Ping time majorly out

[Turin]

Here's mine on GW5

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=144ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=142ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=176ms 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 = 142ms, Maximum = 176ms, Average = 159ms 

[tomharrison]

Same problems here on GW5:

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=193ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=189ms 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 = 188ms, Maximum = 204ms, Average = 193ms

The extra Wimbledon traffic could well be the cause of this

[Gary]

Same problems here on GW5:

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=193ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=204ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=189ms 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 = 188ms, Maximum = 204ms, Average = 193ms

The extra Wimbledon traffic could well be the cause of this

But would that point to capacity issues though 

[dujas]

Pings seem to be decreasing? Averaging 38ms now to www.idnet.net, still higher than normal but much better than earlier in the day.

[Steve]

Not for me on .net adsl Normal is 20-25ms

PING idnet.net (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=120.382 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=171.677 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=105.606 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=118.826 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=150.193 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=166.557 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=161.470 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=184.040 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=175.794 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=171.870 ms

--- idnet.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 105.606/152.642/184.040/26.321 ms

[Colin Burns]

not for me either and for anyone interested im on dsl4

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\colin>ping idnet.net

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=178ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=120ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=161ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=172ms 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 = 120ms, Maximum = 178ms, Average = 157ms

C:\Documents and Settings\coli

[tomharrison]

But would that point to capacity issues though 

Hope not

[Gary]

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6002]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\>ping idnet.net

Pinging idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms 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 = 30ms, Maximum = 57ms, Average = 37ms

C:\Users\>

Getting better here too

[Gary]

Hope not

Well things are coming back to life, damn tennis 

[Steve]

So those of you that are having problems are on the 8 Mb service? It's something I need to to consider as I'm currently looking at switching back  

Probably ok it only seems to play up when there's a major sporting event and then BBCiplayer "kills" the internet

[dujas]

Ping average down to 26ms now, be fun to see what effect the semi-finals will have if it's all due to Wimbledon  

[Gary]

Ping average down to 26ms now, be fun to see what effect the semi-finals will have if it's all due to Wimbledon 

I really hope not 

[Steve]

Could job it's not table tennis

[Simon]

Why can't people watch tennis on the bloody television?   

[Arthix]

I guess its related, I had tons of trouble last night, stayed up rather late. From about midnight until 6am browsing was nigh on impossible, It took me approximately 2 hours of refreshing every few minutes to even load idnetters to see if there was a problem. Got better after 6am though and it seems back to normal now.

[Sebby]

That really doesn't sound right, even if there is some congestion.

[Steve]

Here we go again! Its been 25-30ms all morning. I didn't realise women's tennis was that interesting or is it something else.



PING idnet.net (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=125.978 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=140.847 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=131.367 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=145.662 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=66.094 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=121.887 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=79.011 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=107.173 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=76.469 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=105.556 ms

--- idnet.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 66.094/110.004/145.662/26.677 ms

[dujas]

I agree, load issues (on gw5 at least) still somewhat persist. Average ping to www.idnet.net at 11am this morning was 29ms, now at 1.30pm its risen to 53ms. Main difference appears to be the range in fluctuations, whereas previously it was steady.

[dujas]

I noticed this on AAISP's status blog

Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Tennis
People watching the tennis on-line is generating huge load on 20CN and 21CN services resulting in some packet loss at present.

I wonder how many ISPs are struggling with the increased load. The World Cup next year could temporarily send us back to the 56k modem days with iplayer HD usage

[Colin Burns]

but hopefully i wont be on the sick with a broken thumb with no way of getting about board stiff.

[dujas]

Have you tried rebooting your router? It helped somewhat for me, main issue is the fluctuations; the graph of ping against time looks like an outline of the Big Dipper roller-coaster in Blackpool.

[Gary]

The BBC need to see what there iPlayer is doing, I use it myself and its great like the Glastonbury clips, but not to watch live tennis and drag the UK's internet down with it 

[gizmo71]

GW5 - I've noticed poor ping times for iRacing over the last few days.

Before reboot of router:

Code Select Expand

PING 212.69.36.10 (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=160.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=160.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=150.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=150.0 ms

After:

Code Select Expand

PING 212.69.36.10 (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=90.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=20.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=30.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=20.0 ms

Reported speed dropped from 1600 to 1500 - that's still quite high for me and no doubt I'll need a few more reboots before it's down to its customary (and stable) 1200.

[Gary]

GW5 - I've noticed poor ping times for iRacing over the last few days.

Before reboot of router:

Code Select Expand

PING 212.69.36.10 (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=160.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=160.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=150.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=150.0 ms

After:

Code Select Expand

PING 212.69.36.10 (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=90.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=20.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=30.0 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=20.0 ms

Reported speed dropped from 1600 to 1500 - that's still quite high for me and no doubt I'll need a few more reboots before it's down to its customary (and stable) 1200.

AAISP are having the same issue, no idea what its like on the bigger ISP's I dread to think

[gizmo71]

AAISP are having the same issue, no idea what its like on the bigger ISP's I dread to think

Their users probably aren't noticing the difference.