Rustynuts........Doesn’t sound right to me I also watch sky Q  via sky q app on the iPad in the morning no problem.the one way to prove it would be to run a temporary Ethernet lead from the modem to the mini q box

Edited 21 May, 20188 yr by Sad555

7 hours ago, Rustynuts said:

Yep, channels are well removed from each other. Sky is on Ch 36 and home wifi is on Ch 8.

 

I'm not suggesting that this is the problem at all, but 2.4 GHz WiFi uses different channel ranges to 5 GHz.

 

2.4 GHz  WiFi uses channels 1 to 13 in the UK. Channel 13 should be avoided as many devices don't support it. You can configure your router to use any of the remaining 12 channels but it's generally recommended to use channel 1, 6, or 11 to avoid any "overlap" with adjacent channels. The channel "width" can usually be set to 20 MHz or 40 MHz. Some devices have problems with 40 MHz so setting it to 20 MHz width can sometimes help.

 

5 GHz WiFi uses channels 36 to 167 - a completely different range to the 2.4 GHz channels.

 

You can't get interference between 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz WiFi - they're completely separate so there's no issue there.

 

Your home WiFi is on channel 8. Although it shouldn't cause any issues (and obviously doesn't with any of your other devices) I'd be inclined to follow the general recommendations and change this to 1, 6 or 11 with a channel width of 20 MHz. And I realise you shouldn't have to change your WiFi to get Sky to work, but Sky clearly have some issues with their equipment.

 

On that status page, can you check if the mini box has a valid IP address ? If the box loses its IP address then that would cause connection problems. It should be possible to set a "static IP address" for devices but I cannot say that this would resolve the issue.

Edited 21 May, 20188 yr by BOD20

I changed the router 2.4Ghz channel from 6 to 8. Since then the system has been more stable than before. I also set the router 5Ghz channel to 100, while (as you say) the Sky 5Ghz network is on channel 36. Whether any of this has had any bearing on the reliability of the Sky network or whether it's just coincidental I have no idea.

 

Incidentally, when the Sky "engineer" was here replacing the mini box he asked if we were on Sky broadband and was told no. So he suggested getting a new router from our suppliers, and when I told him we had our own third party router and it was configured to run certain appliances on 2.4Ghz and others on 5Ghz he stopped talking to me and addressed my wife, mumbling about mesh networks which don't work very well vertically but were fine horizontally. If the mini box was downstairs it would work much better. Not sure he'd earned the title "Engineer" really, but that's what they call them these days I guess.

12 hours ago, Jfhuk said:

All I can say is it doesn’t happen to mine. Sounds a bit like excuse 42 being  read. 8-)

Be interesting to compare firmware version numbers of your Sky boxes (main & Q) with those of Rustynuts - to see if a firmware bug has crept in...

1 hour ago, SWBoy said:

Be interesting to compare firmware version numbers of your Sky boxes (main & Q) with those of Rustynuts - to see if a firmware bug has crept in...

Both are at Q071.000.29.00L

 

Main box is at Q070.000.33.00L

 

Q071.000.29.00L  apparently came out only a few days ago and includes minor bug fixes to Spotify & other small stuff.

Edited 22 May, 20188 yr by Rustynuts

14 hours ago, Sad555 said:

Rustynuts........Doesn’t sound right to me I also watch sky Q  via sky q app on the iPad in the morning no problem.the one way to prove it would be to run a temporary Ethernet lead from the modem to the mini q box

 

 

Sky Q app isn't delivered via Sky network, but either by your own wifi or mobile network. Unlikely to be affected I guess.

Like I said to check it out run an Ethernet lead from the modem to the mini box

And again, this is simply fiddling with my own wifi rather than Sky fixing their own wifi network issue.

Unfortunately the Sky installers have minimal network knowledge in most cases. In the end I borrowed a WiFi signal strength meter from work and repostioned the Sky boster box, so that it gave a decent signal in most rooms. They location that they had installed it in gave poor results.

3 hours ago, Rustynuts said:

And again, this is simply fiddling with my own wifi rather than Sky fixing their own wifi network issue.

It's fault finding, so that you can tell Sky the problem with your system is "......" - which MIGHT help them fix it.

 

It isn't such a bad idea to try to help them to help you surely?

The fault is with their wifi network initially.  Any issue with my wifi further down the line is (at least to them) not at all relevant..

 

Another analogy. You pay someone once a week to come to your house and wash & polish your car. He turns up every week and his polisher is broken or plays up, so he asks to borrow yours every week. When yours doesn't work as he wants it to, he spends all his time getting you to make yours work so that he can do what he's being paid for. Would you be happy with that, or would you pretty sharpish get fed up and start asking him to fix his own polisher?

All I expect for the £60 odd per month that they relieve me of is that they provide a system which does as it's supposed to, instead of a system which relies on me replacing my router, reconfiguring it to suit their requirements, having my phone line checked for errors etc. in a vain attempt to make it look as though their system is working correctly.

12 minutes ago, Rustynuts said:

The fault is with their wifi network initially.  Any issue with my wifi further down the line is (at least to them) not at all relevant..

Sky aren't going to fix a problem they can't reproduce unless you can help them out by doing some fault finding.

 

Unless & until you're prepared to help them help you you're going to be stuck with this problem - so you have 3 choices: help them find & fix the problem, work round the problem or tell Sky to get lost.

WiFi is flaky. 

 

It relies on an invisible signal that bounces off some walls, passes through others, picks up interference from various sources, and has to cope with varying loads from multiple devices. It's actually amazing that it works as well as it usually does.

 

It would be good if Sky could actually identify and resolve these issues but they don't equip their engineers with the right tools or training to do that particular job - because it "usually" works out of the box.

 

I always recommend that people don't use WiFi if they can avoid it - use a network cable, or powerline adaptors since they will be less hassle in the long run.

 

But if you have to use WiFi, and you encounter connection problems, then you'll have to be prepared to tinker with the system to get it to work. Or have someone else do the tinkering for you. It's simply the nature of WiFi. Some devices, in some environments, just don't play nice together.

19 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Sky aren't going to fix a problem they can't reproduce unless you can help them out by doing some fault finding.

 

Unless & until you're prepared to help them help you you're going to be stuck with this problem - so you have 3 choices: help them find & fix the problem, work round the problem or tell Sky to get lost.

 

 

I don't think you're understanding the issue here. Sky Q system uses it's own wifi 5Ghz network to communicate and send data between the two boxes. This is entirely separate and different to my home wifi network, and it's something I cannot fiddle with in any way, shape or form. This is their own network generated entirely between the main box and the mini box, and this is the underlying issue. When this fails (at least once a day in our case) then they need to piggyback onto my wifi network to continue to provide their service. Then their equipment further fails to connect to my network and the system crashes completely. My network works fine without their system, and works fine even when their system cannot connect to it.

 

I'm unwilling and unable to fault find their network because 1. it's hidden, 2. I shouldn't need to, 3. I'm paying for them to provide a service which the engineers out in the field and the advisors on the phone neither understand nor care about how it works, and many others before me have had this same issue and failed to get it working.

 

We had a wired system direct from the satellite up until a couple of months ago, at which point we wanted to change our contract as the kids had both moved out, but the only way we could "downgrade2 our service was to have the old system removed and fit the new wireless system. Their wireless system doesn't work, they can'g make their system work with my wifi, and it seems as though the only course of action anyone has had which completely fixes the issue is to hard wire the system again into our home network.

Now I might be a bit pig headed here, but I'm loathe to allow Sky to get away with providing a system which to all intents and purposes sounds like it could work very well, while using my own infrastructure and equipment to actually provide the service they're supposed to. Given that I'm paying for the service I don't really want one of their engineers trooping round my house clipping cables all over the skirting board and drilling holes in all our newly decorated house when they should be fixing their own sh!t

If there were an alternative where we live (Virgin perhaps) then Sky would've been down the road many years gone, but there isn't so we have to stick with them. But having to stick with them doesn't mean I'm going to provide them with the means to get out of the service they should be providing. After all, my car goes to Skoda for any warranty work so why should I pay my local garage to fix something the dealers should be doing for free...

40 minutes ago, Rustynuts said:

I don't think you're understanding the issue here.

 

'm unwilling and unable to fault find their network

You're jumping to an incorrect conclusion that I don't understand the issue - as a retired Chief Engineer from a major telecoms company and former IT network manager I'm clear on the issue.

 

Saying you're unwilling to fault find their network isn't going to get your issue solved - simples. Technologies, especially radio based ones based on an unregulated spectrum like Wi-Fi, are so complex and there are so many variables that even if you got past the "customer helpline" your help and willingness to carry out some debugging would be required - and if you're not willing to help then you're going to be stuck with this issue.

So in your expert opinion, what should I be doing to fault find and debug their network issue?

26 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

You're jumping to an incorrect conclusion that I don't understand the issue - as a retired Chief Engineer from a major telecoms company and former IT network manager I'm clear on the issue.

 

Saying you're unwilling to fault find their network isn't going to get your issue solved - simples. Technologies, especially radio based ones based on an unregulated spectrum like Wi-Fi, are so complex and there are so many variables that even if you got past the "customer helpline" your help and willingness to carry out some debugging would be required - and if you're not willing to help then you're going to be stuck with this issue.

There’s a bit of secret squirrel performed by the Sky Q boxes that you mighten be aware of. Mini boxes talk via  a 'hidden' Sky SSID coming from the main Q box. 

2 minutes ago, Jfhuk said:

There’s a bit of secret squirrel performed by the Sky Q boxes that you mighten be aware of. Mini boxes talk via  a 'hidden' Sky SSID coming from the main Q box. 

 

I'm sure that as a retired chief engineer from a major telecoms company and former IT network manager that this hasn't escaped him. It has been pointed out once or twice...

                      I have been following this thread since the beginning, and feel that I should point out the one fact you seem to be conveniently ignoring. As BOD20 pointed out in the first of his replies, is that the 5Ghz Wifi network has a very short range, being affected by something a simple as a wall or even a person walking between units. It does not matter if it is Sky's 5Ghz network or the 5Ghz network supplied by your home router they are both affected the same. Do you have any 5Ghz devices in your home and if so do they always stay connected to the 5Ghz service or resort to the 2.4Ghz service? As stated hardwired networks are the best.

 

                       It is up to you what you do now, but blaming Sky will not necessarily fix YOUR problem.

 

My 5Ghz network is fine. The LG smart tv in the bedroom (coincidentally very close to the Sky Q mini box) runs on this network and has to negotiate a couple more walls and some random furniture that the Sky 5Ghz signal doesn't. The Sky boxes are 10ft horizontal distance and 9ft vertical distance apart, with the only obstruction between them being the ceiling of the lounge / floor of the bedroom. If Sky have manufactured a system which cannot hold a reliable connection any further than I could cheerfully spit a dead rat, then they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

 

Edit: Not fit for purpose, perhaps.

 

Edited 22 May, 20188 yr by Rustynuts

Also I'm aware that hardwired systems are the best, and as I said we were forced away from a hardwired satellite system to their new wirelss setup, against my wishes. And as stated before I'm far and away not the only person who has this particular problem, yet Sky seem to have no idea what the answer is to the issue. I asked on the first call to their chat line (I don't like to call it a help line...) f it would be possible to hardwire the system again, but the answer was a resounding no.

 

It was also interesting to note that the bloke on the other end of the line told us that it would be a problem with out phoneline because we didn't have a satellite dish any more. I told him that I was certain we did have a dish, because we'd had a new one fitted when they installed the system, and on looking out of the bedroom window I assured him it was still there.

 

 

And despite getting up and turning the main box on at 5.30, the mini box has crashed again this morning.

12 hours ago, Rustynuts said:

The Sky boxes are 10ft horizontal distance and 9ft vertical distance apart, with the only obstruction between them being the ceiling of the lounge / floor of the bedroom. If Sky have manufactured a system which cannot hold a reliable connection any further than I could cheerfully spit a dead rat, then they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

 

Edit: Not fit for purpose, perhaps.

 

5GHz signals can have very short range, in our previous house the 5GHz wasn't usable outside of the same room where the router was.

 

It sounds like the Sky Q box may have a weak 5GHz transmitter and/or deaf 5GHz receiver (by poor design?) which makes the mesh network fail, but the connection to the router (which almost certainly has a better 5GHz transceiver) can reconnect. If that is the case then I agree it would be poor design resulting in a  product not fit for purpose, likely caused by penny pinching.

 

Earlier someone mentioned moving the Sky supplied WiFi booster, that could be worth trying? RF propagation, especially in buildings where reflections from metal object such as radiators can cause "not spots", can be a black art where trial & error is the best method.

 

We are all trying to help get you Sky Q box working reliably, something which Sky seem unable to do for you.

Edited 23 May, 20188 yr by SWBoy

Rusty did Sky supply you with a Sky Q boster? If so, where did they put it in relation to the Sky Q main box and the mini?