High pings again

Glenn · Nov 02, 2009, 18:07:00

I'm still at work

Simon · Nov 02, 2009, 18:08:14

Quote from: Baz on Nov 02, 2009, 18:05:09
WOAH!!!!!!!!!!!! hope thats nothing on my system but I clicked your image Juiceuk and got this

Press Enter to agree to use Imagevenue.com in accordance with our rules.
ENTER

read TOS

and a page of porn

So did I.

juiceuk · Nov 02, 2009, 18:08:27

Ah sorry I don't get ads using hostman. I said the pictures are family safe too so they should not be putting porn ads. Think I'll not be using them from now on.

psp83 · Nov 02, 2009, 18:08:43

Quote from: Baz on Nov 02, 2009, 18:05:09
WOAH!!!!!!!!!!!! hope thats nothing on my system but I clicked your image Juiceuk and got this

Press Enter to agree to use Imagevenue.com in accordance with our rules.
ENTER

read TOS

and a page of porn

Damn, got the popup but not the porn

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:09:18

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:09:40

Quote from: Baz on Nov 02, 2009, 18:05:09
WOAH!!!!!!!!!!!! hope thats nothing on my system but I clicked your image Juiceuk and got this

Press Enter to agree to use Imagevenue.com in accordance with our rules.
ENTER

read TOS

and a page of porn

Same here, Baz, I've removed the links and posted the images.

Glenn · Nov 02, 2009, 18:10:03

The proxy blocked it for me

Simon · Nov 02, 2009, 18:10:28

Quote from: juiceuk on Nov 02, 2009, 18:08:27
Ah sorry I don't get ads using hostman. I said the pictures are family safe too so they should not be putting porn ads. Think I'll not be using them from now on.

It would be appreciated if you didn't. There's a few here with heart conditions.

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:11:15

Hey, if I've got to go, I want to go with a smile on my face.

Glenn · Nov 02, 2009, 18:11:50

Sue will want to know why

Mohux_Jnr · Nov 02, 2009, 18:13:38

I knew requesting my Mac code would do the trick. My pings have been a rock steady "17" for the past 2 hours after a reboot. I see a glimmer of light at the end of a very long tunnel.

Can someone confirm that .51 ip is the new hostlink?. If so, will turning off my router tonight mean there is a chance I could get put on a less reliable ip tomorrow?.

I dont want anything to change, so if the IDNET staff could tippy toe around and breath less deeply it would be appreciated.

The first time in 5 months my pings have been stable.

C:\Users\Jons>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 www.routerlogin.com [192.168.0.1]
2 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net [212.69.63.51]
3 34 ms 17 ms 18 ms telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

4 18 ms 17 ms 17 ms redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
5 20 ms 18 ms 17 ms redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
6 18 ms 17 ms 17 ms www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Jons>ping www.idnet.net

Pinging www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes o
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=17ms 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% lo
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 16ms, Maximum = 17ms, Average = 16ms

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:16:15

51 appears to be the hostlink, Mo, as does 101/2.

Steve · Nov 02, 2009, 18:16:27

These are on the central pipe, I am waiting for Baz first

PING www.idnet.net (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=12.046 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=14.550 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=12.548 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=13.415 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=13.369 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=12.430 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=15.436 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=13.734 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=13.850 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=11.647 ms

--- www.idnet.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 11.647/13.303/15.436/1.107 ms

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:17:49

Of course, as people move to the hostlink, the centrals will get faster anyway...

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:18:45

Quote from: stevethegas on Nov 02, 2009, 18:16:27
These are on the central pipe, I am waiting for Baz first

PING www.idnet.net (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=12.046 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=14.550 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=12.548 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=13.415 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=13.369 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=12.430 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=15.436 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=13.734 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=13.850 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=11.647 ms

--- www.idnet.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 11.647/13.303/15.436/1.107 ms

hey dont hang about for me Steve, feel free to switch

Steve · Nov 02, 2009, 18:26:29

Ok then

PING www.idnet.net (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=12.576 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=14.575 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=13.458 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=14.094 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=13.187 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=14.508 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=16.394 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=11.234 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=12.515 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=14.719 ms

--- www.idnet.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 11.234/13.726/16.394/1.376 ms

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:26:37

the latest from mine is

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

Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=47ms 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 = 46ms, Maximum = 47ms, Average = 46ms

but I think ive always been about that,cant really remember.

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:45:06

after re boot

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

Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=49ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=49ms 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 = 48ms, Maximum = 49ms, Average = 48ms

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:45:52

Don't ping the BBC, Baz, use www.idnet.net.

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:46:58

Pinging idnet.net [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=49ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=49ms 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 = 49ms, Maximum = 49ms, Average = 49ms

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:47:48

Now try a tracert...

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:48:53

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

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
2 50 ms 50 ms 52 ms telehouse-gw2-lo1.idnet.net [212.69.63.51]
3 50 ms 50 ms 50 ms telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

4 49 ms 49 ms 50 ms redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
5 50 ms 50 ms 49 ms redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
6 50 ms 50 ms 50 ms www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:53:40

You appear to be on the hostlink.

Baz · Nov 02, 2009, 18:55:21

right so thats ok now then?. but pings have got slightly worse

Rik · Nov 02, 2009, 18:55:57

Give support a ring/email in the morning and they can check for you.