View Full Version : Network problems Tonight ?
Getting very bad lag on browsing tonight to many sites - Traces seem to show why :(
Target Name: www.3dgamers.com (http://www.3dgamers.com)
IP: 209.8.17.25
Date/Time: 04/08/2005 20:07:23
2 6 ms 7 ms 8 ms 13 ms 7 ms 6 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
3 16 ms 7 ms 6 ms 7 ms 8 ms 15 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.45]
4 7 ms 7 ms 12 ms 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
5 285 ms 270 ms 231 ms 271 ms 258 ms 266 ms tele-ic-2-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.86]
6 8 ms 8 ms 10 ms 9 ms 23 ms 9 ms cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [195.66.224.167]
7 108 ms 106 ms 106 ms 107 ms 109 ms 107 ms www6.3dgamers.com [209.8.17.25]
Target Name: www.ev1servers.net (http://www.ev1servers.net)
IP: 207.218.223.142
Date/Time: 04/08/2005 20:12:20
2 5 ms 7 ms 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
3 170 ms 6 ms 7 ms 8 ms 7 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.45]
4 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
5 13 ms 8 ms 6 ms 8 ms 7 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
6 8 ms 9 ms 17 ms 9 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 314 ms 326 ms 318 ms 321 ms 323 ms [212.250.14.62]
8 390 ms 386 ms 389 ms 393 ms 393 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
9 409 ms 407 ms 409 ms 417 ms 406 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
10 408 ms 407 ms 411 ms 413 ms 406 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
11 419 ms 415 ms 422 ms 426 ms 416 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
12 432 ms 430 ms 437 ms 438 ms 436 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
13 119 ms 122 ms 119 ms 120 ms 120 ms everyonesinternet.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.12.178]
14 * * * * * [-]
Target Name: www.bbc.co.uk (http://www.bbc.co.uk)
IP: 212.58.224.81
Date/Time: 04/08/2005 20:12:51
2 9 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
3 11 ms 7 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
4 6 ms 6 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
5 232 ms 252 ms tele-ic-2-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.86]
6 8 ms 8 ms ntl-ge2-8.prt0.thdo.bbc.co.uk [212.58.239.217]
7 13 ms 8 ms [212.58.238.153]
8 8 ms 9 ms www30.thdo.bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.81]
Every one has a massive spike as it leaves NTL it seems.
Anyone else seeing this ?
cheers
Ian
Browsing normally here N Manchester.
homealone
04-08-2005, 20:30
believe me, I am no expert, but IIRC the tele-ic routers favour 'normal' traffic over pings, so hop times will appear to vary with load. I was always told it is the final hop that shows the true speed - and from those traces the first two are poor, but the one to the BBC is spot-on.
But having said that, the BBC trace went through 'wan64.inet', rather than 'wan62.inet', so maybe there is a local routing problem?
like I say I'm a :dunce: at this ;)
08/04/05 20:34:36 Fast traceroute http://www.3dgamers.com/
Trace http://www.3dgamers.com/ (209.8.17.24) ...
3 80.4.47.161 24ms 13ms 13ms TTL: 0 (nott-t2cam1-a-v128.inet.ntl.com ok)
4 80.1.79.77 13ms 18ms 84ms TTL: 0 (nott-t2core-a-ge-wan73.inet.ntl.com ok)
5 62.253.188.33 21ms 65ms 17ms TTL: 0 (lee-bb-a-so-200-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
6 62.253.185.238 22ms 20ms 24ms TTL: 0 (pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
7 62.253.185.82 26ms 19ms 20ms TTL: 0 (tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
8 195.66.224.167 162ms 42ms 21ms TTL: 0 (cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net fraudulent rDNS)
9 209.8.17.24 116ms 123ms 174ms TTL: 54 (www5.3dgamers.com ok)
Pingplotter is now showing up to 50% packet loss on those traces..others sites affected are:
Target Name: forum.eagames.co.uk
IP: 159.153.177.38
Date/Time: 04/08/2005 20:32:56
2 7 ms 7 ms 5 ms 9 ms 12 ms 8 ms 7 ms 8 ms 7 ms 6 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
3 7 ms 6 ms 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms 11 ms 7 ms 8 ms 6 ms 6 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
4 7 ms 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
5 241 ms 230 ms 225 ms * 208 ms 240 ms * 248 ms 251 ms 270 ms tele-ic-2-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.86]
6 * 9 ms 8 ms * 7 ms 8 ms 8 ms 9 ms 9 ms 8 ms [212.250.14.54]
7 10 ms 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms 224 ms 13 ms 8 ms 10 ms 8 ms 10 ms gi3-0-sar2.lon.router.colt.net [212.74.64.130]
8 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 8 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms [80.169.175.2]
9 9 ms 9 ms 13 ms 13 ms 9 ms 13 ms 10 ms 16 ms 8 ms 11 ms [159.153.156.3]
10 8 ms 9 ms 17 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 4v4.easports.com [159.153.177.38]
Target Name: jolt.co.uk
IP: 82.133.85.65
Date/Time: 04/08/2005 20:36:13
2 7 ms 6 ms 6 ms wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.185]
3 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms popl-t2core-b-ge-wan63.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.189]
4 13 ms 8 ms 8 ms pop-bb-b-so-320-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.69]
5 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.78]
6 249 ms 250 ms 266 ms tele-ic-2-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.86]
7 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms lon1-10.nildram.net [213.208.106.169]
8 9 ms 10 ms 16 ms [84.12.225.130]
9 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms jolt-gw.nildram.net [195.149.20.126]
10 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms [82.133.85.65]
Looks like a problem :(
__________________
believe me, I am no expert, but IIRC the tele-ic routers favour 'normal' traffic over pings, so hop times will appear to vary with load. I was always told it is the final hop that shows the true speed - and from those traces the first two are poor, but the one to the BBC is spot-on.
Yeah, I agree, but in this case my web browsing to those sites is awful (any many others) and download speeds are terrible (sub 20k)
homealone
04-08-2005, 20:52
Yeah, I agree, but in this case my web browsing to those sites is awful (any many others) and download speeds are terrible (sub 20k)
I just got the same spike on that tele-ic link
08/04/05 20:40:22 Fast traceroute http://www.jolt.co.uk
Trace http://www.jolt.co.uk (82.133.85.65) ...
1 10.189.183.254 11ms 11ms 37ms TTL: 0 (No rDNS)
2 10.189.183.254 11ms 9ms 32ms TTL: 0 (No rDNS)
3 80.4.47.161 12ms 14ms 55ms TTL: 0 (nott-t2cam1-a-v128.inet.ntl.com ok)
4 80.1.79.61 12ms 13ms 14ms TTL: 0 (nott-t2core-a-ge-wan72.inet.ntl.com ok)
5 62.253.188.33 14ms 15ms 15ms TTL: 0 (lee-bb-a-so-200-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
6 62.253.185.238 20ms 22ms 20ms TTL: 0 (pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
7 213.105.172.78 19ms 28ms 19ms TTL: 0 (pop-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
8 62.253.185.86 250ms 282ms 393ms TTL: 0 (tele-ic-2-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
9 213.208.106.169 19ms 32ms 36ms TTL: 0 (lon1-10.nildram.net probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
10 84.12.225.130 59ms 120ms 66ms TTL: 0 (No rDNS)
11 195.149.20.126 26ms 37ms 36ms TTL: 0 (jolt-gw.nildram.net fraudulent rDNS)
12 82.133.85.65 20ms 33ms 21ms TTL: 53 (No rDNS)
I have no other issues, when normally surfing, but if you are trying to game it may be a problem ????
can't offer any solutions, sorry ..
Chrysalis
04-08-2005, 21:12
It is true icmp is normally low priority but it should only show maybe the odd jump not persistant high ms, that usually indicates some sort of problem on the hop.
there was 2 problems with my connection yesterday, the one on the first hop I got fixed by my contact in ntl was routing through a bad router, the other is on the edge of the ntl network.
1 7 ms 8 ms 7 ms 10.8.143.254
2 6 ms 6 ms 7 ms leic-t2cam1-b-ge914.inet.ntl.com [82.3.35.213]
3 6 ms 12 ms 6 ms leic-t2core-b-ge-220-0.inet.ntl.com [82.3.33.138
]
4 8 ms 11 ms 9 ms nth-bb-b-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.114]
5 11 ms 14 ms 9 ms pop-bb-a-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.14]
6 275 ms 264 ms 264 ms tele-ic-2-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.86]
7 14 ms 15 ms 14 ms cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [195.66.224.167]
8 193 ms 190 ms 189 ms 63.218.51.46
9 190 ms 191 ms 191 ms unknown.xeex.net [216.152.255.74]
10 191 ms 219 ms 190 ms 10.10.255.3
pccwtbn also has a problem which affected the rest of the route.
Its ok this morning, I wonder if its load related, we'll see tonight I guess ?
Thanks guys.
Ignition
05-08-2005, 08:47
It is true icmp is normally low priority but it should only show maybe the odd jump not persistant high ms, that usually indicates some sort of problem on the hop.
Wrong dude it depends on the model, make, and placement of the router, along with its' config. Foundry boxes especially are bad for it.
Anyway this has been done to death, the tele-ic routers have been upgraded and are now extremely meaty boxes indeed, and are running well within capacity.
So long as what's at the end of the trace is alright then all is fine, there was an issue but it appears to be outside the ntl network, no issues reported with the ntl core or edge last night.
Still bad tonight, seems NTL currently has a very bad connection to Cogent :(
Target Name: www.filefront.com (http://www.filefront.com)
IP: 66.117.8.41
Date/Time: 05/08/2005 21:49:52
2 6 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.185]
3 7 ms 8 ms popl-t2core-b-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.193]
4 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-b-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.117]
5 8 ms 11 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
6 121 ms 117 ms [212.250.14.62]
7 193 ms 188 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
8 209 ms 210 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
9 208 ms 210 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
10 222 ms 222 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
11 237 ms 245 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
12 268 ms 267 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6]
13 269 ms 270 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77]
14 374 ms 373 ms filefront-allyance.dmarc.cogentco.com [38.112.29.134]
15 374 ms 373 ms node.www.la.ioerror.com [66.117.8.41]
Less than 20k speed yet again :(
Chrysalis
05-08-2005, 22:26
Wrong dude it depends on the model, make, and placement of the router, along with its' config. Foundry boxes especially are bad for it.
Anyway this has been done to death, the tele-ic routers have been upgraded and are now extremely meaty boxes indeed, and are running well within capacity.
So long as what's at the end of the trace is alright then all is fine, there was an issue but it appears to be outside the ntl network, no issues reported with the ntl core or edge last night.
Fair enough, as you said it doesnt cause any affect so all seems well. the other problem I mentioned wasnt on the trace I posted and was fixed by my contact and was affecting the rest of the trace.
Still bad tonight, seems NTL currently has a very bad connection to Cogent :(
Target Name: www.filefront.com (http://www.filefront.com)
IP: 66.117.8.41
Date/Time: 05/08/2005 21:49:52
2 6 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.185]
3 7 ms 8 ms popl-t2core-b-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.193]
4 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-b-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.117]
5 8 ms 11 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
6 121 ms 117 ms [212.250.14.62]
7 193 ms 188 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
8 209 ms 210 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
9 208 ms 210 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
10 222 ms 222 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
11 237 ms 245 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
12 268 ms 267 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6]
13 269 ms 270 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77]
14 374 ms 373 ms filefront-allyance.dmarc.cogentco.com [38.112.29.134]
15 374 ms 373 ms node.www.la.ioerror.com [66.117.8.41]
Less than 20k speed yet again :(
No, filefront has been slow as of late and as of I just tried to dl something. Just because you are downloading slow/er then you want, doesn't always mean its in the ntl part of the chain.
Chrysalis
06-08-2005, 03:40
I believe the cogent problem is linked to linx itself in london, unfortently all these us providers who use cogent in a supposedbly bgp mix tend to carry on using cogent even when routing problems persist, I would guess to save money, but in this case I think this isnt ntl's problem.
The first large hop (212.250.14.62) appears to belong to NTL (according to Neotrace).
Looks like a problem they need to deal with.
I've contacted EV1 servers and they are looking into it from their end as well, but I think the problem is with NTL and not them.
:(
Tons of sites are affected - Newshosting/Filefront/Newsreader and anything hosted at EV1
Chrysalis
07-08-2005, 00:45
Well I am only forwarding what I know. There is a confirmed problem that the cogent link to linx is fubared possible at max load but nevertherless performing badly, since a lot of traffic goes through linx I put 2 and 2 together.
EV1 are the only ones who can solve this, they have a magnitude of providers they can use, should they wish to do so they can reroute uk traffic through a different provider but for cost reasons they are probably sticking to cogent. Cogent is america's fastest growing backbone and is by far the cheapest and more and more of their datacentre's are hooking up to it lured by the prices ($10 per mbit) but the cogent transatlantic link is congested to the hilt.
Hopefully you are right, this is the trace now:
Target Name: www.filefront.com (http://www.filefront.com)
IP: 66.117.8.41
Date/Time: 07/08/2005 08:56:50
2 6 ms 6 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 8 ms 8 ms wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.185]
4 7 ms 7 ms popl-t2core-b-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.193]
5 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-b-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.117]
6 9 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 9 ms 9 ms [212.250.14.62]
8 79 ms 79 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
9 100 ms 100 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
10 100 ms 101 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
11 111 ms 111 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
12 125 ms 127 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
13 156 ms 157 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6]
14 159 ms 159 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77]
15 159 ms 160 ms filefront-allyance.dmarc.cogentco.com [38.112.29.134]
16 160 ms 160 ms node.www.la.ioerror.com [66.117.8.41]
As you can see that hop is now low (9) and all is well.
I guess tonight it will be bad again :(
cheers
Ian
Ignition
07-08-2005, 09:40
The first large hop (212.250.14.62) appears to belong to NTL (according to Neotrace).
Looks like a problem they need to deal with.
inetnum: 212.250.14.0 - 212.250.15.255
netname: NTL
descr: NTL Infrastructure - Private Peering
Looks like the direct private link between ntl and Cogentco was saturated or Cogentco were having problems, although it's using ntl IP addresses that IP address is actually the Cogentco side of the link.
Unlikely to be saturation though that would have caused some other entertainment as well.
I'd guess it is saturation, the day is moving along and the congestion is starting again:
Target Name: www.filefront.com (http://www.filefront.com)
IP: 66.117.8.41
Date/Time: 07/08/2005 11:32:03
2 5 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 8 ms wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.185]
4 7 ms popl-t2core-b-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.193]
5 16 ms pop-bb-b-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.117]
6 10 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 47 ms [212.250.14.62]
8 119 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
9 145 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
10 140 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
11 151 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
12 163 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
13 195 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6]
14 195 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77]
15 197 ms filefront-allyance.dmarc.cogentco.com [38.112.29.134]
16 199 ms node.www.la.ioerror.com [66.117.8.41]
Up to 47 on that hop now.
Ignition
07-08-2005, 13:02
OK Have found fault, can't promise it'll be sorted today but things should seem better tomorrow :(
Thanks, your help is much appreciated.
I know you are already looking into this,but I thought this might help - I've had a response to my trouble ticket with EV1 - they seem to think its the Poplar Proxy.
Here is an extract from what they sent me:
---------
Testing to that proxy address was terrible.
telnet@240.125#ping 62.255.64.12 co 1000 size 1420 source 66.98.246.1
Sending 1000, 1420-byte ICMP Echo to 62.255.64.12, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Success rate is 97 percent (974/1000), round-trip min/avg/max=180/203/220 ms.
(very bad packet loss - 3%)
The trace to that host:
240.125#trace 62.255.64.12
Type Control-c to abort
Tracing the route to IP node 62.255.64.12 from 1 to 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms gphou-66-98-241-4.ev1.net [66.98.241.4]
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms gphou-66-98-240-10.ev1.net [66.98.240.10]
3 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms g0-3.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [38.112.25.21]
4 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms g10-3-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.65]
5 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms p13-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.106]
6 26 ms 26 ms 29 ms p5-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.34]
7 39 ms 26 ms 26 ms p15-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.61]
8 58 ms 56 ms 47 ms p14-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.109]
9 118 ms 117 ms 118 ms p3-0.core01.lon02.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.45]
10 212 ms 209 ms 209 ms tele-ic-1-ge-001-217.inet.ntl.com [212.250.14.61]
11 211 ms 212 ms 218 ms pop-bb-b-so-430-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.81]
12 210 ms 209 ms 214 ms popl-t2core-b-pos81.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.118]
13 208 ms 203 ms 213 ms popl-cache-9.server.ntli.net [62.255.64.12]
The loss seems to be between hops 10 and 11 outbound. I would need an inbound trace from the proxy to the server to be sure.
good to hop 10:
240.125#ping 212.250.14.61 size 1420 co 1000
Sending 1000, 1420-byte ICMP Echo to 212.250.14.61, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Success rate is 100 percent (1000/1000), round-trip min/avg/max=109/109/128 ms.
(1,000 pings in both directions, perfect, 109 ms avg latency)
bad to hop 11:
240.125#ping 62.253.185.81 size 1420 co 100
Sending 100, 1420-byte ICMP Echo to 62.253.185.81, timeout 5000 msec, TTL 64
Success rate is 98 percent (98/100), round-trip min/avg/max=204/214/250 ms.
(loss and higher latency and high jitter)
----------
I have to say that I'm using Swansea proxies again as the Poplar one is awful again currently :(
Thanks again for your help.
cheers
Ian
Ignition
07-08-2005, 15:31
From Poplar core (the same that they show in their trace)
To: 62.253.185.81
Using pings of 1420 bytes as above:
Sending 1000, 1420-byte ICMP Echos to 62.253.185.81, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (1000/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/36 ms
To the hop 10 in the trace above:
Sending 1000, 1420-byte ICMP Echos to 212.250.14.61, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (1000/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/40 ms
To Cogent 1st hop, the peering router which tele-ic-1 connects to, in their trace this is 9 118 ms 117 ms 118 ms p3-0.core01.lon02.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.45]
Sending 1000, 1420-byte ICMP Echos to 130.117.0.45, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 94 percent (940/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = 20/74/300 ms
Not much else to say really, they are wrong, worked ok at one point for them when they were testing however their traceroute shows where the fault lies:
9 118 ms 117 ms 118 ms p3-0.core01.lon02.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.45]
10 212 ms 209 ms 209 ms tele-ic-1-ge-001-217.inet.ntl.com [212.250.14.61]
Ping response shown by them is normal for Netapps.
LOL, I'll let you techies battle it out between yourselves, most of that goes waaay over my head :)
__________________
That hop suddenly looks better.
Target Name: www.filefront.com (http://www.filefront.com/)
IP: 66.117.8.41
Date/Time: 07/08/2005 16:32:57
2 6 ms 6 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 7 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.185]
4 7 ms 8 ms popl-t2core-b-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.193]
5 8 ms 8 ms pop-bb-b-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.117]
6 8 ms 10 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 16 ms 15 ms [212.250.14.62]
8 84 ms 88 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
9 105 ms 107 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
10 107 ms 106 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
11 118 ms 118 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
12 133 ms 131 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
13 165 ms 163 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6]
14 164 ms 165 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77]
15 213 ms 217 ms filefront-allyance.dmarc.cogentco.com [38.112.29.134]
16 215 ms 214 ms node.www.la.ioerror.com (http://www.la.ioerror.com/) [66.117.8.41]
Downloads are still slow through NTL though (sub 20k)
Downloading through AOL gives full speed (375k)
Maybe this isn't a fix, just a blip ?
__________________
File Test
This file is on my server with EV1.
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com/)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 07/08/2005 16:50:10
2 7 ms 8 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 8 ms 8 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 8 ms 8 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 9 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 7 ms 12 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 8 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 16 ms 25 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 85 ms 87 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 104 ms 108 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 105 ms 114 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 119 ms 118 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 130 ms 134 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 130 ms 131 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 132 ms 133 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 117 ms 116 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 114 ms 115 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 117 ms 117 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
I get about 80k max dropping to 20k most of the time, from a variety of NTL proxies, but get full speed (over 350k) from non NTL Proxies and an AOL connection - the poor hop appears to have been fixed but my speeds are still rubbish using NTL. I can now get full speed from collecting my mail from the server, but not from the web - which now makes me think its the proxies :(
FTP'ing also gives me full speed, I'm sorry but I tend to support EV1 here and say its the proxies that are at fault, direct connections seem to work fine - even with my little techy knowledge.
If anyone on a 3 meg connection has the time to test the speed by downloading this file using a web browser from my server thru NTL it would be much appreciated.
http://www.froopter.com/radeondriver.test
Its a renamed 10 meg exe file (a Radeon Driver) and completely harmless - I'm not asking you to run it, just download it then delete it, and see what speeds you get.
Many Thanks
Ian
http://www.froopter.com/radeondriver.test
Its a renamed 10 meg exe file (a Radeon Driver) and completely harmless - I'm not asking you to run it, just download it then delete it, and see what speeds you get.
Many Thanks
Ian
Getting 365 kB here in Warrington
total
10.6meg in 27 sec
Thanks, can I ask which proxy you are using (so I can try it from here)
or PM me please if you don't want to publish it.
Thanks
Ian
Thanks, can I ask which proxy you are using (so I can try it from here)
or PM me please if you don't want to publish it.
Thanks
Ian
Its easy to work out. I am in Warrington so i am on bagu-cache-4.server.ntli.net
hope that helps
Thanks, guess what - I get 370k with that Proxy too !!
I'd been getting slower speeds from lots of sites and put it down to the sites being busy, but that proxy gives me full speed everywhere again !
Looks like Poplar and Colchester and Swansea (the others I tried) are not giving full speeds again :(
I do wish instead of speed increases NTL would fix the proxies, I can't see me getting any benefit from 10mb when I can't even fill 3 meg without continual proxy swapping :(
Thanks, guess what - I get 370k with that Proxy too !!
I'd been getting slower speeds from lots of sites and put it down to the sites being busy, but that proxy gives me full speed everywhere again !
Looks like Poplar and Colchester and Swansea (the others I tried) are not giving full speeds again :(
I do wish instead of speed increases NTL would fix the proxies, I can't see me getting any benefit from 10mb when I can't even fill 3 meg without continual proxy swapping :(
Glad that helps you :)
Thanks again, that bad hop is building up again, so looks like no fix yet (that would have been quick!)
I'll shut up now until they have a chance to fix it !
How are you getting 3mbit on an AOL connection? Have I missed something :confused:
I'm not :)
I have a 3meg NTL connection, and use the AOL client in 'Bring your own access' mode on the top. Using that client routes all content through AOL's proxies rather than NTL's, all sites work at full speed through it, which is much better than the NTL Poplar Proxies which are quite frankly awful.
Chrysalis
08-08-2005, 02:39
I believe the linx issue is resolved so if the problem still exists it could be something to do with ntl or another point of failure.
__________________
seems to be a problem with hop 16 tho
14 163 ms 168 ms 162 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6
]
15 171 ms 166 ms 180 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77
]
16 273 ms 246 ms 258 ms filefront-allyance.dmarc.cogentco.com [38.112.29
.134]
17 248 ms 247 ms 276 ms node.www.la.ioerror.com [66.117.8.41]
__________________
I'm not :)
I have a 3meg NTL connection, and use the AOL client in 'Bring your own access' mode on the top. Using that client routes all content through AOL's proxies rather than NTL's, all sites work at full speed through it, which is much better than the NTL Poplar Proxies which are quite frankly awful.
Sounds interesting, what url is it to use that and do you need to be an aOL customer?
I did speedtests for you full speed on both ntl auto proxy and my own proxy.
Link looks good at the moment, but its too early to tell - fingers crossed !
I'm getting full speed from my own Proxy at the moment.
AOL BYOA is only available if you call them I think, its £6.99 a month and you get all their content. To be honest a lot of their content is available elsewhere, but the radio stations are cool, and I get full speed through their client pretty much everywhere - so their proxies must be better than NTL's.
The trace looks good still but suddenly my speeds through my default proxy are terrible again (sub 20k)
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 08/08/2005 11:44:55
2 5 ms 5 ms 6 ms 5 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 14 ms 7 ms 8 ms 8 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 7 ms 7 ms 12 ms 8 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 14 ms 13 ms 13 ms 15 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 85 ms 85 ms 85 ms 85 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 105 ms 105 ms 106 ms 105 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 104 ms 104 ms 110 ms 105 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 117 ms 116 ms 116 ms 118 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 130 ms 130 ms 130 ms 130 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 132 ms 130 ms 132 ms 133 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 131 ms 131 ms 131 ms 132 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 115 ms 114 ms 115 ms 115 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 115 ms 114 ms 120 ms 115 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 115 ms 115 ms 115 ms 115 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
The baguely Proxy gives me back full speed again, surely it must be the Proxy(ies) ??
I don't understand this :(
Chrysalis
08-08-2005, 13:33
It is the proxies by the sounds of things, I wonder if this thread can be moved to the proxy section?
The problem hasn't been fixed with that hop unfortunately.
Downloads are still sub 20k :(
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 08/08/2005 20:43:20
2 6 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 14 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 8 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 12 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 8 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 155 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 226 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 247 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 253 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 261 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 273 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 274 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 278 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 118 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 121 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 116 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
Even worse now :(
Less than 11k a sec
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 08/08/2005 23:30:47
2 7 ms 6 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 8 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 7 ms 8 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 6 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 7 ms 8 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 9 ms 14 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 323 ms 318 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 388 ms 390 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 406 ms 412 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 407 ms 415 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 421 ms 421 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 434 ms 435 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 434 ms 434 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 433 ms 436 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 115 ms 115 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 115 ms 118 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 123 ms 116 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
Got an answer to my ticket with EV1 re: them changing the route:
-------
Dear Customer,
You will need to talk to your ISP about rerouting it other than that you'll
need to wait for them to fix the issue if they can't.
Thank you for choosing ev1servers
Hollie F.
Ev1servers Support.
-------
So I guess thats a no then...
Chrysalis
09-08-2005, 10:06
Thats an absurb reply, I have server's in various datacentres and each one has been able to change routes for me in the past.
I'm piggy in the middle it seems, NTL don't seem to want to fix it (although a big thank you to ignition for trying to help) and EV1 are just pointing the finger at NTL.
Meanwhile its me stuck with sub 11k access to a server I pay for :(
This is an absolute nightmare to be honest, I'm a member of a board based in the states which has recently been running like a pig for certain members. Lo and behold it's the cogent link's that are killing access for me and others...
Im sure NTL should be doing something about this, but whether they will/are is a different matter entirely I suppose....
Chrysalis
10-08-2005, 14:25
Well I still say its the fault of EV1 and other providers who have similiar setup's, they run a BGP setup which announces the ip's on these providers. As far as I am aware they just need to change the announce to exclude cogent then the traffic will not be routed using that provider, I have seen this done when I have asked for rerouting to be done in the past with other datacentres.
It would be nice to get a definative answer on this.
The route 'appears' to have been fixed, but I'm not so sure - speeds are better but I'm never sure if its the proxy or not.
At night speeds are still terrible, but the trace stays good.
But using the Bagaley proxy returns full speed, so it looks like an NTL proxy/routing problem - EV1 are adamant that it is an NTL problem.
They trace to my proxy and its awful, they trace to my ip and its good.
Come on guys, this has been going on for over a week now :(
Chrysalis
11-08-2005, 08:01
Do both your ip and the proxy route the same way? You are talking about 2 different issues here I think.
I think its pretty clear that its a routing issue, my proxy presumably takes a different route to Cogent than the Bageley proxy, hence Bageley stays good 24 hours, the Poplar route gets congested after about 4pm, this seems to be verified by other posts complaining about Cogent connections both here (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showthread.php?p=548084#post548084) and elsewhere.
It seems another of those occasions where NTL are neglecting to maintain their proxy servers properly :(
It seems another of those occasions where NTL are neglecting to maintain their proxy servers properly
I'm going through one of the Notts proxies, I've changed mine and unsurprisingly it now appears that it is working again although it's still slower than it used to be :dozey:
Why don't they just fix the boogers :td:
I've just had a response to my 'feedback' that I sent Ntl, asking for me to provide traceroute's etc to them so that they could investigate further just exactly what/when the problems are appearing...
Luckily for them, I've provided them with my saved ones from both my connection and from LINX where I used the looking glass tools.. ;-)
So, IMHO I'll give Ntl 9/10 for their resolution of the problem, if they fix it they can have a 10 ;)
They were also pointed across here so that they can have a looksee at whats been going on
Good stuff, hope it gets fixed soon :)
I'm tentatively hoping that its been fixed here, I'm getting full speed from Cogent now on the Poplar Proxy, so fingers crossed., I'll wait a couple of days to see if its actually fixed or just a fluke.
Scrap that, Poplar proxy still rubbish, port 119 connections to Cogent are fine, email connections to Cogent are fine and Bageley proxy connections are fine - Poplar proxy web connections are rubbish - I've started to see other sites suffering the same problem with the Poplar proxies as well now (3dgamers for one - 100k with Poplar - 370k with Bageley)
This needs to be fixed :(
There's no point in Poplar area users having 10 meg connections when the rubbish proxies can't even handle 3 mb :( :(
OK, so I used the Responsetek thing last week and have had no answer and the speeds are still terrible through Poplar proxies to many sites (fine through Baguley still) - what now ?
I repeat, what is the point of NTL crowing about 10mb speeds when those of us with poor proxies can't even reach 3 mb (and we had to moan about the proxies last time to get them changed to achieve that !!)
Why do NTL seem to go very quiet when the Proxies are mentioned ?
It seems they know some are substandard but they do nothing ?
Very disappointed :(
Chrysalis
17-08-2005, 12:56
Getting serious problems myself at the moment having to click twice on every single link to every site on my default proxy.
This triggered me to ring simon duffy office and I told them feedback they should provide proxyless service for extra 1-2 pound a month since they wont do it for nothing.
They really need to sort them out, forget more speed, its absolutely useless when the proxies stop any web downloads getting above 100k a sec.
It can be done - AOL proxies are superb, full 3meg speeds from virtually all sites - mind you the baguley NTL ones seem pretty good too, but my default Poplar ones are rubbish, in fact they stop me getting my paid for speed :(
daniel larusso
17-08-2005, 18:02
This is abit of a long shot but its not a recent MS security firewall patch which is causing you hassle is it?
My connection has been appalling the last week, both uploading files to friends over msn and downloading from newshosting. I checked my network settings and it appears a windows patch has activated the windows firewall on my network ports without me even knowing. Disabling it seems to have cured all my problems.
Hi Daniel,
I don't think thats the problem here, switching to other proxies fixes the problem completely, its just the Poplar ones which seem to be the problem for me.
Also things like direct pop3 access and ftp'ing are unaffected to the same domains, just the web browsing with Poplar proxies.
I'm pretty sure NTL know this, but for some reason (money ?) they seem to just ignore anything that is reported as wrong with a proxy server.
The proxies really are a pain, and cripple the web browsing on so many occasions its just not funny any more :(
Ignition
17-08-2005, 20:28
Getting serious problems myself at the moment having to click twice on every single link to every site on my default proxy.
This triggered me to ring simon duffy office and I told them feedback they should provide proxyless service for extra 1-2 pound a month since they wont do it for nothing.
I somehow don't think phoning the CEO's secretary / PA will get you very far.
You may want to consider other options, such as feeding back via the official means, and also take note that it's not possible to provide a proxyless service at the mo.
jonholyfield
17-08-2005, 21:05
Hi I've just registered so be gentle.
I'm a PC technician in Woking and I've been doing this stuff for a while (I worked in the Lotus Development messenging support team for a time).
Deal mainly with home users and small companys now.
This week I have had so many customers with NTL problems that it is not true.
I spent 2.5 hours on the phone to India for a deaf customer this week and despite having got the same problem fixed for another customer last week by the changing of proxy server, this time the nice chaps in India didnt have a clue.
I was back to the "Its something on the PC" routine.
Despite having demonstrated the problem on a laptop as well and the fact that the customers PC connects to my network fine. I spoke to the supervisor et al and it was like a brick wall.
Every proof I threw at them was countered with "No it tests OK here its the PC" I only lost my rag once and ended the call politely but its bloody frustrating.
So what are the other options for broadband over cable? None I assume.
So my customers will have to go through the grief of cancelling and then paying for an additional phone line or ditching NTL (which seems to be a fair option, to be honest).
Cheers
Jon
I've just had a reply to my responsetek entry.
It says that someone from Technical Support will be looking into the matter and contacting me directly.
Fingers crossed !
I feel your pain jonholyfield, the proxies are a real problem here, just today I've had Gamespot,Expedia & Ebuyer all fail to work and needed a proxy switch - If I didn't know about the proxies then I would have probably thought those sites were down, or wasted my time (and theirs) ringing support, and when sites do work they are more often than not very slow.
Usually switching proxies fixes it - for a while, then its the proxy dance again, it was amusing at first, then an annoyance, now its just pathetic.
Oh and Welcome to the forum :)
jonholyfield
17-08-2005, 23:45
The other proxies that I was asked to use when on customer support last week all pointed to the same f...Sorry server. So a complete waste of time. I am tempted to re-direct NTL customers to one of my servers but that is madness.
__________________
I feel very sorry for the support people in India.
It appears they have been given no information and no escalation system.
'kinhell, I've left places for less.
If you put aside the massive issues of outsourcing offshore then ffs give the staff there some ability to fix the problem.
Scripts.. Yeah OK fine, I've written them.
But bottom line when all else fails "it is your fault"
I think not.
Chrysalis
18-08-2005, 14:13
I somehow don't think phoning the CEO's secretary / PA will get you very far.
You may want to consider other options, such as feeding back via the official means, and also take note that it's not possible to provide a proxyless service at the mo.
It got me further then the official means, I have lost account the number of times I have used the responsetek form and had no response. But I spoke to someone on the phone who was in central office which gives me more satisfaction. How do you know its not low level staff who read responsetek?
and whats so bad about going high up the food chain.
Right now doing this post the smilies on the right had 7 failed icons, yet more proxy issues I couldnt refresh the page or anything thinking the site is down but I switched to my own proxy and it instantly loads.
It is possible to do proxyless connection, I have had it before when I signed up, it can be done on mass by turning of the proxy server which to be honest should be done until they work, or it can be done via acl lists.
jonholyfield
18-08-2005, 20:33
Been on the phone to NTL at another customers house today. Spoke to Raj again (or another Raj). Tonight the story has changed from "No problem exists" to "We are fixing a problem in the Woking area, it should be fixed by 19.30".
Not holding my breath but at least its a step in the right direction.
I'll let you know the outcome next week when I am expecting responses from several customers.
Cheers everybody.
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
20-08-2005, 14:53
im so glad its not only me thats gettin hackoff with NTL
sayin theres no fault and sayin its my software thats the prob
i got 3mbit line and my downloads are about 100kbps each from some site its fine min 360k
reinstalled windows 3 times last week thinkin it was a leech or something like that but no still slow laggy
and i kno this prob is all over the UK and it started about 26 july
but i dont think that NTL knos there is a problem had 2 tecs round this week to sort my prob but they cant under stand it ether
so any help would be great
Ignition
20-08-2005, 15:16
It is possible to do proxyless connection, I have had it before when I signed up, it can be done on mass by turning of the proxy server which to be honest should be done until they work, or it can be done via acl lists.
Where there are mass proxy issues they are turned off, as has happened in Nottingham, Luton and Manchester in the past. This was due to issues with the servers and resulting complaints.
I'm aware that it can be done with ACLs however I'm buggered if I'd want to administer it all manually. I'm guessing you had a chat with a network bod regarding WCCP. Nonetheless yes ACLs can be done exempting but as IPs aren't static, such a system would have to be administered manually for at least some time and masses of ACLs may induce performance issues it's not really a viable option.
Can Poplar be turned off then ?
Its awful at present :(
No one has contacted me yet from technical support either as promised 4 days ago...
I'm getting awful speeds from Telia in the USA now to the Poplar proxies, less than 40k a sec.
I'd post a trace but it would be from my ip - which is fine - put in the Poplar prox(ies) and its awful (as are speeds to Fileplanet & 3dgamers) as usual the proxy shuffle normally returns full speed after trying 2 or three different areas of the country.
__________________
Just got an answer to my ticket with my server.
They think the route is fine and it must be something at NTL:
Here is their reply with trace:
------------
I did an MTR run, it looks pretty alright from here actually:
1. 69-50-137-3.mach10hosting.com 0% 116 116 0 0 5 161
2. atl-bb1-geth1-3-0-0.telia.net 0% 116 116 9 0 2 54
3. ash-bb1-pos7-1-0-0.telia.net 3% 113 116 15 12 13 54
4. nyk-bb1-pos7-1-0.telia.net 0% 116 116 19 18 19 45
5. ldn-bb1-pos7-1-0.telia.net 12% 103 116 89 89 90 123
6. ldn-b2-pos9-0.telia.net 0% 115 116 89 89 89 89
7. ntl-110030-ldn-b2.c.telia.net 1% 114 115 89 89 90 139
8. bre-bb-b-so-510-0.inet.ntl.com 2% 113 115 90 89 92 137
9. bre-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com 1% 114 115 90 89 92 164
10. win-bb-b-so-600-0.inet.ntl.com 1% 114 115 92 92 93 121
11. pop-bb-a-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com 0% 115 115 93 93 96 128
12. popl-t2core-a-pos31.inet.ntl.com 1% 114 115 91 90 96 265
13. popl-cache-9.server.ntli.net 1% 114 115 90 90 90 97
(ignore that Telia one, that's just them dropping too much icmp),
I figure that since the cache server is the last hop down the line in the run
that there's something odd at NTL between you and that machine.
------------
I just tried a download through Poplar and speeds are still sub 40k, other proxies are fine, I'm getting pretty pee'd off that this is taking NTL so long to respond to !
Chrysalis
20-08-2005, 19:43
The problem is there is mass proxy problems already but NTL dont recognise this.
Static sites like news sites bbc.co.uk etc. are fine.
Dynamic sites like this site, other forums and webmail have problems.
Also like Ianuk has shown downloads get slowed down in many cases.
Sites have been known to ban proxies or not function properly eg. I cannot use the tweak tester on broadbandreports.com.
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
21-08-2005, 03:57
so how long til NTL recognise the problem
Chrysalis
21-08-2005, 12:50
They wont recognise it as a problem unless the most basic of sites suddenly stop working. If bbc.co.uk and ntlworld.com work then its all good shape for them.
Perhaps someone from the team here could tell me how I can make someone at NTL aware of this really quite massive problem for those of us affected ?
I'm sure if you have a good proxy, and have full speed web browsing and downloads then you think we are just moaning, I assure you we are not, the proxy performance, at least for myself here on Poplar, is quite awful, I get less than 40k most of the times from a large number of sites.
The rest of the time I need to continally click links to get them to work, switching proxies brings them in instantly.
Switching proxies *always* fixes it, using NNTP and POP3 brings full speed - it *has* to be the proxies.
I've expended a great deal of time raising tickets with my hosts, and performing traces, I've wasted even more time switching proxies between almost every site I visit to get some kind of normal service, I have a 3 meg connection, yet through Poplar I get about 40-150k at max from many sites (other proxies give over 350k) - this cannot be right, I'm paying for a service I'm not getting :(
Forget 10mb, NTL's network here cannot even deliver 3mb (except it *can* - if the damn proxies are bypassed)
I've used official channels and been ignored.
I've raised the issue on here and given traces where necessary
I've proved that the same sites work on some proxies and not others.
I've had the 2 companies I host servers with both tell me that the speed problems lie with NTL and not them.
Yet No one from NTL will respond, this has been going on for ages, and I've been polite and patient, but there comes a time when perhaps more effort is needed - what point is the repsonsetek thing when no one bothers following up on problems raised using it ?? (I had a stock response about 6 days ago saying that someone from tech support would contact me - I've heard nothing)
Perhaps if I shout it from the rooftops:
NTL - THE NTL PROXIES AT POPLAR ARE FAULTY - PLEASE FIX THEM !!!
I don't think NTL even consider the proxies when they keep raising their speeds, the 3mb increase needed us to moan(http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=25562) that they were configured incorrectly (and they were) but now it seems they are sliding back into being crap again..
Put 'Proxy' or 'Proxies' in the search box on this forum, and LOOK at the results - this is a BIG BIG problem, yet its continually ignored (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=19532)
Why on EARTH don't NTL fix these obviously flawed proxies ?
What is the point of continual speed increases, when they are impossible to achieve on web sites because of these stupid proxies ?
NTL cannot say they are not aware of these issues, enough of us have raised these issues (both officially and unofficially), I guess they don't have anyone that knows how to fix them - I suggest a trip to AOL, who despite their many faults are able to run proxies superbly that reach full speeds 99.9% of the time.
What a waste of everyones time this is :( :(
The ResponseTek system?
The system you provide, a direct link to NTL:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/ntl.php
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
21-08-2005, 15:53
-=me tips my hat to IanUK=-
lol nicely put ;-)
do any NTL tec read this forum
The ResponseTek system?
The system you provide, a direct link to NTL:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/ntl.php
I know what it is. That's why I was actually suggesting it..
Please read my post, I already did that....
what point is the repsonsetek thing when no one bothers following up on problems raised using it ?? (I had a stock response about 6 days ago saying that someone from tech support would contact me - I've heard nothing)
Please read my post, I already did that....
what point is the repsonsetek thing when no one bothers following up on problems raised using it ?? (I had a stock response about 6 days ago saying that someone from tech support would contact me - I've heard nothing)
Fair enough..
I personally don't have access to the execs at NTL, but I'll see if I can get one of the other mods to follow it up.
Also, have you tried running with no proxy set?
Thanks,
Yeah, with no proxy its default Poplar, thats the problem.
Other Proxies work but not my default one(s).
Also other Proxies are often just as bad, it seems the performance varies wildly.
Chrysalis
21-08-2005, 21:40
Thanks from me as well, I have found specifying a proxy works in many cases, but the problem with that is opera sucks at using proxies, also one proxy never works very long so its a lot of juggling.
jonholyfield
21-08-2005, 22:40
My main problem her lies at the feet of NTL. The support people try. They really do. But they dont appear to have the tools to do the job. "Ah so you ar MR ***" No I'm an It techician and there is a latency problem on this line "So you cannot access the internet".
Sigh here we go again. Script city.
Try bbc.co.uk
Nice try lets take the most well cached site in the world for trouble shooting.
How about trying http://www.zmag.org/ instead.
Relying on cached info to prove it is not a problem verges on criminal.
I DO have problems with outsourcing this support work but that is irrelevant.
If you do send it to India or wherever you have to give them the tools to fix it.
At least a decent escalation procedure that is transparent to the consumer.
Having to threaten court action to get NTL to admit there is even a problem should NOT be common practice.
da-geezer
22-08-2005, 03:31
do any NTL tec read this forum
yes ;)
Try bbc.co.uk
Nice try lets take the most well cached site in the world for trouble shooting.
How about trying http://www.zmag.org/ instead.
Relying on cached info to prove it is not a problem verges on criminal.
Indeed, but it's certainly a start. You know what people are like, if I sent customers to that zmag site to test for HTTP connectivity, how on earth would we explain the usage of a site with the headline "the spirit of resistance lives"? The reason the BBC is generally chosen is because it's a popular neutral site with a short URL. However I can appreciate that the argument that "it's always up" is never a good argument due to the caching issue.
Unfortunatley, I see the issue with the "script city" style of conversation all the time. 99 times out of a 100, it's generally the result of agents not logging exactly what they've done, hence leaving it open for the following agents to repeat themselves.
I will agree though, going to court isn't good news at all.
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
22-08-2005, 05:48
just downloaded a 14meg file from guru3d.com on my 3mbit line
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y97/JackJonesGG/test2.jpg
some sites goood and some pooo
i still cant get over 100kb/s from ftp or dc++
Ignition
22-08-2005, 07:11
My main problem her lies at the feet of NTL. The support people try. They really do. But they dont appear to have the tools to do the job. "Ah so you ar MR ***" No I'm an It techician and there is a latency problem on this line "So you cannot access the internet".
Sigh here we go again. Script city.
Try bbc.co.uk
Nice try lets take the most well cached site in the world for trouble shooting.
How about trying http://www.zmag.org/ instead.
Relying on cached info to prove it is not a problem verges on criminal.
I DO have problems with outsourcing this support work but that is irrelevant.
If you do send it to India or wherever you have to give them the tools to fix it.
At least a decent escalation procedure that is transparent to the consumer.
Having to threaten court action to get NTL to admit there is even a problem should NOT be common practice.
Careful with the description of a latency issue on the line, browsing issues can't really be equated with latency issues.
BBC is a default choice because it's so well cached / mirrored, reduces the chances of a fault on a website's performance shiding a fault on the ntl network.
The rest of it I agree with though, proxy issues are something that's poorly dealt with not least because according to all metrics and readouts from the proxies they are performing well and are not overloaded in any way. (He says looking at the NetApp info).
Bet if you specify a proxy it resolves the issue?
The rest of it I agree with though, proxy issues are something that's poorly dealt with not least because according to all metrics and readouts from the proxies they are performing well and are not overloaded in any way. (He says looking at the NetApp info).
I'd tend to agree with you, as *some* sites are full speed with the Poplar proxies and surely if they were overloaded everything would be slow, specifying a proxy works in the short term, and then a few days later that one is slow too (like my Telia USA site issue - I used the Bagely one and it was fine, but now that is slow too, so I switched to another one etc etc) - we the end users shouldn't have to do this - its time consuming and the whole point of proxies is to speed things up surely ?
The Telia proxy issue at least seems to be time related, Poplar is fast in the morning but slow from about lunchtime onwards, which *does* seem to suggest an overload somewhere, but other sites are slow all the time on certain proxies - the whole proxy issue needs an overhaul it seems to me, they plainly do not work well enough to provide a reliable service - maybe they were good before all these speed issues (they probably worked great when NTL was only dialup) but in these broadband days people want the speeds they pay for - currently 10mb is just a joke for web downloads in this area - which is a shame as NNTP & POP3 downloads show just how good the network behind the proxies is !
jonholyfield
22-08-2005, 11:22
Yeah bad choice of url. I was just being lazy and looking for a url that would be unlikely to be widely cached. Using my business site might have looked a bit like self promotion. I should have picked something less controversial though.
Interestingly any google pages *always* seem to work, including searches for obscure items.
Chrysalis
22-08-2005, 11:48
Careful with the description of a latency issue on the line, browsing issues can't really be equated with latency issues.
BBC is a default choice because it's so well cached / mirrored, reduces the chances of a fault on a website's performance shiding a fault on the ntl network.
The rest of it I agree with though, proxy issues are something that's poorly dealt with not least because according to all metrics and readouts from the proxies they are performing well and are not overloaded in any way. (He says looking at the NetApp info).
Bet if you specify a proxy it resolves the issue?
Ignition I think the problem is when it isnt cached, the proxy freaks out. Static sites like bbc are probably very high hit rate on the cache and perform fine on the proxies, things like this site and other forums which are dynamic sites will have a low cache hit ratio and these sites are the ones that have problems. Yes specifying a proxy usually is a workaround but not a fix, its somewhat a nuisance and the browser doesnt perform as well when it is using a proxy.
jonholyfield
22-08-2005, 21:57
Careful with the description of a latency issue on the line, browsing issues can't really be equated with latency issues.
Again looking at todays replies (for which I am astonishingly grateful, thank you all).
I was doing what I blame people for all the time in not telling the full story.
There *was* a latency issue. I was in no way blaming the proxy issue on that, just trying to give as much relevant info to the poor guy at the end of the phone to try and help him fix the issue(s).
I took 5 calls today (which is pretty good for a dinky little one man band).
All local. All past customers with valid queries. 3 of them had been on to NTL 3 or more times in the last week. One of them is cancelling despite being on the full cable package.
I didn't fish for this information they were just "Oh by the way have you had anybody having problems with NTL broadband?" questions.
I've been self employed for 3 years in the same place and I have NEVER experienced this.
They should at the very least ackowledge a problem. I've worked with this stuff for years. Customers expect it to be like a TV. Rightly or wrongly. You turn it on and it works. If not you get a repair or new set.
On the positive side the status page appears to show stuff being knackered with no real fix date, which is honest enough. Not really obvious though is it?
No idea if its anything to do with the proxies problem but the network status shows:
'Network upgrades will result in a brief loss of service in the Leicester, Manchester, Poplar and Teeside areas.'
I guess I'll see tomorrow !
Chrysalis
23-08-2005, 00:33
Wow still upgrades in Leics, been dozens since last year. another one scheduled 3 days after as well.
Looks like the Poplar network upgrade didn't affect the proxies, still useless here on the same sites as always.
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
23-08-2005, 18:48
just done some speed tests lol
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y97/JackJonesGG/speedtest1.jpg
:wtf:
on a 3mbit line
Less than 30k from Telia now, Bageley proxy giving 374k
Less than 100k from 3dGamers, Bageley gives less than 40k, Hersham gives 374k
*sigh*
Still terrible tonight, still no reply from anyone at NTL...
Chrysalis
25-08-2005, 01:05
you are one voice out of 1.5mill and will be happily ignored :(
Looks that way, tomorrow it will be a fortnight since my official contact with NTL telling them about the poor Poplar Proxies, its obvious they know about the terrible proxies from the many many complaints people have made, but they have decided to ignore it - probably because they cannot do anything about it.
I've wasted a considerable amount of my time collecting traces and writing all these messages when I could be doing something better, NTL customer support really is awful, once they have your money they don't care it seems.
These are servers I own, I need good speeds to them or what is the point in paying for a 3mb connection, I have proved its the proxies, I have shown them traces, I've raised tickets with 2 of the biggest hosting companies in the USA - they have told me its the proxies, but *still* nothing is done.
As I have said many times (and proved when the 3mb increase came and the proxies were misconfigured) the proxies make 10mb useless, there is absolutely no point in anyone (in my area certainly) upgrading because they can't even reach 3mb most of the time let alone 10.
Pathetic
Electrolyte01
25-08-2005, 11:41
Don't understand why, but my connection dropped last night at about 2:30AM, and my modem refused to reboot. Just manually rebooted it, still didn't work, then it rebooted automatically :erm:
Chrysalis
25-08-2005, 17:56
Looks that way, tomorrow it will be a fortnight since my official contact with NTL telling them about the poor Poplar Proxies, its obvious they know about the terrible proxies from the many many complaints people have made, but they have decided to ignore it - probably because they cannot do anything about it.
I've wasted a considerable amount of my time collecting traces and writing all these messages when I could be doing something better, NTL customer support really is awful, once they have your money they don't care it seems.
These are servers I own, I need good speeds to them or what is the point in paying for a 3mb connection, I have proved its the proxies, I have shown them traces, I've raised tickets with 2 of the biggest hosting companies in the USA - they have told me its the proxies, but *still* nothing is done.
As I have said many times (and proved when the 3mb increase came and the proxies were misconfigured) the proxies make 10mb useless, there is absolutely no point in anyone (in my area certainly) upgrading because they can't even reach 3mb most of the time let alone 10.
Pathetic
Ian I have said it numerous times now, they can do something about it. They can stop haveing them cumpolsary. But its a decision someone wont budge on. The cash they save I would guess is neglegible since browsers now days by default cache images. Browsing is so much faster and smoother on a broadband connection with no proxies, but so many of us here have got used to this. People go into robot mode when they specify a new proxy every day.
I see yet another proxy thread started today as well, this is surely a pretty big problem now, The team here have helped me a lot by trying to get someone at NTL to answer my Responsetek form and I thank them for it, and I shall continue to try and get an answer, but it looks like NTL know they are useless and don't care - so much for customer service (or indeed providing what we are paying for in those areas affected)
The NTL network when NOT using the proxies (FTP/NNTP/POP3) seems to be very good to me, when I don't use proxies I get very good speeds indeed, but web browsing takes several clicks on links to get anywhere and then it just crawls along, or gives an out of date page - or in a lot of cases refuses to load a site at all or until refreshed about 5 times.
All I can suggest at this stage is that everyone affected by this problem raise a Responsetek form, if we all do it then maybe they'll listen (although by the number of proxy problems reported on this forum over the last few years and still nothing is done I doubt it)
ho hum
this confuses me, i've never changed a proxy and never experienced a bad service, all my IE links work quickly as they should, why do people keep going on about NTL proxies, my service has been fine from ever since BB started years ago and i use it everyday?. Is it a Northern thing
I honestly think some people over hype these things, if it was a great a problem, there would of have been something done about it.
I only have to use a proxy to get to whatever site very rarely. I think the peeps who complain should state what proxy it is they are going through, if its *that* bad then I'm sure others who can try their proxy will agree.
jonholyfield
25-08-2005, 20:54
I honestly think some people over hype these things, if it was a great a problem, there would of have been something done about it.
Sorry but FFS.
I wouldn't be bothering to post here for fun.
How much plainer can I make it?
There are problems and NTL are useless at fixing them.
A customer signed up and was connected last week. I had to go back yesterday and was greatly relieved and, frankly, surprised to find it all working fine. This customer lives within 500 yards of two others who are having horrendous problems which I can't get fixed.
So yes some customers are currently having a good experience and well done for NTL for those. Getting some of them working fine idicates that the problems can be fixed.
Should be simple enough. Very basic but try looking at a happy customers setting on the same node and an unhappy one and figure out what is set up differently.
We are not over hyping this, we are incredibly frustrated.
Chrysalis
25-08-2005, 22:33
I honestly think some people over hype these things, if it was a great a problem, there would of have been something done about it.
I only have to use a proxy to get to whatever site very rarely. I think the peeps who complain should state what proxy it is they are going through, if its *that* bad then I'm sure others who can try their proxy will agree.
Can I ask what type of sites you tend to visit? and where were you when the cableforum broke down under the ntl proxies over the last few days, I wonder if some people are soft and ignore problems like slow down of pages timeouts etc. Or it could be your proxy is one of few that work well and if so good for you.
I see yet another proxy thread started today as well, this is surely a pretty big problem now, The team here have helped me a lot by trying to get someone at NTL to answer my Responsetek form and I thank them for it, and I shall continue to try and get an answer, but it looks like NTL know they are useless and don't care - so much for customer service (or indeed providing what we are paying for in those areas affected)
There are actually 2 new threads I noticed, one is in the computers and IT forum where the user thought it was his pc, mods didnt move it for what reason they felt suitable.
this confuses me, i've never changed a proxy and never experienced a bad service, all my IE links work quickly as they should, why do people keep going on about NTL proxies, my service has been fine from ever since BB started years ago and i use it everyday?. Is it a Northern thing
I am in Leicester, east midlands. Colchester whereever that is their proxies suffer the same problems.
__________________
dnsreport has promoted me from a basic error to this"WARNING: You are using a web proxy that is currently being abused by malware. Please go here for more details. The web proxy IP is 82.3.32.76"
this confuses me, i've never changed a proxy and never experienced a bad service, all my IE links work quickly as they should, why do people keep going on about NTL proxies, my service has been fine from ever since BB started years ago and i use it everyday?. Is it a Northern thing
Lucky you, nope not a Northern thing, I'm in London - in fact the Northern proxies I try are better than Poplar.
I honestly think some people over hype these things, if it was a great a problem, there would of have been something done about it.
LOL, I thought that too, but now that I've been trying since 12 August to get someone/anyone from NTL to respond through their official channels, I think not. Add to that the fact that *we* had to tell NTL when they brought in 3 meg that their proxies were wrongly configured for USA sites and you'll forgive me for not really agreeing with you there.
I only have to use a proxy to get to whatever site very rarely. I think the peeps who complain should state what proxy it is they are going through, if its *that* bad then I'm sure others who can try their proxy will agree.
I've been quoting my proxy group all the way through this thread, I've been posting traces, I keep track of downloads to my servers at different times of the day, and some proxies work fine - think yourself lucky that you are using some that work ok, but please don't patronise those of us that are CLEARLY having problems and being ignored.
Maybe we are wrong, maybe its something all of us suffering have installed on our pc's, maybe we all use weird sites that no one else uses - maybe its space monkeys - unfortunately we won't know because no one from NTL will talk to me, it seems from reading proxy posts going back on this board for years that whenever proxies are mentioned that NTL clams up, and this seems to be the case again :(
I'm glad you can surf ok, I'm happy for you.
I shall console myself with that thought as I struggle to open my account in EBuyer for the 4th time....
Chrysalis
25-08-2005, 22:54
Yeah I thought the same thing as you posted it, its contradicting when the saying is NTL will act upon it if people open their mouth's but the feedback channels I imagine are data going into oblivion.
When I spoke to simon duffy's PA the problem I had then was she hadnt the foggiest what I was on about as she had no technical knowledge, so whilst I got someone listening I had to explain to the best of my ability what was wrong.
Another problem is one day proxy A works well then goes bad after few hours so I switch to proxy B that works well for 10 minutes then I switch to proxy C that works well for 30 mins, I go back to proxy A which is all hunky dory again, I get the feeling there are dozens of people doing the exact same thing which is why we going around in circles on the proxy cycling, and there are the sites that just dont work well at all such as ebuyer and ebay, hotmail, dnsreport.
OK, whatever, carry on complaining but if it is your proxy, then why not just change and help the situation.
Try mine, 'if they all keep failing' - nott-cache-5.server.ntli.net:8080
jonholyfield
25-08-2005, 23:02
Do be aware that ebuyer are desparately over their sever capacity at the moment. I buy a lot of kit from them and they are horiibly slow web wise.
A victim of their own success.
Anything after 11 am forget it.
Chrysalis
25-08-2005, 23:05
using nott-cache-5.server.ntli.net now.
well ebuyer is flawless when not using ntl proxies so I based my judgement on that.
slowcoach
25-08-2005, 23:07
Been having exactly the same problems here (Oldham) recently, takes longer to load static sites whilst dynamic sites time out, the problem appears to coincide with the maintenance in different areas, changing from transparent to Baguley proxy cures it immediately. The ntl homepage is one of the problem sites, I bet the advertisers could get something done if they were aware of the problem ;)
jonholyfield
25-08-2005, 23:08
Well I dont use NTL :)
well sorry to hear of your problems but never have i had any probs with ebuyer and ebay, hotmail, dnsreport, due to NTL proxy?
if i had proxy problems that required switching every 10/30mins i think i'd move onto someone else becasue its seems clear your not getting what you paid for and NTL in your case isn't helping you or know what to do when others appear to be fine with the service and its proxy setups
Earlier in this thread I posted a link to my server and a test file, that file is now back down to 25k a sec, here is the trace right now from one of my servers to the Poplar Proxy:
traceroute to 62.253.185.81 (62.253.185.81), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 66.98.246.1 (66.98.246.1) 1.897 ms 3.063 ms 0.344 ms
2 gphou-66-98-241-4.ev1.net (66.98.241.4) 0.534 ms 2.765 ms 0.561 ms
3 gphou-66-98-240-10.ev1.net (66.98.240.10) 0.575 ms 3.369 ms 0.690 ms
4 g0-3.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.112.25.21) 1.073 ms 0.950 ms 0.941 ms
5 g0-1.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.64.61) 1.326 ms 1.329 ms 1.193 ms
6 p13-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.106) 15.817 ms 16.077 ms 16.179 ms
7 p5-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.34) 38.145 ms 28.869 ms 27.800 ms
8 p15-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.61) 27.673 ms 27.508 ms 27.112 ms
9 p14-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.109) 47.807 ms 47.947 ms 51.525 ms
10 p3-0.core01.lon02.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.45) 118.380 ms 118.398 ms 122.243 ms
11 tele-ic-1-ge-001-217.inet.ntl.com (212.250.14.61) 410.684 ms 370.789 ms 373.545 ms
12 pop-bb-b-so-430-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.81) 390.724 ms 396.753 ms 397.536 ms
Going from my ip to my server:
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 25/08/2005 23:28:58
2 6 ms 6 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 7 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 8 ms 8 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 8 ms 8 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 8 ms 9 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 9 ms 10 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 262 ms 257 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 325 ms 327 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 345 ms 348 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 343 ms 347 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 356 ms 359 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 370 ms 372 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 371 ms 375 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 371 ms 378 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 115 ms 119 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 115 ms 115 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 115 ms 116 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
I thought this problem had been fixed :( :(
And now from the server to the Baguley proxy:
traceroute to bagu-cache-4.server.ntli.net (80.5.160.7), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 66.98.246.1 (66.98.246.1) 0.505 ms 0.401 ms 0.338 ms
2 gphou-66-98-241-4.ev1.net (66.98.241.4) 0.718 ms 0.495 ms 0.576 ms
3 gphou-66-98-240-9.ev1.net (66.98.240.9) 0.705 ms 0.555 ms 1.093 ms
4 ge-6-0-0.mpr1.iah1.us.above.net (216.200.251.165) 1.733 ms 1.242 ms 1.315 ms
5 so-0-0-0.mpr2.iah1.us.above.net (64.125.31.62) 1.849 ms 2.939 ms 1.794 ms
MPLS Label=258928 CoS=6 TTL=1 S=0
6 so-5-0-0.mpr1.atl6.us.above.net (64.125.29.65) 14.282 ms 14.063 ms 14.191 ms
MPLS Label=261008 CoS=6 TTL=1 S=0
7 so-0-0-0.mpr2.atl6.us.above.net (64.125.27.50) 14.515 ms 14.245 ms 14.186 ms
MPLS Label=245184 CoS=6 TTL=1 S=0
8 so-3-1-0.cr1.dca2.us.above.net (64.125.29.38) 25.766 ms 25.364 ms 25.374 ms
MPLS Label=376672 CoS=6 TTL=1 S=0
9 so-6-0-0.cr1.lhr3.uk.above.net (64.125.31.185) 97.144 ms 97.057 ms 97.127 ms
MPLS Label=100160 CoS=6 TTL=1 S=0
10 pos1-0.mpr1.lhr1.uk.above.net (208.184.231.173) 117.535 ms 186.817 ms 276.362 ms
MPLS Label=425 CoS=6 TTL=1 S=0
11 pos4-0.mpr2.lhr1.uk.above.net (208.185.156.14) 97.012 ms 96.932 ms 97.317 ms
12 gfd-bb-a-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com (208.185.188.30) 109.294 ms 110.372 ms 109.414 ms
13 pop-bb-b-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com (213.105.172.138) 109.301 ms 109.182 ms 109.313 ms
14 lee-bb-a-so-700-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.237) 114.963 ms 114.928 ms 114.937 ms
15 lee-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.187.186) 114.639 ms 150.554 ms 114.698 ms
16 bagu-t2core-b-pos71.inet.ntl.com (213.105.174.74) 115.907 ms 116.867 ms 115.818 ms
17 bagu-cache-4.server.ntli.net (80.5.160.7) 118.051 ms 115.763 ms 116.059 ms
Different route, and its fine, maybe the problem isn't the proxy itself, but the routes Poplar takes, its more proof that there is a problem, but no one is listening :(
It seems everyone should be using Bageley, perhaps thats the answer, make all the proxies take the same routes as Bageley, everyone likes that !
__________________
My other server is the same, takes Telia to NTL using Poplar Proxy and Abovenet using Baguley, it seems we have a clue......
But is anyone listening...
Bad again now at 11:14 this morning.
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com/)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 26/08/2005 11:13:21
2 6 ms 6 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 7 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 7 ms 9 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 7 ms 8 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 8 ms 9 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 9 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 247 ms 252 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 320 ms 323 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 341 ms 345 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 340 ms 344 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 353 ms 355 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 366 ms 370 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 369 ms 369 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 369 ms 372 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 114 ms 114 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 114 ms 114 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 115 ms 114 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
I reported this exact fault in this thread ages ago, it was supposed to be fixed :(
So that two faults now they are ignoring, the Proxies and the network, very poor...
<snip>
I think hop 8 is outside the ntl network... it doesn't have a name associated with it, but I am 99% sure that 212 is not a ntl ip range
According to Ignition it is NTL, he posted this earlier in this thread:
inetnum: 212.250.14.0 - 212.250.15.255
netname: NTL
descr: NTL Infrastructure - Private Peering
Just thought I'd add my little bit.
I've had network probs for last 10 days. Some sites download fine others are crawling... and my speed check on adslguide.org fluctuates between 90k and 190k every time I run it. Currently on 2mb connection with NTL. I'm down in the South of UK
Pudders
I'm in Essex, I've finally had a reply from someone at NTL, I'll let you all know what the outcome is !
Maybe these proxies will finally get sorted....(or not)
I'm in Essex, I've finally had a reply from someone at NTL, I'll let you all know what the outcome is !
Maybe these proxies will finally get sorted....(or not)
PLease mate... its killing me. :(
Pud
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
26-08-2005, 13:55
im in portsmouth and its been crap speed since end of july
before that had no problem anytime of the day or night i could load at 360k
but now lucky to get 120k :td:
you kno what itll be theyll put a laptop to your line text some sites they use
and say "theres no fault on your line sir" "maybe its your pc or some software "
but i DO HOPE you have better luck than we had !!!!!!
markmarkymark
26-08-2005, 13:59
for what its worth, Reading (RG10) is really lagging just now ..
Mark
im in portsmouth and its been crap speed since end of july
before that had no problem anytime of the day or night i could load at 360k
but now lucky to get 120k :td:
Same area as me... and about the same time for crap speed. What proxy server is ya default? Cosham by any chance?
Pud
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
26-08-2005, 15:13
Same area as me... and about the same time for crap speed. What proxy server is ya default? Cosham by any chance?
Pud
You are using the 'cosh-cache-5.server.ntli.net' proxy server.
This is an ntl Proxy Server in the Cosham area.
so yeah this is my default proxy
Chrysalis
26-08-2005, 15:31
I am still using this nott-cache 5 proxy from last night although not been using it very long, so far no timeouts.
what is very unusual that on this proxy dnsreport works.
I am still using this nott-cache 5 proxy
Will that improve the download speeds? as my browsing is not that bad... (a little but not much)
PUd
Chrysalis
26-08-2005, 15:54
Ok done some tests on
http://www.froopter.com/radeondriver.test
Ianuk if you can do a traceroute from your server to nott-cache5.server.ntli.net please.
the nott-cache5 still has the slowness for downloads so the guy who gave it me claiming no problems is either lying to make it look like the problem isnt there or downloads no files from offshore servers or is satisfied with lower speeds or has the 1mbit package.
download speed graph for nott5-cache. Peak 160kB/sec avg 86kB/sec
http://www.chrysalisnet.org/ntl/nott5.jpg
download speed graph for squid, located in germany (further distance)
Peak 236kB/sec avg 218kB/sec
http://www.chrysalisnet.org/ntl/squid.jpg
colc-cache2 speed graph. Peak 128kB (been generous) avg 51kB/sec
http://www.chrysalisnet.org/ntl/colc2.jpg
finally my default proxy speed graph. Peak 160kB/sec avg 92kB/sec
http://www.chrysalisnet.org/ntl/default.jpg
graphs taken with netlimiter showing my total traffic My connection was otherwise idle.
__________________
Will that improve the download speeds? as my browsing is not that bad... (a little but not much)
PUd
See my last post, it seems not. The browsing is defenitly better on this proxy but not much else.
I'm currently mucking about with the list of NTL proxies to see if I can see which ones are any good for improving download speeds. When I change them in the LAN settings do I need to put any exceptions box?
Can you just run by the exact way to change a proxy with what boxes should be checked/unchecked.
I agree though.. the Nott 5 proxy was quicker for browsing but no improvement on download speed.
Pud
I'm experiancing some bad lagging issues myself... for instance, Some IRC server's im connecting to, I keep constantly getting disconnected from (Connection reset by peer) Where as there's probably only 1 i'm able to keep connected to...
Playing games is also another issue, I keep getting disconnected from servers... It's only started happening about 2 nights ago, I just thought it was NTL doing something the first night, but now it's just continued to play up...
I'm from Derby, (cpc3-stap5-4-0*.nott) (DE7*)
I've got a fairly good download speed (Approx 360kb/s +)... and Ping's seem to be fine, Appart from a few IRC servers which are pinging up to 1sec sometimes
traceroute to nott-cache-5.server.ntli.net (62.254.0.30), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 66.98.246.1 (66.98.246.1) 0.623 ms 0.434 ms 0.604 ms
2 gphou-66-98-241-4.ev1.net (66.98.241.4) 0.676 ms 0.580 ms 0.529 ms
3 gphou-66-98-240-10.ev1.net (66.98.240.10) 0.680 ms 0.740 ms 0.781 ms
4 g0-3.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.112.25.21) 0.974 ms 1.194 ms 1.120 ms
5 g0-1.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.64.61) 2.452 ms 1.857 ms 1.271 ms
6 p13-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.106) 15.723 ms 16.340 ms 16.484 ms
7 p5-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.34) 29.100 ms 27.776 ms 27.328 ms
8 p15-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.61) 27.191 ms 27.109 ms 27.156 ms
9 p14-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.109) 66.230 ms 48.040 ms 47.878 ms
10 p3-0.core01.lon02.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.45) 118.825 ms 119.625 ms 119.032 ms
11 tele-ic-1-ge-001-217.inet.ntl.com (212.250.14.61) 411.446 ms 407.205 ms 402.039 ms
12 pop-bb-b-so-430-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.81) 401.492 ms 412.766 ms 411.700 ms
13 pop-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com (213.105.172.78) 412.092 ms 404.017 ms 391.128 ms
14 nth-bb-b-so-400-0.inet.ntl.com (213.105.172.13) 395.859 ms 405.876 ms 416.889 ms
15 nott-t2core-b-pos31.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.38) 414.475 ms 415.153 ms 415.975 ms
16 nott-cache-5.server.ntli.net (62.254.0.30) 409.078 ms 393.103 ms 393.575 ms
Still bad to that proxy.
I think the bad Cogent connection is probably a seperate issue though, although it still needs to be fixed (again)
Don't NTL monitor this kind of thing ?
It looks like each area of the countries proxies choose the best routes (ie: Poplar is currently going via cogent to my server, whereas Baguley is going via Abovenet) - which is fine in theory I guess, but means that, like now, some areas of the country get awful connections, while the others don't.
It also explains why a lot of people think we are just whining, because their proxy is taking a different route and is ok.
Surely it would give better service to choose the best routes for *everyone* and not for us the 'end users' to have to manually fart about trying to get proper speeds nearly every day to a lot of sites that we visit ?
Chrysalis
26-08-2005, 16:21
I'm experiancing some bad lagging issues myself... for instance, Some IRC server's im connecting to, I keep constantly getting disconnected from (Connection reset by peer) Where as there's probably only 1 i'm able to keep connected to...
Playing games is also another issue, I keep getting disconnected from servers... It's only started happening about 2 nights ago, I just thought it was NTL doing something the first night, but now it's just continued to play up...
I'm from Derby, (cpc3-stap5-4-0*.nott) (DE7*)
I've got a fairly good download speed (Approx 360kb/s +)... and Ping's seem to be fine, Appart from a few IRC servers which are pinging up to 1sec sometimes
Not sure whats causing your isses but it wont be the proxy server's.
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
26-08-2005, 16:21
lol my speed test no uploads no other downloads
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y97/JackJonesGG/Snap1.jpg
with and without cosham proxys
50k from guildford proxy
still not a happy speed
from guru3d.com
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y97/JackJonesGG/Snap3.jpg
thats happy speed
my tracert
tracert www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
Tracing route to www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com) [66.98.246.48]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 8 ms 6 ms 5 ms 10.75.48.1
2 6 ms 18 ms 7 ms cosh-t2cam1-b-v109.inet.ntl.com [80.3.162.145]
3 13 ms 6 ms 7 ms cosh-t2core-b-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [80.3.161.13
3]
4 7 ms 9 ms 9 ms gfd-bb-b-so-210-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.253]
5 7 ms 7 ms 8 ms gfd-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.5]
6 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-110-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.78]
7 282 ms 266 ms 262 ms 212.250.14.62
8 370 ms 369 ms 363 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0
.46]
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 377 ms 353 ms 343 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6
2]
11 402 ms 415 ms 391 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.3
3]
12 415 ms 412 ms 401 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.1
05]
13 418 ms 419 ms 409 ms g0-1.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66
.28.64.62]
14 397 ms 405 ms 409 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112
.25.158]
15 399 ms 397 ms 416 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
16 407 ms 407 ms 416 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
17 411 ms 406 ms 412 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
Trace complete.
This is only going to get worse as 10mb and higher comes in and people get a lot more savvy to the speeds they should be getting for their money.
I'm not saying I should get 10mb from a single connection, but I certainly should get more than 25k though my web browser :)
Ignition
26-08-2005, 18:32
The old Cogent<>ntl problem is back I guess.
Permanent work is being done to sort this but will take a little while as it involves new fibre and peering connection, this should be sorted in fairly rapid time.
Also by the way that hop you said that apparently belonged to ntl doesn't it's just using an IP from an ntl range, it actually is a Cogent box :p:
People aren't going to be getting 10Mbit or anywhere close to it a lot of the time from a lot of sites, going to be amusing people complaining like crazy about it though ;)
Infact already sorted (for now!):
8 12 ms 11 ms 13 ms tele-ic-1-so-110-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.78]
9 18 ms 16 ms 17 ms 212.250.14.62
Chrysalis
26-08-2005, 19:18
nott-cache5 attempt after ignition fix
http://www.chrysalisnet.org/ntl/nott5a.jpg
max 240kB/sec avg 230kB/sec
apart from flaky start looks good.
So far no browsing issues on nott5 proxy. I have 12 ntl proxies in my proxy list which I cycle through including 2 other nott proxies and this is the only one that has had no issues during use O_O
Also by the way that hop you said that apparently belonged to ntl doesn't it's just using an IP from an ntl range, it actually is a Cogent box :p:
LOL, well I was only quoting you earlier, I don't have inside knowledge like you :)
People aren't going to be getting 10Mbit or anywhere close to it a lot of the time from a lot of sites, going to be amusing people complaining like crazy about it though ;)
True enough, but with the current proxy situation one day they will get 300k the next 20k, its this inconsistency and the fact that it often takes 3 or 4 clicks on the same link to get anywhere that is so annoying.
Froopter.com gives me 374k currently through Poplar, yesterday it gave me about 25k through Poplar and about 370k thru Baguley, this happens almost every day recently, and the same with my other server on a totally different network (Telia) - presumably because the proxies take different routes.
I never had this inconsistency when I used Freeserve, (when they had proxies) nor do I get it now with AOL proxies on their service, every day its roughly the same (Good).
I'm not naive enough to think that NTL will get rid of the proxies, all I would like is for them to work consistently (at good speeds !), so that I don't have to waste time changing to get decent speeds on different sites all the time.
The NTL network seems to be pretty good here, as I've said before - non proxies connections are extremely good, gaming is great, but these proxies are pretty awful at present.
Yesterday for example on 3dgamers.com(Savvis network)
Default Poplar gave me about 100k a sec
Baguley gave about 370k a sec
....and this is by no means unusual.
I think I've made my point, and someone from NTL is listening at last (maybe) so I'll shut up now until I have some news or updates to pass on.
Chrysalis
26-08-2005, 22:46
What bamuses me is ignition and other NTL staff have not stated the reason and logic as to why they wont remove the proxies from service, even for a temporary period. He just stated a few posts ago there is a permanent fix coming into place for this one problem, (make no mistake there are dozens more) so he acknowledges the problem.
The frustration here is I have 2 choices in maxthon and IE.
1 - use the nott5 proxy or my squid proxy for good browsing, but suffer from missing images due to IE not handling specified proxes very well.
2 - dont specify a proxy so IE loads all images good but then suffer from transperent proxy issues having to hit refresh various times and not been able to use some sites.
IanUK with AOL using proxies I see justification for them since they have an unmetered services, with NTL they have caps which are in the 1st stage now of becoming hard caps so they are in effect already limiting traffic and cutting their traffic costs, this should remove the need to have proxy server's since we have a traffic allocation to use as we please.
Ignition your solution to the cogent issue also bemuses me, we keep hearing NTL have a outstanding internal network at low utilisation blah blah, so the internal network kicks ass good, but now we hear the peering is not so great eh? possible external traffic congestion issues going on is this the main driving force behind the policy on the proxies to keep their external traffic uncongested?
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
27-08-2005, 00:54
better speed tonight its not 100%
but avg 250kb/s better than 20k tho
better speed tonight its not 100%
but avg 250kb/s better than 20k tho
Me and you use the same proxy and my speed has gone back to normal since last night .. am mildly happy :)
Pud
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
27-08-2005, 14:48
Me and you use the same proxy and my speed has gone back to normal since last night .. am mildly happy :)
Pud
hmmm only Mildly happy im maxxing out 378kb/s down and i had to limit my up to 10kb/s
its all good down south again
what about you IanUK ?
thx ;-)__}
Chrysalis
27-08-2005, 15:30
still full speed on this one testfile.
Yes, my Cogent server is cool now, top whack, but my Telia hosted one is still very poor.
Also today getting DNS failures on the Poplar Proxy, I see there is a seperate thread about that today as well :(
If you guys get a chance please try the same file hosted on my other server, I'm currently getting about 50k max from Poplar.
But 374k FTP'ing direct to my IP.
AOL gives 374k
Poplar Proxy seems useless again.
http://69.50.131.182/radeondriver.test
The tech at Natnet (where the server is) says:
'I figure that since the cache server is the last hop down the line in the run
that there's something odd at NTL between you and that machine.'
Trace from my server to Poplar Proxy:
traceroute to 62.253.185.81 (62.253.185.81), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 69-50-137-3.mach10hosting.com (69.50.137.3) 1 ms 0 ms 0 ms
2 atl-bb1-geth1-3-0-0.telia.net (213.248.90.45) 0 ms 0 ms 2 ms
3 ash-bb1-pos7-1-0-0.telia.net (213.248.80.141) 13 ms 13 ms 14 ms
4 nyk-bb1-pos7-1-0.telia.net (213.248.80.70) 21 ms 19 ms 20 ms
5 ldn-bb1-pos7-1-0.telia.net (213.248.65.89) 89 ms 90 ms 90 ms
6 ldn-b2-pos9-0.telia.net (213.248.74.2) 91 ms 90 ms 89 ms
7 ntl-110030-ldn-b2.c.telia.net (213.248.75.90) 89 ms 88 ms 88 ms
8 bre-bb-b-so-510-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.188.122) 89 ms 88 ms 145 ms
9 bre-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com (213.105.172.86) 90 ms 90 ms 90 ms
10 win-bb-b-so-600-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.198) 93 ms 93 ms 93 ms
11 pop-bb-a-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.201) 95 ms 94 ms 95 ms
12 pop-bb-b-so-430-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.81) 91 ms 91 ms 100 ms
Seems fine to my untrained eye, but speeds are terrible :(
Trace from my server to my IP:
traceroute to 81.98.7.221 (81.98.7.221), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 69-50-137-3.mach10hosting.com (69.50.137.3) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
2 e01.atl.fe1-2.wvfiber.net (63.223.8.181) 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms
3 pos1-6-1.ash-b0-00.wvfiber.net (63.223.0.246) 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms
4 a00.ash.pos0-0.wvfiber.net (63.223.24.14) 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms
5 e01.ash.fe1-1.wvfiber.net (63.223.24.34) 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms
6 ge-4-3-1.mpr2.iad10.us.above.net (64.125.12.189) 14 ms 14 ms 14 ms
7 so-4-0-0.mpr2.iad2.us.above.net (64.125.30.122) 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms
8 so-0-0-0.mpr1.iad2.us.above.net (64.125.28.25) 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms
9 so-4-0-0.mpr2.iad1.us.above.net (64.125.29.133) 15 ms 16 ms 15 ms
10 so-1-0-0.cr2.dca2.us.above.net (64.125.28.129) 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms
11 so-6-0-0.cr2.lhr3.uk.above.net (64.125.27.166) 100 ms 100 ms 100 ms
12 pop-bb-b-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com (208.185.188.42) 89 ms 89 ms 89 ms
13 popl-t2core-b-pos31.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.70) 92 ms 93 ms 92 ms
14 wapk-t2cam1-b-ge-wan34.inet.ntl.com (62.255.81.174) 92 ms 91 ms 99 ms
15 ubr07seve-ge02.inet.ntl.com (80.1.170.186) 92 ms 92 ms 92 ms
16 * *
Diiferent Route and speed is great.
Seems sadly familar...
Chrysalis
27-08-2005, 22:19
nott5
peak 92kB/sec
avg 36kB/sec
squid (germany based)
peak 240kB/sec
avg 232kB/sec
as you have already tested direct speeds this will be another case of it would be fine if the proxy was turned off.
homealone
27-08-2005, 22:29
08/27/05 22:25:35 Fast traceroute http://69.50.131.182
Trace http://69.50.131.182 (69.50.131.182) ...
1 10.189.183.254 10ms 10ms 10ms TTL: 0 (No rDNS)
2 10.189.183.254 10ms 12ms 10ms TTL: 0 (No rDNS)
3 80.4.47.225 11ms 25ms 12ms TTL: 0 (nott-t2cam1-b-v128.inet.ntl.com ok)
4 80.1.79.185 14ms 11ms 185ms TTL: 0 (nott-t2core-b-ge-wan71.inet.ntl.com ok)
5 62.253.185.37 16ms 15ms 13ms TTL: 0 (nth-bb-b-so-200-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
6 62.253.185.117 14ms 103ms 13ms TTL: 0 (nth-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
7 62.253.185.98 18ms 18ms 17ms TTL: 0 (gfd-bb-b-so-400-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
8 213.105.172.149 20ms 17ms 19ms TTL: 0 (bre-bb-a-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
9 213.105.172.85 26ms 25ms 28ms TTL: 0 (bre-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
10 62.253.188.121 26ms 50ms 27ms TTL: 0 (telc-ic-1-so-210-0.inet.ntl.com ok)
11 213.248.75.89 25ms 28ms 54ms TTL: 0 (ldn-b2-geth8-1.telia.net ok)
12 213.248.64.73 27ms 26ms 27ms TTL: 0 (ldn-bb2-pos1-3-0.telia.net ok)
13 213.248.65.94 121ms 100ms 100ms TTL: 0 (nyk-bb2-pos0-2-0.telia.net ok)
14 213.248.80.138 108ms 113ms 107ms TTL: 0 (ash-bb1-pos7-0-0-0.telia.net ok)
15 213.248.80.142 116ms 116ms 119ms TTL: 0 (atl-bb1-pos5-0-0.telia.net ok)
16 213.248.90.6 109ms 111ms 111ms TTL: 0 (nationalnet-108158-atl-bb1.c.telia.net ok)
17 No Response * * *
18 No Response * * *
29 No Response * * *
Yeah traces look fine, its weird, but I just tried the download and still only get about 50k max from Poplar Proxy, I get 355k from AOL....
Hopefully someone from NTL will get back to me this coming week with a reason and fix :)
BTW: homealone: You might want to not make the link clickable above, that site is not suitable for this forum I think, thats why I always used the ip and not url ;)
BTW: homealone: You might want to not make the link clickable above, that site is not suitable for this forum I think, thats why I always used the ip and not url ;)
Done :)
homealone
28-08-2005, 17:02
Yeah traces look fine, its weird, but I just tried the download and still only get about 50k max from Poplar Proxy, I get 355k from AOL....
Hopefully someone from NTL will get back to me this coming week with a reason and fix :)
BTW: homealone: You might want to not make the link clickable above, that site is not suitable for this forum I think, thats why I always used the ip and not url ;)
:blush: didn't realise, sorry - thanks for pointing it out and to Chris W for the edit :tu:
Chrysalis
28-08-2005, 19:56
can you be more specific where on telia this is?
I have telia server's located in germany which are fine even on these proxies, and its 100ms from those so doesnt seem to be a neighboring country.
jonholyfield
28-08-2005, 20:28
I thought this had been locked?
Update.
All my customers in the Woking area appear to be surfing to their satisfaction. Thanks for putting up with my moaning.
can you be more specific where on telia this is?
I have telia server's located in germany which are fine even on these proxies, and its 100ms from those so doesnt seem to be a neighboring country.
USA, Telia in Europe is fine for me too.
__________________
I thought this had been locked?
I requested it unlocked as I had pointed the NTL person who was helping me to this thread, and she hasn't replied yet.
jonholyfield
28-08-2005, 23:11
Oh fantastic.
When I lock a thread it tends to stay locked.
Thanks again to this forum.
NTL problems increase my work but if it is not a pc problem then I dont get paid.
My choice.
I would not touch them following the occasion three years ago when my faher in law died and they transferred the account to my address even though we are not connected on cable and charged me for three months for the service. They still owe me 42 pence.
And the life reducing esperience of "hanging on"
Oh fantastic.
When I lock a thread it tends to stay locked.
Thanks again to this forum.
The reasons for the thead closure were explained in the closing post, as was an invitation to PM me if anyone had reasons for the thread to remain open. IanUK provided a good reason for this thread to remain open, thus i reopened it.
If you have a problem with the moderation on this site, please contact a member of the Team via Private Message.
Chrysalis
29-08-2005, 00:20
I think its good it stayed unlocked because ignition's fix for the cogent issue is temporary and I for one would like to know when they have the permanent fix in place (new fibre).
Chrysalis
29-08-2005, 01:18
nott5 bailed out on me for a couple of minutes, it did well for a proxy just about 2 days with no browsing problems.
JackJones-ÃÂÂÂÃÂÂÂ-Ã
29-08-2005, 01:51
still loading at 370k it looks like its ok down here in the south
:tu:
Speeds dropped again today, looks like Cogent is going again :(
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com/)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 29/08/2005 15:50:38
2 6 ms 13 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 7 ms 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 9 ms 7 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 7 ms 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 8 ms 8 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 9 ms 9 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 139 ms 146 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 211 ms 208 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 230 ms 225 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 228 ms 229 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 242 ms 241 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 253 ms 255 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 253 ms 255 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 254 ms 255 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 134 ms 132 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 134 ms 134 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 133 ms 132 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
and between 11 and 40k from my Telia server
There was mention of new fibre for the Cogent problem, is there going to be new fibre for the Telia USA problem as well, if anything my speeds are even slower with that provider :(
AOL is managing 374k from both currently..
*sigh*
Ignition
29-08-2005, 17:24
I think its good it stayed unlocked because ignition's fix for the cogent issue is temporary and I for one would like to know when they have the permanent fix in place (new fibre).
Just to be fair this isn't my fix I don't work for ntl anymore :)
Chrysalis
29-08-2005, 21:09
Got a brand new cogent issue, ntl to staminus going over cogent.
staminus have 3 backbones in their network mix, abovenet, cogent and nrs, they tried to depreference cogent and nrs but I am told ntl are making it go over cogent, there is a jump to 380ms which is usually 160ms on abovenet and 200ms on nrs.
Trace below, target ip private. but range is 72.20.x
1 24 ms 8 ms 7 ms 10.8.143.254
2 9 ms 8 ms 12 ms leic-t2cam1-a-ge914.inet.ntl.com [82.3.35.149]
3 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms leic-t2core-a-ge-220-0.inet.ntl.com [82.3.33.10]
4 8 ms 10 ms 9 ms lee-bb-a-so-220-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.110]
5 15 ms 14 ms 16 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 33 ms 16 ms 15 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 201 ms 200 ms 197 ms 212.250.14.62
8 272 ms 267 ms 270 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0
.46]
9 295 ms 323 ms 295 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.11
0]
10 298 ms 332 ms 299 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6
2]
11 312 ms 312 ms 313 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.3
3]
12 330 ms 338 ms 333 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.1
05]
13 369 ms 360 ms 388 ms p14-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.6
]
14 354 ms 357 ms 362 ms p4-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.77
]
15 371 ms 377 ms 381 ms p15-0.core02.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.1.
54]
16 378 ms 410 ms 376 ms g0-2.na21.b000899-0.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com [66
.250.8.166]
17 372 ms 365 ms 393 ms brdr02-4ge.lax1.staminus.net [72.20.0.170]
18 373 ms 364 ms 375 ms edge01-ge.lax1.staminus.net [72.20.0.1]
19 397 ms 388 ms 400 ms core02-ge1.irv1.staminus.net [72.20.0.33]
20 397 ms 386 ms 386 ms csr1-ge.irv1.staminus.net [72.20.0.180]
21 389 ms 384 ms 390 ms xxx.xxx.org [72.20.x.x]
friend who works at ntl says ntl peering congested but he hasnt got the access to fix. So I am hoping ignition can have a look thanks.
Even worse now :(
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 29/08/2005 21:03:07
2 7 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 6 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 11 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 7 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 10 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 11 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 210 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 275 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 303 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 295 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 306 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 322 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 322 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 327 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 133 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 132 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 139 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
And my test file from my other Telia USA hosted server is less than 15k now, pathetic again.
As usual - direct connections, or AOL proxies bring both still in at full speed, I think its time someone from NTL did something about this :(
Chrysalis
29-08-2005, 21:10
Just to be fair this isn't my fix I don't work for ntl anymore :)
umm that puts me up **** creek :(
The Cogent issue is separate to the proxy issue I think, it only affects my server through the web browser because the Poplar Proxy chooses that route, direct connections go through Abovenet and don't suffer the same.
My other server is different though, traces look ok, but speeds through NTL proxies are terrible, All other ISP's seem fine, just NTL users that are having problems connecting to my server(s).
Direct connections show the bandwidth is there, so its not congestion this end, it looks like NTL's peering is pretty poor, this is two networks now that are suffering, its either that or the proxies, I don't know :(
I ask again, why don't NTL monitor this kind of thing ?
The Cogent fix is coming we are told, and it was fixed temporarily, so why can't it be fixed temporarily again, and keep fixing it temporarily until the fibre arrives ?
This has been going on for weeks now.
I see yet another proxy problem thread started today as well (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=34293), thats at least one a day recently, NTL fix these things PLEASE !!!!!
Chrysalis
29-08-2005, 21:34
The cogent issue is defenitly nothing to do with the proxies, I noticed it when there was a massive pause waiting for my ssh session to respond, ssh traffic is direct and doesnt use proxies. I havent done any speed tests over ftp. This kind of thing I agree with you I expect to be monitored so I am guessing one of 2 things, ntl have waited until its full to the brim before the new fiber got laid, or these recent high speeds people have been reporting caused a surge in the utilisation.
Just to back up IanUK, I have no proxy set, yet when I use VisualRoute to trace the route to that site, the ping time rises at the last point in the route that's in the NTL network. According to NTL, this point is where NTL peer to Cogent.
jonholyfield
29-08-2005, 22:14
The cogent issue is defenitly nothing to do with the proxies, I noticed it when there was a massive pause waiting for my ssh session to respond, ssh traffic is direct and doesnt use proxies. I havent done any speed tests over ftp. This kind of thing I agree with you I expect to be monitored so I am guessing one of 2 things, ntl have waited until its full to the brim before the new fiber got laid, or these recent high speeds people have been reporting caused a surge in the utilisation.
I agree.
This stinks of bad management.
The market is horribly competitive.
I dont know but it seems as though they have looked at the competition and are being told to deliver the same. Bad move as far as I can see. Pipex are giving me 2 meg with no problem but they never promised it.
Interesting distiction there when they agree a one meg connection and you get 2 you think "Oh Thanks". Promise ten and degrade the whole network and nobody is happy.
Chrysalis
29-08-2005, 22:52
I agree.
This stinks of bad management.
The market is horribly competitive.
I dont know but it seems as though they have looked at the competition and are being told to deliver the same. Bad move as far as I can see. Pipex are giving me 2 meg with no problem but they never promised it.
Interesting distiction there when they agree a one meg connection and you get 2 you think "Oh Thanks". Promise ten and degrade the whole network and nobody is happy.
Well whats baffling here and with IanUK's EV1 case I was originally wrong and NTL decide on their outbound route. EV1 and staminus both have different providers, abovenet is very good to staminus, was less hops and much lower latency. nrs which kicked in the last 4-6 weeks was lower standard but still only 40ms over abovenet and useable, so ntl not only are using a congested link but are also preferencing it over non congested routes.
I'm guessing its cost, Cogent is well known for being a cheap provider, most 'pile em high' type internet businesses (Newshosting/Newsreader/Filefront/EV1) will have Cogent bandwidth for their High Usage situations and I'm guessing its also cheaper for NTL to route using Cogent.
None of this helps us poor customers of course :(
And other ISP's seem to manage with Cogent just fine.
Perhaps Telia is a cheap route as well ? might explain why it also suffers from about 12pm onwards....
In fact after more research it seems that NTL's peering is pretty poor all round, Easynews has a route selector tool that lets you choose the network that carries your bandwidth, their support forum is full of uk cable users that have very poor connections to them using virtually all of the networks, Level 3 works great for me to them, full speed, but the other providers (Qwest,LLNW,UU & ATT) are all very poor (mid 100k's) so thats another 4 providers that NTL seem to have poor speeds with.
I think its looking to be network probs and not proxies...it just shows as the proxies because different proxies can take different routes...or maybe it *is* the proxies, I don't know, we can witter on for ages here talking to ourselves but we need someone from NTL to answer my Responstek as promised !!
I just realised that my old news server takes the same route, its mighty strange that i used to go through the same 'mental' hop as you but could flat line 360kb/s with four threads.
That was from February for some months...something happened on ~16th June, could not get over 130kb/s even with 8 threads. They upgraded something, unrelated really and soon after I could max out with 8 threads, on occasions it was flaky between 320 and 350 but nothing to shout about.
Chrysalis
30-08-2005, 17:46
I'm guessing its cost, Cogent is well known for being a cheap provider, most 'pile em high' type internet businesses (Newshosting/Newsreader/Filefront/EV1) will have Cogent bandwidth for their High Usage situations and I'm guessing its also cheaper for NTL to route using Cogent.
None of this helps us poor customers of course :(
And other ISP's seem to manage with Cogent just fine.
Perhaps Telia is a cheap route as well ? might explain why it also suffers from about 12pm onwards....
In fact after more research it seems that NTL's peering is pretty poor all round, Easynews has a route selector tool that lets you choose the network that carries your bandwidth, their support forum is full of uk cable users that have very poor connections to them using virtually all of the networks, Level 3 works great for me to them, full speed, but the other providers (Qwest,LLNW,UU & ATT) are all very poor (mid 100k's) so thats another 4 providers that NTL seem to have poor speeds with.
I think its looking to be network probs and not proxies...it just shows as the proxies because different proxies can take different routes...or maybe it *is* the proxies, I don't know, we can witter on for ages here talking to ourselves but we need someone from NTL to answer my Responstek as promised !!
The proxies have issues, they just different issues.
right now the cogent problem is back to normal, but I wonder what it will be like tonight.
So much of usa is turning to cogent now which is very scary since the provider is still below the standards of AT&T abovenet etc. However many providers still have it amongst a mix of providers so that does still leave the likes of NTL with a choice of route, so I am very dissapointed NTL have opted for budget over quality since they sell the "we cap you but it improves quality" so much.
Chrysalis
30-08-2005, 21:46
its back as predicted.
6 18 ms 17 ms 20 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 243 ms 221 ms 216 ms 212.250.14.62
8 285 ms 294 ms 290 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0
.46]
__________________
ok staminus have had me run some tests and have done something their end to help force change the route, it hasnt kicked in yet and wont kick in if ntl have cogent forced.
test #1 to abovenet ntl to above handoff - 60ms - poor - possible congestion
5 15 ms 14 ms 17 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 63 ms 76 ms 63 ms so-4-0-0.cr2.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.185.188.41]
7 167 ms 111 ms 112 ms so-7-0-0.cr2.lga1.us.above.net [64.125.31.182]
test #2 ntl to nrs handoff - 90ms - very poor likely congestion
8 19 ms 19 ms 17 ms tele-ic-2-so-110-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.74]
9 86 ms 99 ms 123 ms cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [195.66.224.167]
test #3 ntl to cogent - very poor - 200ms - confirmed congestion
6 16 ms 20 ms 15 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 195 ms 201 ms 201 ms 212.250.14.62
8 289 ms 284 ms 286 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.
.46]
looks like with all the ubr upgrades going on ntl forgot about their peering, no wonder they keeping the proxies enabled, external traffic is pretty clogged.
Chrysalis
31-08-2005, 00:03
problems easing a bit.
6 17 ms 15 ms 23 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 162 ms 164 ms 169 ms 212.250.14.62
8 217 ms 221 ms 216 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0
abovenet looks clear now
5 15 ms 14 ms 16 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 20 ms 21 ms 66 ms so-4-0-0.cr2.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.185.188.41]
Chrysalis
31-08-2005, 01:02
at 1am cogent looks normal.
6 34 ms 19 ms 25 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 22 ms 18 ms 59 ms 212.250.14.62
8 90 ms 90 ms 91 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0
.46]
Looks like its Cogent/Telia/Abovenet & PCCWBTN thats proven to be getting congested then
Just to keep everyone up to date - I've had two replies to my Responsetek form, and am now awaiting a call from the broadband department.
I'm not sure why they have to call me when all the info is in this thread and affects other people than me, but thats fine if thats how they want to do it.
I've been told I'll be contacted by this Friday, I'll post here when I get more details.
Just to back up IanUK, I have no proxy set, yet when I use VisualRoute to trace the route to that site, the ping time rises at the last point in the route that's in the NTL network. According to NTL, this point is where NTL peer to Cogent.No surprise, since at that point you are crossing the pond, so the ping times will rise by quite a bit.
No surprise, since at that point you are crossing the pond, so the ping times will rise by quite a bit.
You are wrong, that hop is in the UK.
__________________
All of the problem points are in the UK, thats why there is a problem with the peering it seems :(
Abovenet UK HOP:
6 63 ms 76 ms 63 ms so-4-0-0.cr2.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.185.188.41]
Cogent UK Hop:
7 195 ms 201 ms 201 ms 212.250.14.62
PCCWBTN UK Hop:
9 86 ms 99 ms 123 ms cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [195.66.224.167]
All far higher than they should be at peak times (and often off peak in the case of Cogent)
You are wrong, that hop is in the UK.PSI[net] (before the congent net) is in the USA, not UK.
You are wrong or ignition is wrong then :)
Ignition told us the hop you are talking about (212.250.14.62) is in the UK, in fact currently it pings about 9, so its impossible to be in the USA, so I think ignition is right.
You are wrong or ignition is wrong then :)
Ignition told us the hop you are talking about (212.250.14.62) is in the UK, in fact currently it pings about 9, so its impossible to be in the USA, so I think ignition is right.Erm, actually, I'm talking about the next one (130.117.0.46) - where it leaves ntl and crosses to the US.
The problem is before(or as) it leaves NTL, once it gets to the USA its already delayed, clearly shown in our traces recently at the *first* largest hop in Stuart c's trace and ours.
The USA hops are always going to be larger :)
Okay, nevermind - I only looked at Stuart's image and read the previous hop as 14, it's actually 141. I'll go and book my appointment at specsavers now ... :blush:
Having to use Baguley proxy tonight as Poplar won't resolve this site :(
Edit: As seen below looks like for once it wasn't a Poplar Proxy fault.
Back to low speeds on Cogent.
Both sites still slow as usual.
:(
Site been off for 1 1/2 hours tonight.
Site been off for 1 1/2 hours tonight.
me to :(
Site been off for 1 1/2 hours tonight.Not really on topic for this thread, but ;
http://www.cableforum.info/board/showthread.php?t=212
hello whose fault this time :rolleyes:
what ^^^^ said
My connection has been up and down like a brides nightie tonight :erm: :rolleyes:
Wicked_and_Crazy
31-08-2005, 21:19
My connection has been up and down like a brides nightie tonight :erm: :rolleyes:
mines been fine for some sites eg hotmail but is dire for others eg ibank.barclays.co.uk
Chrysalis
31-08-2005, 23:35
No surprise, since at that point you are crossing the pond, so the ping times will rise by quite a bit.
The jumps are happening in london.
200ms to london is NOT normal :(
__________________
Had some connectivity issues to kpn last night it affected noone else, but traceroutes looked normal.
Tonights congestion tests. 11.40pm
cogent
6 18 ms 17 ms 20 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 121 ms 124 ms 137 ms 212.250.14.62
8 191 ms 195 ms 195 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0
.46]
abovenet
5 15 ms 15 ms 18 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 21 ms 23 ms 20 ms so-4-0-0.cr2.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.185.188.41]
nrs - pccwtbn
8 17 ms 14 ms 29 ms tele-ic-2-so-110-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.74]
9 19 ms 16 ms 19 ms cr02.ldn01.pccwbtn.net [195.66.224.167]
10 195 ms 190 ms 193 ms 63.218.51.46
abovenet and nrs both looking ok, although its late evening, unfortenatly although staminus went out their way to depreference cogent my traffic is still going through it from ntl. Cogent itself is congested quite heavily but less then last night.
SNAKEKIL
01-09-2005, 18:42
Hi, Ok its all way over my head, but have a look in forums? There is a lot of posts about limited or no conectivity, slow speeds, lag, poor upload speeds and dropping conections, Now ive had all of them in the last frew days, and iam down in the BN area, i get it at 0600am and ive just had a bad one at 1810hrs. What is going on?:dozey: ps sorrey about the poor english:dunce:
Just my nightly post, both sites still slow.
getting boring now....
Chrysalis
01-09-2005, 22:06
cogent this morning (4am) took its own **** and routed traffic from uk-france-amsterdam then hitting usa at 360ms this wasn't directly ntl's fault but one would have expected them to not be routing traffic thru cogent if possible but of course they did.
Staminus have disabled cogent FULLY for my server at their datacentre because NTL wasnt responding to the cogent been depreferenced, the staminus owner who knows a fair bit about bgp protocol has come to the conclusion that NTL are simply using cogent no matter what preference its set to at the other end which does explain why its congestion gets so bad. The issue here is he cannot keep me at this configuration permanently and I will be back onto the bgp mix within a few days, my contact at NTL says he will look at it but says I am wrong about NTL forcing the cogent route but I cant think of another reason why the cogent route is ALWAYS used even when going through france and holland en route.
__________________
currently cogent heavily congested, nrs normal, abovenet normal.
My server tonight:
Target Name: www.froopter.com (http://www.froopter.com)
IP: 66.98.246.48
Date/Time: 02/09/2005 21:38:02
2 7 ms [10.82.176.1]
3 7 ms wapk-t2cam1-a-ge-wan41-112.inet.ntl.com [80.1.170.57]
4 7 ms popl-t2core-a-ge-wan64.inet.ntl.com [62.255.81.65]
5 8 ms pop-bb-a-so-330-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.113]
6 8 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 10 ms tele-ic-1-so-010-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
8 229 ms [212.250.14.62]
9 301 ms p10-0.core01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com [130.117.0.46]
10 323 ms p5-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.110]
11 322 ms p15-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.62]
12 333 ms p12-0.core01.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.33]
13 345 ms p12-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.4.105]
14 347 ms g0-2.na21.b015619-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com [66.28.64.66]
15 346 ms everyones_internet_2.demarc.cogentco.com [38.112.25.158]
16 114 ms gphou-66-98-241-27.ev1.net [66.98.241.27]
17 116 ms gphou-66-98-241-125.ev1.net [66.98.241.125]
18 115 ms srv1.froopter.com [66.98.246.48]
50k speeds - again :(
My other server is fine by direct connection, but the proxies give less than 50k also...again.
For those that care - despite being contacted by Executive Office staff at NTL (twice) and being promised a call by 9pm tonight at the latest, that still NO ONE has contacted me regarding any of these issues. - its been 3 weeks now since my official complaint.
If you have proxy issues then no one at NTL cares, they have clearly shown this I think.
I'm not posting in this thread any longer,unless I get an answer or something drastic changes, as I'm clearly just wasting my time. I'd ask that the team don't close it just yet as I have written Richard Bourne at NTL an email telling him exactly what I think of his companies 'service' and pointed him here, I doubt he'll bother answering or looking here, as they have been pretty useless so far - but I'd like to at least give him the option.
Chrysalis
03-09-2005, 02:47
I would like this thread to stay open so if any of us gets information we can post updates, I will stop posting nightly reports as by now we all know whats going on.
SNAKEKIL
03-09-2005, 07:24
I would allso, keep it open.
Just an update, NTL contacted me tonight, and we went through my problems, they are going to test my two server downloads at various times tomorrow to see if they get the same slowdowns that I do.
I think we may be nearing the end of this mammoth task :)
Oh, and Betanews.com is now working on the Poplar Proxies ;)
cheers
Ian
Chrysalis
06-09-2005, 00:36
so you mentioned about having to cycle proxies as well?
OK, had a follow up call tonight, we have narrowed the problem down regarding the slow speeds to my server to the fact that only one of the Poplar proxies is giving me full speeds, we tested each one individually, and all but one were giving very poor speeds, this is being escalated and I have been asked to give it one week and I should see the difference.
As far as I'm concerned this thread can be closed now, or moved, whichever the mods want to do, the problem of the proxies (speedwise at least) in my area is now hopefully being looked into.
cheers
Ian
I'll close it for the time being so i can have a good look at what has been said... there may be some unresolved issues that need attention, but there are so many different issues in one place that if the thread is reopened it will be cleaned up first :)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.