High pings again

Started by glen, Jul 20, 2009, 10:34:43

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 ... 34
User actions

glen

Jul 20, 2009, 10:34:43
Anyone else having high ping problems, slow response time?
Here's some stats definately not right, but I've been in touch with support hopefully the can resolve it.

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

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>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=194ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=206ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=185ms 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 = 181ms, Maximum = 206ms, Average = 191ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>ping www.jolt.co.uk

Pinging www.jolt.co.uk [84.234.17.86] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 84.234.17.86: bytes=32 time=162ms TTL=124
Reply from 84.234.17.86: bytes=32 time=192ms TTL=124
Reply from 84.234.17.86: bytes=32 time=202ms TTL=124
Reply from 84.234.17.86: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=124

Ping statistics for 84.234.17.86:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 137ms, Maximum = 202ms, Average = 173ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>

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

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>tracert www.idnet.com

Tracing route to www.idnet.com [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   175 ms   199 ms   200 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3   239 ms   177 ms   166 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]

  4   199 ms   179 ms   152 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5   176 ms   172 ms   177 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6   173 ms   186 ms   195 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>
They must find it difficult...
Those who have taken authority as the truth,
Rather than truth as the authority

Rik

#1
Jul 20, 2009, 10:35:46
Normal here. :(

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=27ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=26ms 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 = 25ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 26ms

Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

Bill

#2
Jul 20, 2009, 10:51:34
And here:

PING www.idnet.com (212.69.36.10): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=19.312 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=19.077 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=18.950 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=18.933 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=19.373 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=19.046 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=19.018 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=18.230 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=19.188 ms
64 bytes from 212.69.36.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=59 time=18.406 ms

--- www.idnet.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 18.230/18.953/19.373/0.348 ms
Bill
BQMs-  IPv4  IPv6

coreservers

#3
Jul 20, 2009, 11:24:42
you sure you've not got any trojans on your pc?
If you truly believe you need to pick a mobile phone that 'says something' about your personality, don't bother. You don't have a personality. A mental illness, maybe - but not a personality

karlak

#4
Jul 20, 2009, 11:25:20
High pings and half speed for me this morning



Pinging www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=144ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=168ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=168ms 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 = 144ms, Maximum = 180ms, Average = 165ms





Rik

#5
Jul 20, 2009, 11:26:36
Have you spoken to support? I've been told the network is back to normal this morning.
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

glen

#6
Jul 20, 2009, 11:30:46
Yes Rik spoke to support at 9.30 this morning,still the same but.
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>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=165ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=173ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=205ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=168ms 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 = 165ms, Maximum = 205ms, Average = 177ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Glen>
They must find it difficult...
Those who have taken authority as the truth,
Rather than truth as the authority

karlak

#7
Jul 20, 2009, 11:32:36
Support have just sorted mine for me - now back to normal.  Give them a call

Rik

#8
Jul 20, 2009, 11:33:10
Could they give you a reason for the high pings, Glen?
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

karlak

#9
Jul 20, 2009, 11:37:44
Quote from: Rik on Jul 20, 2009, 11:33:10
Could they give you a reason for the high pings, Glen?

I was told they "reset my session", but looks like it was probably like it since yesterday.  My son was complaining of lag on the Xbox yesterday so sounds likely.  Looks like mine was a local exchange issue that a reset cleared...

Rik

#10
Jul 20, 2009, 11:39:20
Thanks.  :thumb:
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

glen

#11
Jul 20, 2009, 11:44:54
No Rik, just said they'd be in touch, so just have to wait.
They must find it difficult...
Those who have taken authority as the truth,
Rather than truth as the authority

Rik

#12
Jul 20, 2009, 11:50:20
Keep us posted will you?
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

JB

#13
Jul 20, 2009, 12:11:58

My pings (from Cheshire) are poor too. I have the electric company calling soon to change the meter so I won't phone IDNet just now.

On gw5 by the way.



[attachment deleted by admin]
JB

'Keyboard not detected ~ Press F1 to continue'

Gary

#14
Jul 20, 2009, 12:21:23
My pings Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6002]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.Pinging idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=114ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms 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 = 32ms, Maximum = 114ms, Average = 62ms

Not so great when all is well  >:(
Damned, if you do damned if you don't

Rik

#15
Jul 20, 2009, 12:23:28
Bit lumpy, Gary. Might be worth doing an extended test with the -n parameter, say -n 100?
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

Gary

#16
Jul 20, 2009, 12:24:42
Quote from: Rik on Jul 20, 2009, 12:23:28
Bit lumpy, Gary. Might be worth doing an extended test with the -n parameter, say -n 100?
Ok will do  :thumb:
Damned, if you do damned if you don't

Rapier Racer

#17
Jul 20, 2009, 12:30:35
Mine are the same, all was good this morning at 10.10am pings to idnet.net were 40-42. Now my pings have shot up again tho average is 180ms :O (Speed still poor at 10.10am)

Speeds not been the same for days either best I got was 4.5meg at 2am the other morning, 6.5meg profile too. I'll wait till midweek then maybe call support since they just let me know the Interleave is going off in the next 24hours.

Aaarrghh!

Simon

#18
Jul 20, 2009, 12:35:56
My pings are also high this morning - just about to try rebooting the router.

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

Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=150ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=179ms 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 = 150ms, Maximum = 179ms, Average = 162ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Simon>ping idnet.com

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=184ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=152ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=185ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=148ms 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 = 148ms, Maximum = 185ms, Average = 167ms
Simon.
--
This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

dujas

#19
Jul 20, 2009, 12:40:10
Ping average (to www.idnet.net) is 28ms on gw5 here.

Simon

#20
Jul 20, 2009, 12:42:47
Following reboot, pings are better, but there seems to be a bump on the tracert:

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

Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=121
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=34ms 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 = 33ms, Maximum = 36ms, Average = 34ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Simon>ping idnet.com

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

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms 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

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 = 35ms, Average = 31ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Simon>tracert idnet.com

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

  1     1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  home [192.168.1.254]
  2    32 ms    37 ms    37 ms  telehouse-gw2-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.55]
  3   146 ms   433 ms   126 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]
  4    31 ms    31 ms    37 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    31 ms    31 ms    31 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    35 ms    31 ms    31 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.
Simon.
--
This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

Rik

#21
Jul 20, 2009, 12:46:17
I'm seeing it one hop later:

tracert www.idnet.com

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

  1     1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  home [192.168.1.254]
  2    25 ms    27 ms    25 ms  telehouse-gw4-lo2.idnet.net [212.69.63.99]
  3    26 ms    27 ms    25 ms  telehouse-gw3-g0-1-400.idnet.net [212.69.63.243]
  4    37 ms    54 ms   287 ms  redbus-gw2-g0-1-331.idnet.net [212.69.63.5]
  5    27 ms    25 ms    25 ms  redbus-gw1-fa2-0-300.idnet.net [212.69.63.225]
  6    25 ms    25 ms    25 ms  www.idnet.net [212.69.36.10]

Trace complete.
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

Gary

#22
Jul 20, 2009, 12:49:13
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6002]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\>ping www.idnet.net -n 100

Pinging www.idnet.net [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=48ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=85ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=107ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=101ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=72ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
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=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms 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
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=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=84ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=109ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=59
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=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=34ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms 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
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=59
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
    Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 99, Lost = 1 (1% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 29ms, Maximum = 175ms, Average = 38ms

lot of pings there, Rik  :)
Damned, if you do damned if you don't

Rik

#23
Jul 20, 2009, 12:56:09
Reasonable overall but some big spikes, Gary. Coupled with the tracerts, it makes you wonder if there's a router which is a bit busy?
Rik
--------------------

This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.

Simon

#24
Jul 20, 2009, 12:57:21
I've sent mine to support - awaiting a response.  :)
Simon.
--
This post reflects my own views, opinions and experience, not those of IDNet.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 ... 34
User actions