Web pages stall when loading

[#1]

This type of issue could be caused by packet loss, but there's a couple of other things we can look at.
If the problem continues can you try opening whatever site if affected in Firefox and then pressing CTRL+SHIFT+Q - this brings up some tools to look at what's going on. In here we're looking for where there are timeouts when trying to retrieve elements of the page, or maybe 404 errors or even DNS lookup issues.
If possible it'd be useful to see what's happening via a wireshark capture, this lets us see whether the issues are caused by DNS fails, TCP fails, packet loss etc.

[#2]

Just updating, that since last night, it has started happening again.
Strangely, this morning i was on my Plusnet account page and clicked a link and it stalled completely.
Would my ping times have anything to do with this?
Can these times be improved?
Also, why do they increase in the evening?


Edit to add that when with Sky, pings were mid teens max.

[#3]

Did this stall occur on any other site or just PlusNet? I ask because the PlusNet site has always been a little slow at times, including these forums.
Also that ping test you posted is not very accurate with the server being "Coventry", much better to use a server in London (or nearest location). The reason for this is because no matter where you are in the country your starting point on to the internet is in London, where PlusNet's gateway servers are located.

[#4]

No, it isn't just PN. To be honest, there isn't a particular website.
Also, on pingtest.net, it doesn't give me any other option, only coventry and Ireland?
I am wondering if it could be my TP link router that is affecting pings.

[#5]

I'll have to check out pingtest.net not visited it on computer in a while, must see what options there are.
Anyway, to be completely sure with regards to ping times, it's best to run a ping from the command line.

MS:
ping -n 10 www.bbc.co.uk
OSX:
ping -c 10 www.bbc.co.uk

Edit: Must have mixed up ping commands. I sometimes forget which is which.

[#6]

Just for comparison, I am using a TP-Link router and get this from pingtest.net:

I do get better pings from the command line:
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.3.9600]
(c) 2013 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
C:\Users\Brian>ping -n 10 bbc.co.uk
Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.244.18] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Reply from 212.58.244.18: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=56
Ping statistics for 212.58.244.18:
    Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 24ms, Maximum = 24ms, Average = 24ms
I'm not a gamer, so latency isn't an issue, and it doesn't affect browsing or streaming here.

[#7]

Thanks for the links and help.
I know its early and from my TBB graphs, latency seems to increase in the evenings, but i ran the test anyway and got...
PING www.bbc.net.uk (212.58.244.67): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=0 ttl=55 time=13.270 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=13.489 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=13.587 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=13.355 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=13.042 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=13.547 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=13.444 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=13.249 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=13.421 ms
64 bytes from 212.58.244.67: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=13.483 ms
--- www.bbc.net.uk ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 13.042/13.389/13.587/0.156 ms

Im not a gamer either, however, we do a fair bit of streaming (YT, Iplayer etc) and I'm wondering if the higher pings in the evening cause some buffering and web pages stalling?

[#8]

Quote from: Alucidnation

I'm wondering if the higher pings in the evening cause some buffering and web pages stalling?

It may well be - do the command line ping when the buffering is happening to see if there's any huge difference. Perhaps try more than 10 pings - if you are using Windows, do -t instead of -n 10. This will ping until you stop it by pressing Ctrl+C. The other command to try is pathping bbc.co.uk, which effectively pings and traceroutes at the same time, showing where there may be a problem.
Going by the output of your ping, you don't appear to be using Windows, so you may not have an equivalent command to pathping available.

[#9]

We'll further update, (yes i am using OS X).
I have been having my suspicions on the tplink router.
i have two wireless networks (one2.4 & one 5) due to the house layout etc.
I have an Asus router that i use at one end of the house(5g), and the tplink (300Mbps) which is 2.4 only does the other end (on a completely independent channel after doing a local wifi scan)..
I sat by both routers and got roughly 63Mbps on the Asus (which is almost wired speed), and around 50 on the tplink. However, pings remained similar on both.
I have now swapped back to the PN supplied router and get very similar results. So, by my reckoning, the cheaper routers just don't seem to be capable of maximum throughout on wifi, especially when looking at the PN router stats and it specifically states that it is max 65Mbps wifi.
With that in mind, i am now looking at getting another Asus and maybe trying that for the 2.4 or maybe just using it as a mother 5G network.

[#10]

Some of the ( less technical) posts on this thread line up with my own v recent experience, e.g. when viewing the new BBC  Horrible Histories. Although all tests show v good speeds and low pings against my 40mb/s fibre, I saw that revolving doughnut twice.
Interesting that Roberto, an elder on TBB forums,  has posted:
Plusnet do seem to be having niggling problems with FTTC at the moment. I have a feeling the frequent capacity increases have been stopped by the recently appointed CEO from BT

[#11]

Bit ropey at the moment for me.
Plusnet ?

[#12]

I've been following this thread for several weeks now after joining Plusnet back in December last year.
Using the Plusnet router, I experienced terrible web page hanging and timeouts until I followed advice here and changed my DNS settings to Google's Public DNS. Things improved immeasurably, not perfect, but no where near as bad as before Google DNS.
Downloads were unaffected as has been reported here also.

During the last few days though, I've experienced seriously intermittent fibre speeds. My average before today (wifi) was approx 30Mb but the last few days have been down to 5Mb!!
Queue serious action. I dug out my TP-Link 300 Mbs and programmed it to Plusnet's settings and hey presto - instant fix. Wired speeds of 74Mb and wifi touching 60Mb which is faster than I've ever had.
To test the router further, I removed the Google DNS settings and rebooted the machine. I've now been surfing the internet all night without a hint of a problem on 5 different machines.
As far as I'm concerned, the only difference in my setup is that I've removed the Plusnet router from the equation.

[#13]

Im guessing i need to start a new monitor as this is what i now get now I've swapped the router back to PN!

[#14]

You'll need to splash out a whole fiver for a static IP address, or otherwise keep deleting and re-adding your BQM, which kind of defeats the purpose.
With a dynamic IP address, every time you disconnect or lose the PPP session, you're likely to get a new IP address. With a static IP address it stays the same.

[#15]

Jaggies - your post #52 has proved very useful to me.
Whilst pinging various sites (e.g. bbc.co.uk) with the parameters you mentioned hasn't turned up anything untoward, using pathping, as you suggested, has proved interesting, and potentially revealing?
I've tried it a few times, including just now (OK, peak period) whilst trying to watch Celia Imrie on BBC iplayer, and each time the result has been what I, a complete novice, might have expected, i.e. lost is zero. Except consistently at one point:
The third hop on traces has shown
RTT: - - -  
Source to Here Lost/Sent=Pct: 100/100 =100%
This Mode/Link Lost/Sent=Pct: 100/100 = 100%
Address: irb.11.PTW-CR02.plus.net [84.93.249.10]
The [ ] address varies between tests.
I'd be grateful, Brian,  for your thoughts as to what this might indicate.