller-id problems. . . caller-id is becoming more problematic on any platform because of the VOIP links in the chain.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dbronstein said:


> 1. Thank you for proving my point. Is it really that hard to post your settings so I can verify mine are the same?
> 
> 2. I didn't say that multiple people having issues is "proof", I said it is evidence. When many people have the same problem, you look for the commonality, and in this case, the only commonality (that we can identify) is DirecTV.
> 
> 3. I would be happy to do network monitoring if someone can provide some reasonably easy to follow instructions on how to do it. I tried MS network monitor and Wireshark and their instructions are impossible to follow for someone who is not a network administrator.


1. Not being some network guru, "my settings" are the default in both the receivers & router. I don't really pay attention since "they work".

2. Troubleshooting something like you're looking at [for me] would require two independent paths to DirecTV to both exhibit the same problemwith the same show ant the same time before "I'd look" at DirecTV. Without this I don't know squat :shrug:

3. I once played with wireshark by using a hub [not a switch] to monitor the traffic to the receiver. I had to copy & paste the log to network admin to have it deciphered


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dbronstein said:


> I keep bringing up caller ID because it's the same thing. People post that it doesn't work for them, so therefore it's clearly a problem with the Genies. Yet it works perfectly fine for me, so I can just as easily say that proves it's not a problem with the Genies. See how that works?


The variables for Caller ID are different ... one can test whether they are getting a clean Caller ID signal in their home by connecting to other devices. One cannot test the feeds used for DirecTV on demand on any other device.

The expectation that DirecTV provide a device that would work as well as any other Caller ID receiver in your home ... regardless of the data and line quality your local telco and inside wiring provides is similar. Your expectation is that DirecTV provide a service regardless of any "local conditions".

If Caller ID was not working on your Genie how much would you expect DirecTV to do to fix the problem? How much would you be willing to do to solve the problem?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dbronstein said:


> Rich, I don't have a problem with people posting they are not having issues. As you said, that is helpful in trying to diagnose and reslove issues. I do have a problem with people such as yourself posting "I don't have any issues so that proves the problem is not with DirecTV." Because that doesn't prove the problem isn't with DirecTV.
> 
> I keep bringing up caller ID because it's the same thing. People post that it doesn't work for them, so therefore it's clearly a problem with the Genies. Yet it works perfectly fine for me, so I can just as easily say that proves it's not a problem with the Genies. See how that works?
> 
> And you didn't answer my question on the internet speed. I get over 20 mbps down. Are you saying that is not fast enough for VOD?


I thought I made that pretty clear in my posts, but I'll say it again: Before Cablevision raised my downspeed to over 100Mbs down I was getting 50-60Mbs down and I did have problems using Watch Now. I don't see that problem anymore. I've never tried downloads at 20Mbs so I can only tell you what I've experienced. I just don't see it as a D* problem. All the other problems I see with VOD can be blamed on D*, I think. Also, I'm not using any Genies, just 24s, I don't know if that makes any difference.

Rich


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dbronstein said:


> 1. Several people have already said you can't connect a Genie directly to a modem. Can you or can't you?
> 
> 2. Just because something works for most people doesn't mean it's not DirecTV's fault. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? The issue might not be with DirecTV, but that's not proof. Again, caller id works fine for me, therefore any problems people have with it are clearly because of their phone lines or something else in their houses..


There's no reason you can't connect a receiver, or any ethernet device, directly to a modem as long as your modem has been setup already.You also have no proof that the error is on DIRECTV. You're speculating out of frustration and quite honestly you're outside of your depth to do so. That's not meant to be an attack, or condescending, but it would be like me speculating on why someone is having health problems. I know the data and I can assure you that the people who have a problem are a significant minority. So I'm sorry that you continue to have issues. At this point unless you, or someone else, post help requests for troubleshooting I'll just stay out of it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> There's no reason you can't connect a receiver, or any ethernet device, directly to a modem as long as your modem has been setup already.You also have no proof that the error is on DIRECTV. You're speculating out of frustration and quite honestly you're outside of your depth to do so. That's not meant to be an attack, or condescending, but it would be like me speculating on why someone is having health problems. I know the data and I can assure you that the people who have a problem are a significant minority. So I'm sorry that you continue to have issues. At this point unless you, or someone else, post help requests for troubleshooting I'll just stay out of it.


Yeah, good idea, I'm gonna back out now, I'm just repeating myself.

Rich


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Rich said:


> I thought I made that pretty clear in my posts, but I'll say it again: Before Cablevision raised my downspeed to over 100Mbs down I was getting 50-60Mbs down and I did have problems using Watch Now. I don't see that problem anymore. I've never tried downloads at 20Mbs so I can only tell you what I've experienced. I just don't see it as a D* problem. All the other problems I see with VOD can be blamed on D*, I think. Also, I'm not using any Genies, just 24s, I don't know if that makes any difference.
> 
> Rich


FYI this was a major upgrade internally and externally for them as well. Chances are you wouldn't have had issues after they made the equipment possible to get that speed regardless if you took it or not. I've had 10,14,20,40,50 mbps connections and each has been able to do on demand just fine as watch now. The 10 and 14 got iffy when other people were using the net heavily but after 20+ I've never had an issue. I was going to copy this into my other post but you're too fast and quoted it already


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> FYI this was a major upgrade internally and externally for them as well. Chances are you wouldn't have had issues after they made the equipment possible to get that speed regardless if you took it or not. I've had 10,14,20,40,50 mbps connections and each has been able to do on demand just fine as watch now. The 10 and 14 got iffy when other people were using the net heavily but after 20+ I've never had an issue. I was going to copy this into my other post but you're too fast and quoted it already


Thanx. Don't really understand the technology.

Rich


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Shades228 said:


> There's no reason you can't connect a receiver, or any ethernet device, directly to a modem as long as your modem has been setup already.


I am not sure you can connect a receiver, regardless of model, directly to a modem. DIRECTV® receivers only work with private IPs, (as any other gadget on the market, except PCs). and a modem would give a public IP.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

peds48 said:


> I am not sure you can connect a receiver, regardless of model, directly to a modem. DIRECTV® receivers only work with private IPs, (as any other gadget on the market, except PCs). and a modem would give a public IP.


Why do you think they only work with a private IP? Granted only one unit would get an address but it shouldn't care that it's a public IP.

I don't know of any device that restricts IPs.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

dennisj00 said:


> Why do you think they only work with a private IP? Granted only one unit would get an address but it shouldn't care that it's a public IP.
> 
> I don't know of any device that restricts IPs.


I really don't know the answer, but my experience tells me that besides computers (PCs, MACs) I have never been able to connect anything to the internet using only a modem. I also remember having a "talk" with Ebonovic, he mentioning that DIRECTV® receivers only "take" LAN type addresses.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

peds48 said:


> I really don't know the answer, but my experience tells me that besides computers (PCs, MACs) I have never been able to connect anything to the internet using only a modem. I also remember having a "talk" with Ebonovic, he mentioning that DIRECTV® receivers only "take" LAN type addresses.


I just tested it and you're correct they have disabled the ability. I tested every other device in my entertainment system and this was the only one that chose to act this way. I could speculate but the bottom line is it won't work.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> I just tested it and you're correct they have disabled the ability. I tested every other device in my entertainment system and this was the only one that chose to act this way. I could speculate but the bottom line is it won't work.


Did you assign your outside static IP / Gateway or depend on DHCP?

If it still doesn't work, it might be to make sure the content isn't routable.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

It strikes me that, after 13 pages, there is next to no information as to how Directv distributes VOD content. IMO, it is impossible for anybody to automatically conclude any particular individual's issues are not caused by an issue on Directv's end.

We don't know what the sever load is on average or what servers serve which programs or to who. We do know the servers are capped. We do know the bit rate range can be above that cap, which alone would clearly create a buffering issue. There is another thread right now where engineers have said "some parts of the country" are having issues with VOD being unavailable. That alone tells me that the user experience from one part of the country could be different than another.

Much of the confusion is created by Directv alone. Several have commented they have no issues with "Watch Now" Why do some shows give the "Watch Now" option while others don't? I've seen some guesses about that, but have never seen anything official. More confusion is created by using the term of "On Demand". Sorry, but "On Demand" means now. I'm sure some of the same spinmeisters who think "Keep Until I delete" shouldn't really mean "I", also won't agree that "On Demand" means now, but I'd bet to most people, it doesn't mean check back in a few hours. If you can't deliver "On Demand" don't mislead and advertise it as such.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

It was there a few pages ago.

To sum it up, all 20 million+ subscribers are NOT hammering a server hosted in El Segundo. DirecTV uses CDNs, content delivery networks where the content is hosted on multiple servers with different data providers across the country. So far we spotted servers hosted by Akamai, Limelight and Edgesuite. The actual server you're sent to varies based on your ISP, location and real time traffic conditions.
There are times where Akamai would route people to servers in Europe when traffic is heavy, and DirecTV has no control over this process, that's handled between your ISP and the CDNs
Location makes a difference too because someone with Verizon on the west coast will be sent to a different server than someone with Verizon on the east coast
ISPs make a difference because someone with Verizon in NYC will be sent to a different server than their nextdoor neighbor who has Time Warner Cable.

To make a simplified analogy, think of paper towels as the file, the store as the CDN server, the roads as the internet backbone and taxis the different ISPs.

You have to go to the store to get paper towels, you have 3 different taxis, 1 tries to find the best route and the store with the shortest line, another insists on taking the same route no matter what the current traffic conditions are, the other insists on going to the Walgreens no matter how packed it is.
Taxi 1 will have no problems
Taxi 2 may or may not have problems depending on how congested the road is, however someone else using the same highway might not have problems if their exit is before the congestion.
Taxi 3 may or may not have problems depending on how busy the store is, however someone else in another town might not have problems at the Walgreens in their town.

Your personal speed is not a factor unless you're on a really slow DSL connection. The speed that matters is the one between your ISP, the internet backbone and the CDN. Unfortunately some ISPs have a history of letting these connections go overloaded unless they get paid by the CDN. So you can have a gigibit connection and still have problems if your ISPs connection to one of the CDNs are overloaded.

Unfortunately it's way too techincal to explain how to identify the CDN you're sent to unless you're tech savy and know how to capture traffic in promiscuous mode. The easiest way to do it is with Wireshark and have everything on a wireless connection, if you have an extra network port on a PC you can try using your PC as the router with internet connection sharing, if your only option is a switched ethernet connection you're kind of out of luck because your PC will only see its own traffic. You'll need to run a traceroute on the specific IP address that the download is coming from to see where it has to go between your modem, your local ISP, the ISP's backbone, the CDN and ultimately the server hosted by the CDN. It cannot be the domain name as that just sends you to a different server hosted by the CDN each time.




Also, DirecTV can NOT offer On Demand the same way cable can. On Cable On Demand is essentially a dedicated channel controled by your settop box, since their network is divided in nodes serving a few homes, they have the bandwidth to accomplish this. Satellite has one headend in the sky serving all 20 million+ subscribers and how many receivers they all have. There's just not enough bandwidth to deliver it the same way, and even if there were they'll still need a return path to handle the selection of content along with pause/rewind/fastforward functions. So DirecTV uses the internet to deliver VOD content and is at the mercy of your ISP and your ISP's relationship with the various CDN providers.

For me On Demand is the ability to watch an episode or movie without waiting for it be scheduled on an actual channel. For network TV along with some cable channels it's kind of the only way to catch the latest episode before the next new episode if you didn't record it. Some networks also use On Demand to give advanced screening of new episodes. (i.e. Showtime On Demand frequently has premieres of shows up before they air, ABC and NBC sometime do it with premieres of new series) Some channels like Esquire, Oxygen, Universal Sports, Pivot, Boomerang, Sportsman and El Rey have HD On Demand content even though the linear channel isn't carried (or even available in Boomerangs case) in HD, which really helps those who refuse to watch SD programming.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dennisj00 said:


> Did you assign your outside static IP / Gateway or depend on DHCP?
> 
> If it still doesn't work, it might be to make sure the content isn't routable.


No I didn't want to get into that level as the average consumer is really not going to get to that level. What I did find interesting though was my GenieGo light would be blue when the Genie was directly connected and then blink yellow/orange when it wasn't connected. So it appears that the GenieGo could access part of it. It's also possible that something else in the SWM could was getting the IP instead of the Genie. I could do a bsf in between but again this is something the average person won't have.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

raott said:


> There is another thread right now where engineers have said "some parts of the country" are having issues with VOD being unavailable. That alone tells me that the user experience from one part of the country could be different than another.


We all know that DIRECTV® uses "the engineers are aware and working on it" very loosely, most of the times to appease its customers.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

raott said:


> Much of the confusion is created by Directv alone. Several have commented they have no issues with "Watch Now" Why do some shows give the "Watch Now" option while others don't?


Are you saying that some VOD shows are missing the "watch now" option? And it only says "record"?


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

peds48 said:


> Are you saying that some VOD shows are missing the "watch now" option? And it only says "record"?


I think I remember if your connectivity doesn't test high enough, you don't get 'watch now'.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> No I didn't want to get into that level as the average consumer is really not going to get to that level. What I did find interesting though was my GenieGo light would be blue when the Genie was directly connected and then blink yellow/orange when it wasn't connected. So it appears that the GenieGo could access part of it. It's also possible that something else in the SWM could was getting the IP instead of the Genie. I could do a bsf in between but again this is something the average person won't have.


I was just thinking of plugging an HR into the modem Ethernet . . . plugging a coax network into the modem would not necessarily get an IP to any HR.

I would try it but I don't want to carry a HR / TV to the basement.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

K

Nice explanation! Very useful. 

Now, just be sure to get "The Quicker Picker-upper"!


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Shameful if true.



peds48 said:


> We all know that DIRECTV® uses "the engineers are aware and working on it" very loosely, most of the times to appease its customers.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

I've heard that explanation and I've also heard some VOD channels have watch now, while others do not. I honestly don't think anyone here really knows why watch now sometimes happens and other times does not.

My connection is way, way more than enough and I get watch now for some things but not others, at least I used to, I stopped using Directv's VOD a long time ago because of the inconsistency.



dennisj00 said:


> I think I remember if your connectivity doesn't test high enough, you don't get 'watch now'.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

raott said:


> I've heard that explanation and I've also heard some VOD channels have watch now, while others do not. I honestly don't think anyone here really knows why watch now sometimes happens and other times does not.
> 
> My connection is way, way more than enough and I get watch now for some things but not others, at least I used to, I stopped using Directv's VOD a long time ago because of the inconsistency.


Then why were you asking? You have your own conclusion.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

My only conclusion is no one here really knows. From this thread alone I've seen two different explanations for watch now.



dennisj00 said:


> Then why were you asking? You have your own conclusion.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

raott said:


> My only conclusion is no one here really knows. From this thread alone I've seen two different explanations for watch now.


All the posters in this thread DON'T work in the DirecTV receiver engineering group!

What is here are people's experience, some good & some bad.

The reference to CDN is very important.

The fact that some shows have watch now and some don't can be due to several things, so one show might have a different reason than another.

How well it was encoded into MPEG-4 "I know" is one, as I've seen it and measured it.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Which was kind of my point. I've seen at least two explanations from people opining as though they know. IMO, watch now should always be an option.



veryoldschool said:


> All the posters in this thread DON'T work in the DirecTV receiver engineering group!
> 
> What is here are people's experience, some good & some bad.
> 
> ...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

raott said:


> IMO, watch now should always be an option.


Everyone gets to have and express an opinion, it just doesn't make it so.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

I am very curious about the "watch now" can anyone name a show that dees not currently have it as an option. I have never, ever seen a show without that option. Or perhaps they are referring to the Start Over.....


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

peds48 said:


> I am very curious about the "watch now" can anyone name a show that dees not currently have it as an option. I have never, ever seen a show without that option. Or perhaps they are referring to the Start Over.....


This is my thought, too. It doesn't make sense the first way.


----------

