Fed up with idnet.

[Tacitus]

Have you talked to support, Mark?

I agree Rik.  Even if the OP does decide to jump ship, I think it worth contacting support and giving them an opportunity to try and sort it out.  If the results are posted here, there may be knowledge which is beneficial to all of us for the future.

[Rik]

Particularly as Simon has invited the contact, Tac.

[Tacitus]

Particularly as Simon has invited the contact, Tac.

I think it's called customer service Rik   

[davej99]

I mentioned elsewhere that my speeds and pings were falling away sometimes.

BT speedtest 16.46hrs 13-1-08
DSL connection rate: 8128 kbps(DOWN-STREAM),  448 kbps(UP-STREAM)
IP profile for your line is - 7150 kbps
Actual IP throughput achieved during the test was - 2608 kbps

Ping statistics for 212.69.63.51: telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net first hop
    Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 9, Lost = 1 (10% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 68ms, Maximum = 2180ms, Average = 407ms

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:   www.idnet.net
    Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 82ms, Maximum = 103ms, Average = 91ms

Tech support argue pings are low priority, but taken with low speeds and some gamers' perception, I interpret that as possible congestion in parts of the network. But whos?

[Rik]

From here, with interleaving on:

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=23ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms 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 = 22ms, Maximum = 25ms, Average = 23ms


So I'd guess at a BT issue, possibly exchange congestion. OTOH, I'm only 30-50 miles away, which could be helping.

[Steve]

Using winmtr

Shame it doesn't retain format with cut and paste.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Rik]

Closer to my results than Dave's, Steve. 

[davej99]

When I was with a much congested ISP, it was possible to connect using various gateways at random. I used to automatically logoff and logon, checking pings on each to find the best. Some were good and some were congested with poor pings and poor speeds, whilst of course my exchange remained the same.

It would be interesting to know what different IDNET gateways are doing. For example are your most excellent pings achieved on telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net, Rik? If so that would put my local exchange in the frame.

Though, if as tech support say the issue is one of ICMP priority, why so some subscribers see times in the 20s while other see double that or more at best, with interleaving off off peak. I uses to see 20's.

On the other hand maybe those English electrons are reluctant to journey up here to Perthshire.

[Rik]

I seem to come in on lo2, Dave, perhaps because I'm on dsl4, not gw5?

tracert www.idnet.net

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

  1    <1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  home [192.168.1.254]
  2    23 ms    25 ms    29 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    23 ms    25 ms    25 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    23 ms    23 ms    25 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    29 ms    23 ms    37 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    23 ms    25 ms    23 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

Being that much closer to London helps as well, of course, but I'd rather be in Perthshire.

[Philip]

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6001]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\Philip>ping www.idnet.com

Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=37ms 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 = 36ms, Maximum = 37ms, Average = 36m

here's mine from Penzance on dsl4

[davej99]

So there you have it; English electrons would rather go to Penzance than Perthshire.

Curiously, I found I can ping Rik's telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55] and it comes up as the one and only hop.

Ping statistics for 212.69.63.55:
    Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 71ms, Maximum = 273ms, Average = 92ms

When I ping my own first hop telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net [212.69.63.51] I get a slightly better results.

Ping statistics for 212.69.63.51:
    Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 66ms, Maximum = 150ms, Average = 78ms

So, if I listen, I think I can hear IDNET techs having a laugh here, because obviously I have no clue how the network is configured and tracert tells us nothing about it.

But suppose different subscribers consistently come in on different routes and some are congested and others not, then that could explain why some of us get poorer performance. Meantime I am looking at Thinkbroadband speeds of circa 1500 from 16.00 to 20.00hrs today, on a 7150 profile.

[Philip]

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6001]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\Philip>tracert www.idnet.com

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

  1     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2    38 ms    39 ms    35 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    39 ms    37 ms    37 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    37 ms    37 ms    39 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    38 ms    38 ms    41 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    41 ms    36 ms    37 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Philip>

[davej99]

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

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms 
  2    89 ms    86 ms   137 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net [212.69.63.51]
  3    96 ms    85 ms    87 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    95 ms   106 ms    92 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    98 ms   105 ms   102 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6   102 ms   101 ms    90 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

[LesD]

Here's one from Stafford up here in the midlands:

C:\Users\Les>ping www.idnet.com

Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms 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 = 31ms, Maximum = 33ms, Average = 31ms

C:\Users\Les>date
The current date is: 13/01/2009
Enter the new date: (dd-mm-yy)

C:\Users\Les>time
The current time is: 22:27:12.64
Enter the new time:

C:\Users\Les>

[vitriol]

Ouch!!!!!!

Currently investigating.

[LesD]

Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59

With the above why do I see 73ms in the attached BBMax result?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[vitriol]

It's not on IDNet's network, so may have further to travel.

[vitriol]

Just tested again an now have

this

something weird is going on with my phone line I think.

[drummer]

Not sure if it helps anyone but I just did some pings:

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=12ms 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 = 12ms, Maximum = 13ms, Average = 12ms


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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=12ms 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 = 12ms, Maximum = 13ms, Average = 12ms

Pinging multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.22] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=124
Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=124
Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=124
Reply from 85.236.96.22: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=124

Ping statistics for 85.236.96.22:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 12ms, Maximum = 13ms, Average = 12ms

Did this earlier.

Slightly bored at the mo because my web conference for midnight GMT hasn't started yet because southern California is having a late lunch, Okinawa and Tokyo went to bed hours ago and the northern Europeans are being prima donnas.

Never mind, snooker's on the telly as I type...

[ducky22]

Pings are better today than well the past 3 months... Did someone at IDnet find something? Upgrade a path? Or is this just an off day?


M:\>tracert idnet.co.uk

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

  1     1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1
  2    23 ms    23 ms    23 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net [212.69.63.51]
  3    23 ms    24 ms    24 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    26 ms    27 ms    30 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    36 ms    41 ms    36 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    39 ms    43 ms    49 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

M:\>

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.138:
    Packets: Sent = 40, Received = 40, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 24ms, Maximum = 48ms, Average = 30ms



http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1231958263&v=6007994 - not the worst by far but not quite what it used to be.

[siege2]

I have played online for many years now, only problems I have had is when the new  pipes were getting installed over a year ago, I spoke to idnet and resolved the problem with a certain game that I needed to get working "spring" alternative to the old c&C. also play alot off cod5 "siege2" and gtaIV, iam not suffering any problems atm.

[jimc]

Must admit I have been suffering disconnects and latency for a few months now , however I no longer blame my ISP I just assume its BT at my local exchange and there is nothing I can do, Spent my early broadband days ISP hopping but have long since given up, of course I live in Peterhead , Scotland and there is no light at the end of my tunnel

Jim

[jimc]

ah I have just found the old plusnet user tools

http://usertools.plus.net/exchanges/

shows my VP as red , maybe there is light ?

[davej99]

That's just a Northern Light Jim. BT have barely got Scotland off cocoa tins and string. The general rule is that the more remote you are, and so the more you need high speed communications to function, the less likely you are to get them. However, if you are in SE england with 10 million people within hailing distance you can have state of the art;  essential of course so the City can get us all in hock. Whoops, got to go, the string has got wet and my connection is ..........

[Rik]

Money goes to money, Dave.