Ping times Jan 28 onwards

[Sebby]

Looks fine for an interleaved line, Simon.

[Ham]

i am having bad pings and some packet loss also
its been happening now for about a week
very bad on WoW,Cod4,cod5

i have reboot router ect still the same tho sometimes its lower for a short period of time then they get high again
nothing running in background that i could see



>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  www.routerlogin.com [192.168.0.1]
  2   422 ms   204 ms    68 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    92 ms    100ms    97 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    92 ms    93 ms    94 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    95 ms    96 ms    94 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    93 ms    97 ms    93 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

[goshawk]

14 months of near perfect service since joining, until you set about 'improving' the system!

About an hour per day of slow or nil communication since 28/1

Worst so far today, with huge ping time (compared with typical < 90ms):

Code Select Expand


speedtest.net results:

Date      Time             D/L       U/L      Ping    Server       Dist
1/30/2009 2:42 PM GMT    6234 kb/s  364 kb/s   86 ms  London     < 50 mi
2/3/2009  4:08 PM GMT     378 kb/s  134 kb/s  374 ms  London     < 50 mi
2/3/2009  4:12 PM GMT     252 kb/s  172 kb/s  369 ms  London     < 50 mi
2/3/2009  4:14 PM GMT     279 kb/s  353 kb/s  195 ms  Maidenhead ~ 50 mi
2/3/2009  4:23 PM GMT     266 kb/s  346 kb/s  229 ms  Limerick  ~ 400 mi
2/3/2009  4:58 PM GMT     689 kb/s  280 kb/s  369 ms  London     < 50 mi
2/3/2009  5:00 PM GMT     396 kb/s  310 kb/s  240 ms  Barcelona ~ 700 mi
2/3/2009  5:01 PM GMT     701 kb/s  290 kb/s  431 ms  Oslo      ~ 700 mi
2/3/2009  5:02 PM GMT     497 kb/s  140 kb/s  403 ms  Dublin    ~ 300 mi
2/3/2009  5:04 PM GMT     363 kb/s  284 kb/s  305 ms  New York ~ 3500 mi
2/3/2009  5:05 PM GMT     614 kb/s  275 kb/s  477 ms  Torshavn  ~ 800 mi
2/3/2009  6:16 PM GMT    4859 kb/s  375 kb/s   90 ms  London     < 50 mi
2/3/2009  6:44 PM GMT    5762 kb/s  377 kb/s   94 ms  London     < 50 mi


Usual download exceeds 5000 kb/s, and very steady during test, and typically 375 lb/s upload, similarly steady, latency ~ 90 ms.

Currently download speed back to near normal for me, but noticeable  speed flicker during test, ie not quite back to best.

Hope you get back to normal status before too long.

[Simon]

  goshawk.

I should point out that while you have a valid complaint, we are not IDNet themselves, but an unofficial support forum, so you should air your grievance direct to IDNet, either by email or telephone. 

Oh, by the way, the latest advice is to reboot your router, which may help with the ping issues.

[goshawk]

  goshawk.

I should point out that while you have a valid complaint, we are not IDNet themselves ...

Understood, and anyway not a complaint! If anything more a tribute. Day after day rock solid at a bit over 5000 kb/s sometimes hitting 6000kb/s, having been told that max likely speed on my connection would be 6mb/s, when signing-up.

Just sharing experience.

[Rik]

Trust me, there's been a lot of shared experience this week, Goshawk.  Welcome to the forum.

[Steve]

I must admit ping times looking pretty good at the moment


Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.138] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=122
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=122
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=122
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=122

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.138:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 15ms, Maximum = 18ms, Average = 16ms



Pinging idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=16ms 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 = 15ms, Maximum = 16ms, Average = 15ms

[Rik]

Mine have been right back to normal today, Steve, 21-24ms range.

[Sebby]

Welcome, Goshawk!

[mrapoc]

C:\Users\Sam>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=34ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=38ms 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 = 27ms, Maximum = 38ms, Average = 32ms

Got that 10 seconds ago after having interleaved set to off

Now..

C:\Users\Sam>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=93ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=119ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=98ms 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 = 91ms, Maximum = 119ms, Average = 100ms

[Rik]

See my other post, Sam, things seem to be a bit spiky at the moment.

[Steve]

Anything else running on the network which you've fogotten about? That's the stupid mistake I made yesterday when checking ping times I'd forgotten the serving with P2P running at that time or has interleave gone automatically straight back on?

[Ray]

Mine have been much better today apart from a few occasional spikes.


[attachment deleted by admin]

[Rik]

Mine were good earlier today...

[attachment deleted by admin]

[mrapoc]

What program are you all using to log pings?

Nah I made sure utorrent wasnt running 

[Rik]

PingGraph, Sam.

http://www.vwlowen.co.uk/moreinternet/files.htm

[Ray]

Mine were good earlier today...

Mine have started to get more spikey over the last 20 minutes or so, Rik.

[Rik]

Same here, I'm running a new graph as we type.

[Rik]

Things seem to have been patchy for an hour or so and are now settling again.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[bridgej]

Hi

Can someone explain to me what pings are. Can I take it that the lower it is, the better it is?

Up until today, my ping rate via the speedtest.net site was always averaging somewhere between 75ms and 102ms on each test, looking back it once was 56ms back in August last year. The highest it's been a couple of times is about 153ms, excluding yesterday when it was 349ms, a reboot of the router fixed that though.

Today it is 41ms.

So what should I expect it to be?

[Rik]

There's no simple answer to that question, unfortunately. Pings are a bit like blood pressure, they vary naturally throughout the day. Your ping time will depend on several factors including distance to the site you are pinging (check with an Australian site and you'll see what I mean as an extreme), the level of traffic (contention) at your exchange at the time, the level of traffic on the site you are pinging and the importance that that site gives to ping traffic. As IDNet's services are based at Telehouse in London, the closer you are to London, the better your pings will be to www.idnet.net. I use that site as the reference point because the routing is simple, and extended times will quickly show up a fault at IDNet, or BT congestion.

The other variable is whether your lines has interleaving on. If it does, this will add anything up to 30ms to a ping, depending on depth. I do have interleaving on, but my pings to IDNet are usually around 24ms on average.

[bridgej]

I see what you mean having just tested via Adelaide. (I'm in London and always use the London test icon)

So my next question, what is interleaving?

[Rik]

It's used when a line is prone to errors, and it splits data into packets, so instead of sending squentially, eg 1-2-3-4-5-6, it might send as 1-4-2-5-3-6. The idea is that if any data is lost, there's less to re-send so the overall speed of the line is better, but the result is an increase in latency, due to the overhead of splitting and reassembling the data, so pings increase.

Incidentally, don't trust the ping times reported by speed test sites, always do manual pings yourself, or use PingGraph, mentioned above.

[DarkStar]

Not looking too good at the moment 
Wasn't too bad this morning, gradually started getting worse late afternoon

Ian

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Cowie]

Am having some really poor ping results since the weekend,previously it's always been around the 20-25ms mark,but this week i've been hitting the 120-140 mark