Speeds and pings

[spiral]

Just got home and everythings slow.

Anybody else experiencing really bad speeds and above normal pings?

[Rik]

Mine are bang on normal here, 22ms to the BBC, interleaving on.

[AvengerUK]

my pings are spot on - 20ms to BBC - although IS spiking to around 50ms :/

This is on a "old fashioned" 1mb fixed line (which is also @ full speed dl)

Are you on MAX spiral? May be profile related

EDIT: Spoke to soon, although pings are on the whole low, there are spikes, 4 in 5 ping requests show a ping over 50ms. Have you asked/contacted support spiral? - L8nc graph for me is showing a "sad story" tonight!

EDIT AGAIN: some pings: (bbc)

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=183ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=123

[AvengerUK]

Would edit again, but its timed out

Somethings cirtainally up..my "ingame" pings are now near enough constantly over 100

[Rik]

Still OK here.

ping www.bbc.co.uk

Pinging www.bbc.net.uk [212.58.224.86] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.86: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.86: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.86: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.86: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=250

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.86:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 20ms, Maximum = 28ms, Average = 22ms

ping 212.58.224.131

Pinging 212.58.224.131 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=122
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=122
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=122
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=122

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 20ms, Maximum = 25ms, Average = 21ms

[AvengerUK]

ping bbc.co.uk

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.131] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=103ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=442ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=154ms TTL=123

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 31ms, Maximum = 442ms, Average = 182ms

[DAB Badboy]

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.131] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=123

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 18ms, Average = 17ms

[AvengerUK]

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

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

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.131] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=123

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 18ms, Maximum = 19ms, Average = 18ms

C:\Documents and Settings\Simon>

Strange :/

[cavillas]

OK Here still

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



Pinging 212.58.224.131 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=123

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 20ms, Maximum = 21ms, Average = 20ms



Pinging 212.58.224.131 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=123

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 20ms, Maximum = 24ms, Average = 21ms

[spiral]

Pinging www.bbc.net.uk [212.58.224.125] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.125: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.125: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.125: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.125: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=250

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.125:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 25ms, Maximum = 26ms, Average = 25ms

Mine are better now but there usually 13

Also playing battlefield pings were 60 instaed of my usual 20.

[AvengerUK]

Just been doing a few tests via a AOL 1mb line - (for simple bordom!) - by one  pinging BBC, two speed tests, and three pinging my Idnet connection.

Speeds: Virtually the same, however AOL much more stable
Pings: Now, both the same. (20ms/19ms) - although AOL more stable
Pinging me: Major packetloss - however pings stable.

Doesent really say much, if anything! - Puzzles me though how AOL can be more "stable" then the IDnet connection! - So you can see what i mean ive enabled public viewing of my l8nc graph again (not for ever mind).

NOTE: Im not moaning! - Im merely posting "my two cents" in order to "attempt" to help spiral - however, as in my L8nc graph, there does seem to be a issue??

[RobMc]

I've always read with interest these posts on pings as mine is very so-so as can be seen below

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6000]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\rjm>ping bbc.co.uk

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.131] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=123
Reply from 212.58.224.131: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=123

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.131:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 38ms, Maximum = 40ms, Average = 38ms

C:\Users\rjm>


I've got interleaving on, I'm synced at 8128 Kbps and get high speeds. I no longer play online games so speed is more important to me then latency, but 38ms seems a bit big compared to others quoted here.

Ho hum

Rob.

[Lance]

It is thought that interleaving adds between 20-30ms on to your ping (except in Riks case for some reason!). Taking this into account I would say your pings are fine!

[Rik]

I can't explain my ping times either, Lance, but the router is definitely showing interleaving on. Comms is still a dark art.

[spiral]

Idnet is the first place i've had troubles with ping, they were stable constantly at my previous ISPs.

[AvengerUK]

There used to be a problem with pings, a long while back now. That was fixed somehow, but i left at around the time it was fixed! - Where i moved to was 100% stable, until capacity problems came in...so i came back! - Pings on the whole stable first week, then capacity issue, then stable after re-balance...

...Well atleast, until last night. I havent raised it with CS as of yet - dont plan to, until it happens again anyway (IF it happens again, chances are it wont )
Have you contacted them Spiral?

[spiral]

No thought i'd see what people were experiencing here. I will check them tonight when i get home from work. And if it's still not right will give them a call.

I didn't really have any problems when they were waiting for the new pipe speeds were slightly slower but nothing to complain about and pings were ok. It's becoming a hassle now though as like most people i only get to use my connection in the evenings and on weekends.

(Daydream mode) The good old days of broadband, when i first got connected it just worked, whenever i did a speed test it was always a solid 477 on adslguide speedtest and my pings were solid day and night to. I never had a disconnection the whole time i had my 512 connection.

[AvengerUK]

(Daydream mode) The good old days of broadband, when i first got connected it just worked, whenever i did a speed test it was always a solid 477 on adslguide speedtest and my pings were solid day and night to. I never had a disconnection the whole time i had my 512 connection.

Ahh yes, those were the days! Suprisingly, those days lasted 1 whole year, 512kb, never failed in any shape or form....it was AOL aswell!!

[Rik]

I must remind you, Avenger, that we do have a language code in here, and such epithets as AOL are questionable... 

[Rik]

I never had a disconnection the whole time i had my 512 connection.

Max is very much a mixed blessing, particularly for those of us with poor lines. OTOH, I'm still getting 2.5 times the speed I could under 'vanilla' rules, so for me it's been worth it.

[CaptainSlow]

I must remind you, Avenger, that we do have a language code in here, and such epithets as AOL are questionable... 

You can't say things like that on here Rik, shame on you! I'm not repeating the three letter acronym you just used, but it's not cricket old chap, I'd suggest a mouthwash now! 

[RobMc]

LOL, a few years ago when I was playing Half-Life TFC via 64kbs ISDN I was consider a LPB (low ping Bas...) for having a ping less then 100ms, how things have changed

Rob.

[spiral]

It's all BT's fault anyway, as they haven't upgraded there network and make it so expensive for the ISP's to do also.

In the good old days the majority of ISP's were great and you picked what offered the best price or extras, now there's a handful of decent ones.

[Rik]

That's partly BT and partly the mass market arriving. You have to remember the incredible speed at which ADSL has grown.

[Rik]

I'd suggest a mouthwash now! 

Gone to get the soap, sorry...

Actually, I used to 'work' AOL for Adobe years ago. I truly cannot repeat what we called it without having to ban myself.

[CaptainSlow]

Gone to get the soap, sorry...

Actually, I used to 'work' AOL for Adobe years ago. I truly cannot repeat what we called it without having to ban myself.

Now you've done it again, is this a record attempt we just don't know about yet?

[Rik]

It's more of a special dispensation due to my years working there.

[AvengerUK]

If im honest, my opinions about AOL see them as "highly rated" - backed up by a family members account with them currently! - the service was brillient and flawless... Only reason i left was to save money...

...Im going to need some bleech now, i think...

EDIT: OOooh, remembered, the new packages that AOL Might, MIGHT be introducing may include a free laptop...with uni later this year, i may have to consider it eventually!

[Rik]

Provided you don't mention Tis...., we can let you off.

[spiral]

That's partly BT and partly the mass market arriving. You have to remember the incredible speed at which ADSL has grown.

True