Bad ping times

[GameRuk]

i use cmd prompt why ?

[Sebby]

I think he means what's the result when you ping IDNet?

[GameRuk]

C:\Documents and Settings\Game oveR>tracert idnet.net

Tracing route to idnet.net [212.69.36.10]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2   112 ms   105 ms   109 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    79 ms    79 ms    70 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    62 ms    57 ms    70 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    96 ms    91 ms    83 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    79 ms    87 ms    78 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

[Rik]

I manage 23ms with interleaving on. It's worth letting IDNet have your results and see if they can find a cause.

[davej99]

Rik, like you I used to see pings in the 20s. I just ran an overnight PingGraph and the floor is just over 40 with averaged excursions into the 100s at one every 3-5 minutes and the 50s at about the same rate. Though I must caveat that I am very inexperienced at measuring and tracking pings and I could be suffering a cranial inversion. 

[Rik]

Did you mean you're standing on your head, Dave?

It would be worth letting support have the graphs, see if they can come up with anything. It sounds a bit like interleaving has been turned on, or the error correction depth has increased.

[davej99]

I have always been interleaved, Rik.

The cranial inversion I spoke of is sometimes known as secondary alimentary canal articulation. Saw a nasty case at Holyrood recently. 

Where would I look for error correction depth. Is that the FEC HEC stuff? Tech support say the rise in ping is not a result of a network change and is caused by a low ICMP priority.

Cheers, Dave

[Rik]

I have always been interleaved, Rik.

Bang goes the first theory.

The cranial inversion I spoke of is sometimes known as secondary alimentary canal articulation. Saw a nasty case at Holyrood recently. 

They do it well.

Where would I look for error correction depth. Is that the FEC HEC stuff? Tech support say the rise in ping is not a result of a network change and is caused by a low ICMP priority.

I do know that IDNet's routers do give low ping priority, so within that environment, nothing should really have changed. I've just checked and got:

ping www.idnet.net

Pinging www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 32ms, Average = 25ms

Pretty much normal, with one slower one.

The interleave depth can't be determined by the end user, and tbh, I know little about it, just that it was explained to me once, not by IDNet, that the depth of interleave had an effect on latency and, given my figures, I must be on one of the low settings.

[Steve]

Screen shot from DMT tools of a Netgear DG834N showing interleave depth

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Rik]

OK, it can't be determined by the end user unless they have a router which reports it.

[Steve]

Rik I agree, I never used to get the depth figures using DMT and the 585V6. I don't understand netgear error reports, which are important? As I have always wondered about having interleave removed just for the sake of it and also for the gamers in the household.

[Rik]

Usually, Steve, interleaving has been turned on by the system for a reason. However, it does no harm to get it turned off - if the line can't hack it, it will simply be turned back on again. With a full sync and 13.8db of noise margin, I can see no reason why you should need interleaving.

[Steve]

It was turned on six months ago I had BT 2700 HGV synced at 8128 go mad one afternoon shortly before it failed completely when I swapped it for another one the next sync was 7616.The margin used to be 12 prior to this I think its 15 now.

[Rik]

Worth trying it off again then, I'd say.

[Sebby]

Yep, I'd agree with that. It sounds like something mislead the exchange into believing you need interleaving on.

[GameRuk]

i got nearly the same thing from support what this low ICMP priority all about sure this cant make my ping as bad as it is.Also i guess this will stay on so my ping wont go back to normal.bummer i may have to look else why for another isp.

[Steve]

Whilst sympathizing with your ping times as they are worse than my interleave connection,any server i.e perhaps jolt? which is set to give give low priority to ICMP requests is going to give a poor response to pings but should not effect downloads speeds or gaming. I think perhaps before you jump you need to ensure BT congestion is not the root cause.

[Sebby]

It might be true, but I sometimes think that the low priority thing is a bit of a good excuse, but it's difficult to say.

[davej99]

The ICMP priority argument does not explain why my pings were 20s and are now 40s at very best, with episodes in the 100's. I like the interleaves on the line excuse much better. 

[Steve]

The ICMP priority argument does not explain why my pings were 20s and are now 40s at very best, with episodes in the 100's. I like the interleaves on the line excuse much better. 

Thats Network Rails's excuse.