kai88
join:2005-03-06
| att dsl bad routing
I have att elite 6mbps dsl. I have bad routing to a lot of game servers that I normally play on. I live in Houston, Texas and I know I should be pinging better than what I have been pinging with att dsl. Here is a tracert to a Dallas, Texas game server.
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Documents and Settings\Kai>tracert 70.87.221.73
Tracing route to 49.dd.5746.static.theplanet.com [70.87.221.73]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms bras12 l0.hstntx.sbcglobal.net [151.164.182.42]
3 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms dist1-vlan50.hstntx.sbcglobal.net [151.164.11.126]
4 8 ms 8 ms 8 ms bb1-g14-0.hstntx.sbcglobal.net [151.164.92.204]
5 73 ms 64 ms 65 ms 151.164.94.255
6 64 ms 64 ms 64 ms asn3356-level3.eqnwnj.sbcglobal.net [151.164.89.250]
7 146 ms 163 ms 97 ms ae-32-56.ebr2.Newark1.Level3.net [4.68.99.190]
8 65 ms 72 ms 71 ms ae-4.ebr3.Washington1.Level3.net [4.69.132.101]
9 119 ms 88 ms 65 ms ae-63-63.csw1.Washington1.Level3.net [4.69.134.162]
10 91 ms 71 ms 72 ms ae-61-61.ebr1.Washington1.Level3.net [4.69.134.129]
11 186 ms 169 ms 80 ms ae-2.ebr3.Atlanta2.Level3.net [4.69.132.85]
12 63 ms 68 ms 72 ms ae-7.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.134.21]
13 65 ms 150 ms 167 ms ae-63-63.csw1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.136.154]
14 64 ms 63 ms 63 ms ae-14-69.car4.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.68.19.6]
15 140 ms 64 ms 62 ms THE-PLANET.car4.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.71.122.2]
16 63 ms 64 ms 63 ms te9-2.dsr02.dllstx3.theplanet.com [70.87.253.30]
17 282 ms 195 ms 215 ms te3-3.dsr02.dllstx2.theplanet.com [70.87.253.126]
18 63 ms 64 ms 64 ms vl2.car01.dllstx2.theplanet.com [12.96.160.43]
19 64 ms 65 ms 63 ms 49.dd.5746.static.theplanet.com [70.87.221.73]
Trace complete.
Now 60ish ping is not bad, but I should be pinging a whole lot better considering I live in the same state as the server. And this is just 1 example, I've been experiencing this kind of routing with tons of other servers all over the country. Like pinging 90 to southern california servers when I should be somewhere around 50-60 |
|
Frohike
Premium
join:2000-07-23
Waxahachie, TX | Once it leaves AT&T network - its out of their hands. They can't control where goes. |
|
kai88
join:2005-03-06 | reply to kai88
so am i pretty much SOL on this one? |
|
powerspec88
Premium
join:2007-03-11
Harrisonville, MO | Pretty much, going from KC to KC routes me to newyork and then back... and i've noticed this is only with Level3. ATT/SBC peering sucks when it comes to same state routing between ISP's. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
 ·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to kai88
Depends upon where AT&T Internet Services (ATTIS) meets with Level 3. Here, in California, Level 3 has transit hubs in the S.F./S.J. region, and L.A. However, nearly as I can tell, ATTIS only meets Level 3 in San José (S.J.). So ATTIS customers in San Diego are SOL for transit to Dallas, TX. There traffic rides ATTIS transit from San Diego to San José (~600 miles), then jumps on to Level 3 transit and rides back to Los Angeles (L.A.; ~400 miles), before turning east to Dallas, TX.
OTOH, traffic from my connection to that server does not appear to run on Level 3 transit, but on AT&T Worldnet Services (ATTW) transit:
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to powerspec88
said by powerspec88  :ATT/SBC peering sucks when it comes to same state routing between ISP's. I wonder what it would cost AT&T Internet Services to peer with Level 3 in both San José, CA, and Los Angeles, CA?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
powerspec88
Premium
join:2007-03-11
Harrisonville, MO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·AT&T Yahoo
| No idea, but i think they are getting better, i noticed last week they finally peered with NTT in Chicago so i get a 23ms ping to OpenDNS now when i was getting 60ms as i was routed with Level3.
I think first they need to do is peer the sbcglobal.net backbone with the att.net backbone. No idea why they have not done this yet (at lease here in Kansas City). Or at lease peer with the major ISP's in the major citys (like here in KC with Road Runner, Comcast, ATT, Sprint, and Cogent). There is NO peering in KC for the sbcglobal.net backbone, it all goes to Chicago or Dallas and then to other ISP's.
from work to my dsl line
But routing out of town is nearly perfect. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| AT&T Worldnet Services (ATTW, the Tier 1 backbone) doesn't connect to every part of the Internet.
AT&T Internet Services (ATTIS, the 'sbcglobal.net' backbone) appears to connect to assorted other networks on a Tier 3 basis.
I ping the same to OpenDNS, Google, and Yahoo!.
I don't know who ATTIS is peering with out here. They connect direct to Google and Yahoo! (and, I believe, Microsoft). I still go through Level 3 to my brother-in-law in Oregon (Comcast customer).
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
powerspec88
Premium
join:2007-03-11
Harrisonville, MO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·AT&T Yahoo
|
Heres a trace to my server here in KC. I host a few game servers on it but its the only host that i know of that has this bad of routing (but it also has to do with who the host ISP's are to). They will soon get a OC3 line with (ATTIS) so i will soon get ~10ms ping to it and 5hops to it!
But still, overall im very happy with the routing i get outside of KC where 99.9% of all game/web servers are. |
|
robbob340
K.U. Sweet 16
Premium
join:2001-02-15
Wichita, KS
| reply to kai88
It kinda blows that DSL customers get to ride sbcglobal and level 3, while wholesale customers get the tier 1 treatment. :hmm:
|
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by robbob340 :It kinda blows that DSL customers get to ride sbcglobal and level 3, while wholesale customers get the tier 1 treatment. ??? Level 3 is a Tier 1 network. One of eight recognized as such:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_network
And "SBC Global" is an old name, retired since SBC bought AT&T, then changed their name to, "AT&T". The old SBC transit network was called, "SBC Internet Services" (SBCIS), but is now called, "AT&T Internet Services" (ATTIS). I think I still have an email from them announcing that change. Somewhere.
This regional transit network is operated apart from the AT&T Tier 1 transit network, called, "AT&T Worldnet Services" (ATTW).
As for peering assignments, you need to look up ASNs, and their relationships.
And I wonder if SBC had some long term contractual arrangements with Level 3, which are now coming to an end. I know that I used to get a Level 3 dial-up POP when I used a dial access number, but I now get an AT&T Worldnet Services dial-up POP.
I assure you that I am not a wholesale customer; residential DSL all the way. I've been seeing more ATTW transit in my trace routes, in place of Level 3 transit.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
rey00
@swbell.net
| reply to kai88
Wow.. from Houston to New Jersey then back to Dallas? Horrible.
I live in Lubbock, TX (~350 miles from Dallas) and my tracert was a lot better.
|
|
kai88
join:2005-03-06 | I envy you rey00 
Do you guys think if I got uverse that I would get better routing? |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| I don't have Uverse. I have pretty good routing to just about everywhere. I suppose it helps that I live near a major transit hub for several transit providers.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
rdcinhou3
join:2004-08-31
Houston, TX
| reply to kai88
I am an old SBC Global Net customer and I am always amazed at how poor "The *NEW* AT&T(tm)" can be.
Over the last couple of weeks my AT&T Pro (3008 kbps) service will sometimes run at speeds SLOWER THAN DIALUP (62 kbps!).
I've replaced modems, changed cables, filters, etc. and kept careful logs of the line conditions.
My noise and attentuation margins are in the EXCELLENT range. I have no packet errors or other processing problems, but still will have periods of 2-6 hours with little or no service.
One side comment...my firewall log did show a few servers in China trying to do port scans (all blocked of course!) and there was a major networking problem with the Pentagon and Defense computer networks last week. Could it be that AT&T is trying to localize and quarantine services to try and stop the spread of this new exploit? |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by rdcinhou3 :Over the last couple of weeks my AT&T Pro (3008 kbps) service will sometimes run at speeds SLOWER THAN DIALUP (62 kbps!). I've never made a dial-up connection at 62 kb/s. Not even 56 kb/s. I have seen 44 kb/s on occasion; but, mostly 33 kb/s, or less.
I've replaced modems, changed cables, filters, etc. and kept careful logs of the line conditions.
My noise and attentuation margins are in the EXCELLENT range. I have no packet errors or other processing problems, but still will have periods of 2-6 hours with little or no service.
Filters, modems, and line conditions will mostly cause dropped, or otherwise flaky synch. If you never synch under 3008 kb/s, but routinely see only 62 kb/s, most likely something else is afoot. Part of a 'botnet, perhaps?
One side comment...my firewall log did show a few servers in China trying to do port scans (all blocked of course!) and there was a major networking problem with the Pentagon and Defense computer networks last week. Could it be that AT&T is trying to localize and quarantine services to try and stop the spread of this new exploit?
Should be causing widespread cases of good synch, slow speed. My only issue, in the last three weeks, was an intermittent open on the loop. Cable maintenance claimed to have found a bird's nest in a cable housing along the F2.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
rdcinhou3
join:2004-08-31
Houston, TX
| My experience with computers dates back to the 70's. My first modem was 110 baud, so "dial-up" has a much wider meaning for me.
My DSL modem reports a sync of 3008 kbps, but actual speed tests (using AT&T's test) now have been down to 3.88 kbps.
I've started a thread in the AT&T Direct area and hope to make some progress on it. I'm sure that the problem is upstream of my DEMARC. I hope to get this resolved soon. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by rdcinhou3 :My experience with computers dates back to the 70's. My first modem was 110 baud, so "dial-up" has a much wider meaning for me. I suppose a 300 baud Hayes Smartmodem wouldn't count for squat in a "dial-up pissing match"; but dial-up is not that complicated. The fastest dial-up modems ever sold were just 56 kb/s; and there were certain limitations which kept the fastest attainable dial-up speeds to 53 kb/s.
Is ISDN considered "dial-up"? Didn't think so.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
