Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Author Topic: Zyxel VMG1312-B10A packet loss  (Read 671 times)


  • Just arrived
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Zyxel VMG1312-B10A packet loss
« on: September 22, 2018, 04:58:38 PM »

Curently I'm using a Huawei HG612 and an Asus RT-N66U.
Sync is 70052/15214 SNRM 3.0/6.3
Over the last few months I thought I would try a Zyxel VMG1312-B10A in bridge mode.
The results are
Sync  72885/13850 SNRM 3.3/5.7 however BQM shows random packet loss.
I've tried a second VMG1312-B10A  and swapped backwards and forwards with the HG612 over a month or two and always the BQM shows packet loss

My Broadband Ping

VMG1312-B10A BQM
My Broadband Ping

Anyone have any advise as to why this is happening? Are there any settings in the Asus RT-N66U that need tuning?


  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 32035
  • Trinity: Most guys do.
Re: Zyxel VMG1312-B10A packet loss
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2018, 05:50:53 PM »

It's a 'feature' that happens on several modems (inc my VMG8324).
I believe its something to do with QoS and [de]prioritisation of ICMP ping rather than actual packet loss. 
Please do not PM me with queries for broadband help as I may not be able to respond.
How to get your router line stats :: ADSL Exchange Checker


  • Just arrived
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Zyxel VMG1312-B10A packet loss
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2018, 07:08:43 PM »

That makes a lot of sense as I've not noticed any practical difference in day to day use


  • Addicted Kitizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 7292
  • Retd sw dev; A&A; 4 ◊ 7km ADSL2; IPv6; Firebrick
Re: Zyxel VMG1312-B10A packet loss
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2018, 03:55:13 AM »

In fact this could be linked to another thread -,21833.msg376592.html#msg376592

That Firebrick 6000 series ping box does I think do IP ICMP pings or PPP LCP pings and it must be the former in this case - canít think straight just now, pain drugs, is that correct? (I am the latter being an AA ISP user.)

Basically what Kitz said, surely. The consensus from that other thread is that this is bogus and there is no solution available for the likes of us but there is a proper one for corporate users.

I donít know if the other option, PPP LCP pings is better or worse. If LCP ping is treated as high priority then the result may be what they want to see or the opposite. In the general case, either you want to measure the link alone or you want to measure link plus queuing time resulting from the traffic that currently happens to be present.

If your router treats a huge lot of ICMPs as an attack then it would throw them away. But I wouldnít have thought this is relevant here as they are spaced out.

Perhaps we need a new RFC or two, one with explicit definition of performance measurement goals and rules about handling of the responses.