High pings again

[jimc]

Thats strange Just e mailed support and have no reply yet however pings have improved

>ping www.idnet.co.uk

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=89ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=52ms 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 = 50ms, Maximum = 89ms, Average = 61ms

[JohnH]

I honestly don't know what's going on with pings. I'm told that the network is re-balanced and there's no congestion, so I'm left with believing IDNet and blaming BT for poor capacity on the DSLAM VPs and backhaul, or not believing IDNet. The fact that WBC doesn't seem to be suffering suggests to me that it's a BT issue.

Rik, in that case, what I find puzzling is that all the users with problems appear to be on gw5. I don't think I have seen one from anyone on another gateway complaining about speed or pings.

John

[karser]

From what I've seen so far we all appear to be on adsl max too, not seen anyone complain thats on wbc that I can remember.

[Simon]

I am on GW5, and although my pings seem slightly higher than average at the moment, I don't seem to be suffering as much as some.  Pings were high yesterday, so I rebooted my router, but that was over 24 hours ago, and pings now are:

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=49ms 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 = 39ms, Maximum = 50ms, Average = 46ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Simon>ping bbc.co.uk

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.138] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=78ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=121

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.138:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 32ms, Maximum = 78ms, Average = 45ms

[JohnH]

My pings and speed have been all over the place for the last few days, but have been better this afternoon and evening.
I hope it stays that way - I don't want to have to think about moving ISP.  

[karser]

Rik, in that case, what I find puzzling is that all the users with problems appear to be on gw5. I don't think I have seen one from anyone on another gateway complaining about speed or pings.

John

And I would like to add to that this was my ping graph from last Tuesday 14th July the day after the Idnets central keeled over & was rebooted, sadly it only lasted for the one night before it went crazy again.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[glen]

Never did get a reply back from support regarding the mad ping issue, but its still up and down, websites taking forever to load, then its fine then it's slow again. But apart from that everything is fine

[Mohux_Jnr]

I am on GW4 and my pings are crazy any time of the day, 11pm at night and still 100+. I am almost tempted to ask for a switch to GW5 if that is possible because I cannot believe the pings can be any worse than I have experienced over the last couple of months.

Pinging www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=102ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=71ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=44ms 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 = 44ms, Maximum = 102ms, Average = 79ms

[Mohux_Jnr]

Maybe somebody can explain why doing a tracert for me always seems to show GW2 as being the problem?. I am not sure how to decipher the information but that hop does not like me 


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

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  www.routerlogin.com
  2    32 ms    30 ms    57 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    31 ms    31 ms    30 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4   195 ms   272 ms   239 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    41 ms    37 ms    33 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    30 ms    32 ms    34 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.


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

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  www.routerlogin.com
  2    40 ms    32 ms    40 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    59 ms    45 ms    30 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    33 ms    30 ms   300 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    30 ms    31 ms    32 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    30 ms    30 ms    34 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

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

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  www.routerlogin.com
  2    40 ms   110 ms    41 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    37 ms    36 ms    40 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4   187 ms   243 ms    54 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    30 ms    32 ms    31 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    32 ms    32 ms    30 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

[karser]

Hmm cant seem to put it down to just one myself:

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

C:\Documents and Settings\Karser>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  192.168.1.1
  2    66 ms    45 ms    42 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3   117 ms   101 ms    92 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4   249 ms   275 ms   292 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    41 ms    35 ms    57 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    90 ms    87 ms    75 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Documents and Settings\Karser>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  192.168.1.1
  2   171 ms    64 ms    74 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3     *       53 ms    33 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    25 ms    31 ms    45 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    31 ms    39 ms    40 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    86 ms    62 ms    70 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Documents and Settings\Karser>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  192.168.1.1
  2   117 ms   123 ms    79 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3    53 ms    58 ms    78 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4    41 ms    37 ms    28 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    51 ms    34 ms    40 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    35 ms    40 ms    38 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Documents and Settings\Karser>

[Mohux_Jnr]

No, your right, the whole lot is a bag of spanners.


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

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms 
  2   129 ms   129 ms   121 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3   121 ms   169 ms   158 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4   168 ms   163 ms   160 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5   182 ms   185 ms   185 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6   124 ms   125 ms   127 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

[zappaDPJ]

Maybe somebody can explain why doing a tracert for me always seems to show GW2 as being the problem?. I am not sure how to decipher the information but that hop does not like me 

As far as I am aware pings returned from intermediate hops don't really tell you much unless they are consistently missing (*) which is an indication of packet loss. It could well be that that particular hop has low priority on ping requests.

It's the ping to the destination address that really counts. I'm sure someone will correct me if that's not the case

[MarkE]

I am on GW4 and my pings are crazy any time of the day, 11pm at night and still 100+. I am almost tempted to ask for a switch to GW5 if that is possible because I cannot believe the pings can be any worse than I have experienced over the last couple of months.

You do not want to be on gw5 with me im seeing 300ms here right now good riddance idnet tbh 

[juiceuk]

I too am GW5 and ADSL Max but I am nice and stable since my line was fixed the other week. Games have been constantly smooth as silk for the first time since what seems like when the new pipe was installed.

C:\Documents and Settings\deano>ping www.idnet.co.uk -n 20

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
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=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
   Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
   Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 24ms

My ping was slightly lower before the new pipe awhile back but I'm not worried about that now that it's stopped stuttering "choking" in game. It could have been my line all along though and it going down slowly before it was fixed.

[glen]

I too am GW5 and ADSL Max but I am nice and stable since my line was fixed the other week. Games have been constantly smooth as silk for the first time since what seems like when the new pipe was installed.

C:\Documents and Settings\deano>ping www.idnet.co.uk -n 20

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
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=25ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
   Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
   Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 24ms

My ping was slightly lower before the new pipe awhile back but I'm not worried about that now that it's stopped stuttering "choking" in game. It could have been my line all along though and it going down slowly before it was fixed.

Iwould love to be in your situation .

[zappaDPJ]

My post above didn't quite turn out as intended so take two

Maybe somebody can explain why doing a tracert for me always seems to show GW2 as being the problem?. I am not sure how to decipher the information but that hop does not like me 

As far as I am aware pings returned from intermediate hops don't really tell you much unless they are consistently missing (*) which is an indication of packet loss. It could well be that that particular hop has low priority on ping requests.

It's the ping to the destination address that really counts. I'm sure someone will correct me if that's not the case

[Mohux_Jnr]

Many thanks, sounds logical, unlike the fact that many people do not have an issue and others are at their wits end with this ping debacle. Location, router or hardware differences or just the way the wind is blowing, its damn frustrating if you are a sufferer.

[zappaDPJ]

I can fully sympathise. I run a large on-line gaming clan as well as a World of Warcraft Guild so I totally understand the problems caused by high latency 

[Lance]

Zappa is spot on about the intermediate hops not nattering unless they show packet loss.

[Rik]

I tend to agree with you, Jim. Based on all I've read here, I believe that exchange, and possibly backhaul congestion, is behind this.

[jimc]

back to normal this morning ?

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

>ping www.idnet.co.uk

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=50ms 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 = 50ms, Maximum = 54ms, Average = 51ms

>

regards
Jim C

[Sebby]

Still quite high, Jim, even for a heavily interleaved line, but certainly an improvement.

[Fox]

Well for the first time in a long time my ping seems to be ok 


Pinging www.idnet.com [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms 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 = 40ms, Maximum = 40ms, Average = 40ms

I hope it lasts. I havent rebooted my router since yesterday....so far so good 

[Rapier Racer]

On gw5 here and Max, today after a day or so of stability in the ping department, pings of 41 average I find that they have indeed returned to the lows I used to enjoy 21ms average to idnet.net and multiplay.co.uk.

Hope the good old days are returning.

[Rik]