 TSI MarcPremium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:3 | reply to sMURF
Re: Packet loss rates up to 2% on TekSavvy DSL Hey sMURF,
ok that's good that you noticed that. However; 206.248.155.233 and 65.39.134.1 are the same router and on the same interface.
Ai can you have a second look again please? I'm thinking the changes we made in the last couple days caught whatever was going on...
--
TSI Marc - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
 JayMan26WhootPremium
join:2002-06-05
Earth | reply to hiremichael
I put on a DSLR Packet Loss Monitor on my line a few days ago and I am seeing no packetloss OTHER then the downtime the other night.
It is watching my pfsense box.
--
COME ON OVER TO THE NEW »TekSavvy FORUM |
|
| Yeah, the night after they did the upgrade, packet loss was about 0%.
Good for Teksavvy customers; I don't care since my account should expire this weekend.
I don't know how long those packet loss rates went on; I imagine that constant upgrades are the logical result of an ISP increasing it's customer base with $30/month unlimited/almost unlimited accounts.
The 5-6% max I was seeing during prime-time makes for awful VOIP. |
|
| reply to TSI Marc
Re: Packet loss rates up to 2% on TekSavvy DSL Marc,
unfortunately i cant really replicate or repeat my last nights ping tests because as of tonight im just like sMURF being routed through different TSI routers
however i do have trace route results from tonight august 17/07 9:30pm thats just before my routing was changed [it changed around 11:00pm after i reconnected to internet]
>>>>my old routing [trace route 9:30pm august 17/07]:
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| 192.168.0.1 - 0 | 503 | 503 | 0 | 1 | 31 | 0 |
| 206.248.154.102 - 0 | 503 | 503 | 0 | 15 | 79 | 31 |
| 65.39.134.1 - 20 | 503 | 406 | 0 | 16 | 110 | 0 |
| 65.39.198.250 - 0 | 503 | 503 | 0 | 17 | 78 | 16 |
| oc48-po7-0.tor-1yg-cor-1.peer1.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 0 | 17 | 62 | 16 |
| 216.187.114.141 - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 27 | 78 | 16 |
| 12.119.137.69 - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 28 | 78 | 16 |
| tbr1.cgcil.ip.att.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 29 | 94 | 31 |
| ggr2.cgcil.ip.att.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 36 | 234 | 31 |
| 192.205.33.186 - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 36 | 219 | 31 |
| ae-31-55.ebr1.chicago1.level3.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 35 | 79 | 47 |
| ae-68.ebr3.Chicago1.Level3.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 15 | 34 | 94 | 15 |
| ae-2.ebr2.washington1.level3.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 31 | 55 | 94 | 46 |
| ae-4.ebr2.Newark1.Level3.net - 0 | 503 | 503 | 46 | 61 | 94 | 78 |
| ae-22-52.car2.newark1.level3.net - 1 | 503 | 498 | 46 | 54 | 110 | 78 |
| 4.79.190.30 - 3 | 503 | 490 | 31 | 44 | 1016 | 1016 |
| 66.55.133.237.choopa.net - 1 | 503 | 502 | 31 | 39 | 109 | 32 |
|________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
WinMTR - 0.8. Copyleft @2000-2002 Vasile Laurentiu Stanimir ( stanimir@cr.nivis.com )
>>>>my new routing [trace route 11:40pm august 17/07]:
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| 192.168.0.1 - 0 | 302 | 302 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 0 |
| 206.248.154.120 - 0 | 302 | 302 | 0 | 7 | 109 | 0 |
| 206.248.154.69 - 1 | 302 | 301 | 0 | 8 | 78 | 0 |
| 65.39.198.250 - 0 | 302 | 302 | 0 | 8 | 79 | 16 |
| oc48-po7-0.tor-1yg-cor-1.peer1.net - 0 | 302 | 302 | 0 | 9 | 94 | 16 |
| 216.187.114.141 - 0 | 302 | 302 | 15 | 20 | 94 | 32 |
| 12.119.137.69 - 0 | 302 | 302 | 15 | 20 | 94 | 31 |
| tbr2.cgcil.ip.att.net - 0 | 302 | 302 | 15 | 22 | 110 | 47 |
| ggr2.cgcil.ip.att.net - 0 | 302 | 302 | 15 | 30 | 234 | 31 |
| 192.205.33.186 - 0 | 302 | 302 | 15 | 30 | 234 | 31 |
| ae-31-51.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net - 0 | 302 | 302 | 15 | 29 | 94 | 31 |
| ae-68.ebr3.Chicago1.Level3.net - 1 | 301 | 300 | 15 | 29 | 94 | 32 |
| ae-2.ebr2.washington1.level3.net - 0 | 301 | 301 | 31 | 46 | 125 | 79 |
| ae-4.ebr2.Newark1.Level3.net - 0 | 301 | 301 | 46 | 59 | 125 | 78 |
| ae-22-56.car2.newark1.level3.net - 0 | 301 | 301 | 32 | 55 | 125 | 47 |
| CHOOPA-LLC.car2.Newark1.Level3.net - 3 | 301 | 294 | 31 | 42 | 94 | 47 |
| 66.55.133.237.choopa.net - 0 | 301 | 301 | 31 | 39 | 125 | 31 |
|________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
WinMTR - 0.8. Copyleft @2000-2002 Vasile Laurentiu Stanimir ( stanimir@cr.nivis.com )
>>>>that looked ok
so i decided to ping and trace route router ip 206.248.154.120 on second hop to double check
at 12:50am august 18/07
>>>>ping results:
IP: 206.248.154.120
Sent: 128
Received: 128
Lost: 0
Loss Rate: 0.00 %
Min Time: 14 ms
Max Time: 107 ms
Avg Time: 78 ms
Avg TTL: 126
>>>>trace route results:
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| 192.168.0.1 - 0 | 301 | 301 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 206.248.154.120 - 0 | 301 | 301 | 0 | 58 | 110 | 47 |
|________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
WinMTR - 0.8. Copyleft @2000-2002 Vasile Laurentiu Stanimir ( stanimir@cr.nivis.com )
>>>>no packet loss thats an improvement
but 58 and 78ms ping average cant be good spiking to 107-110ms
by the way what time did you ping router ip 65.39.198.250 Marc? |
|
| well the problem - ping spikes is still there every evening
and it appears to be TSI router that im on
ip 206.248.154.102
here is my ping results to that router
done tonight at 10:45pm
itd be nice if TSI could do something to fix it
C:\WINDOWS\system32>ping 206.248.154.102 /n 60 /l 64
Pinging 206.248.154.102 with 64 bytes of data:
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=68ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=41ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=98ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=16ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=18ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=74ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=49ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=97ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=23ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=59ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=60ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=64ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=108ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=51ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=65ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=66ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=73ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=99ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=82ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=106ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=14ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=42ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=46ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=66ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=14ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=39ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=57ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=38ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=49ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=91ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=88ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=14ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=28ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=34ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=89ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=31ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=49ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=63ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=97ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=58ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=80ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=33ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=90ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=101ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=90ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=71ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=83ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=72ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=86ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=97ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=32ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=57ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=64ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=38ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=42ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=69ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=65ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=18ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=56ms TTL=126
Reply from 206.248.154.102: bytes=64 time=69ms TTL=126
Ping statistics for 206.248.154.102:
Packets: Sent = 60, Received = 60, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 14ms, Maximum = 108ms, Average = 60ms |
|
sMURF
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON | said by Ai_:well the problem - ping spikes is still there every evening and it appears to be TSI router that im on ip 206.248.154.102 Post a trace route.
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms 206.248.154.102
3 11 ms 11 ms 41 ms 206.248.154.69
4 15 ms 11 ms 11 ms 65.39.198.250
5 13 ms 13 ms 11 ms oc48-po7-0.tor-1yg-cor-1.peer1.net [216.187.114.161]
6 25 ms 23 ms 23 ms 216.187.114.141
7 29 ms 27 ms 23 ms 72.51.60.248
I'm also back on 206.248.154.102, however the third hop is different from my previous posts. It used to be 206.248.154.102, then 65.39.134.1, but now it's 206.248.154.102, then 206.248.154.69. I'm currently not seeing any packet loss or abnormal ping spikes. |
|
JayMan26WhootPremium
join:2002-06-05
Earth | reply to Ai_
From what I understand there is nothing to fix. The routers are set to give ICMP a low priority so you can expect the numbers to go up and down.
Also keep in mind in the evening everyone and there uncle in north america is online so things can slow down. |
|
|
|
