dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2135
share rss forum feed

Darksoul

join:2010-04-17

[FiOS] Who do I need to contact to fix this?

This is ridiculous.

C:\Users\Tyler>tracert 74.221.208.28

Tracing route to 74.221.208.28 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
2 4 ms 3 ms 4 ms 50-35-176-1.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net [50.35.176.1
]
3 4 ms 3 ms 3 ms G14-0-6-110.STTLWA-LCR-01.ncnetwork.net [184.19.
242.14]
4 4 ms 3 ms 4 ms 50.34.2.1
5 33 ms 33 ms 32 ms ae3---0.cor02.sttl.wa.frontiernet.net [74.40.1.1
01]
6 33 ms 33 ms 32 ms ae0---0.cor01.sttl.wa.frontiernet.net [74.40.3.1
37]
7 33 ms 33 ms 33 ms ae1---0.cor02.ptld.or.frontiernet.net [74.40.2.1
53]
8 49 ms 34 ms 32 ms ae0---0.cor01.ptld.or.frontiernet.net [74.40.4.1
09]
9 33 ms 33 ms 32 ms ae1---0.cor01.plal.ca.frontiernet.net [74.40.2.1
58]
10 32 ms 32 ms 33 ms so--0-0-0---0.br01.plal.ca.frontiernet.net [74.4
0.3.150]
11 33 ms 32 ms 33 ms xe-0.paix.plalca01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [198.32.176
.14]
12 57 ms 56 ms 56 ms ae-2.r06.plalca01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.5.2
38]
13 34 ms 52 ms 34 ms ae-1.r21.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.4.1
19]
14 52 ms 51 ms 52 ms ae-1.r20.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.3.3
8]
15 55 ms 54 ms 55 ms ae-1.r04.sttlwa01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net [129.250.5.4
3]
16 63 ms 63 ms 63 ms xe-0-5-0-3.r04.sttlwa01.us.ce.gin.ntt.net [198.1
04.202.18]
17 66 ms 63 ms 66 ms agg1-sea-p20.bb.spectrumnet.us [208.76.153.38]
18 66 ms 64 ms 65 ms sentris-1000M-SEA.demarc.spectrumnet.us [208.76.
184.210]
19 69 ms 62 ms 66 ms 63.223.120.129
20 62 ms 63 ms 63 ms 74.221.208.28

Trace complete.

Hop 5 is Seattle... so the other 15 hops just to get to another location in Seattle.. it blows my mind.

Thanks.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
Unless you have packet loss which I don't see here I don't see a problem here.

If you would read the rdns it shows it has to talk to talk to an other provider in CA, Palo Alto CA, which hands it off to San Jose CA, then it's transferred back to Seattle WA. This is out of frontiers hands, and they will do nothing about this. You can't always get the closest routing, and many providers operate out of a few main cities.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent out necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.

plat2on1

join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
reply to Darksoul
good luck, i left frontier 10 years ago because this is how they run their network. when citizens purchased frontier they changed the dsl egress point from NYC to Washington DC.

plat2on1

join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

Unless you have packet loss which I don't see here I don't see a problem here.

If you would read the rdns it shows it has to talk to talk to an other provider in CA, Palo Alto CA, which hands it off to San Jose CA, then it's transferred back to Seattle WA. This is out of frontiers hands, and they will do nothing about this. You can't always get the closest routing, and many providers operate out of a few main cities.

it is not out of their hands, they choose to have only 4 POPs(SFO, CHI, WDC, ATL)

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
Are you so sure about that? I have fios also on the west coast, and don't get routed through California. I get routed through Seattle WA.


Ben J
Triple Play Architect
Premium
join:2011-09-16
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:10
reply to plat2on1
So some education on how Internet peering works. The side RECEIVING the traffic generally pays for it. Thus, the receiving entity generally manipulates their advertised routes to prefer the cheapest provider for them. ISPs generally use the "quickest drain" methodology. We want the traffic off our network as soon as possible (why would we pay to transfer a bit ourselves when we can have someone else do it?). It is very rare subset of conditions that would cause an ISP to override this for outbound traffic. So generally speaking, if your outbound route is cracked out, it's the entity on the other side who's ultimately dictating it, not your ISP.

Also, as anyone who actually logs into a BGP looking glass can verify, Frontier peers in 5 locations: Seattle, Palo Alto, Chicago, Ashburn, and Atlanta, covering our entire footprint with very minimal egress latency (when external factors don't otherwise mess with it).
--
Transparency Disclosure and Disclaimer: I am a Frontier employee posting in my own personal capacity. The opinions and positions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Frontier.

Darksoul

join:2010-04-17
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

Unless you have packet loss which I don't see here I don't see a problem here.

If you would read the rdns it shows it has to talk to talk to an other provider in CA, Palo Alto CA, which hands it off to San Jose CA, then it's transferred back to Seattle WA. This is out of frontiers hands, and they will do nothing about this. You can't always get the closest routing, and many providers operate out of a few main cities.

I'm a gamer. This kind of crap is terrible for my latency (some of my favorite servers happen to be in Seattle) and I don't really appreciate it.

Additionally, I've never had this problem before. I haven't been gaming in a while (last 2-3 months) because I had other things to do, but the routing never used to be like this for me. So yes, I think that it's something they can fix and it's not "out of their hands".

I had the same issue with Dallas, Texas causing my ping to go upwards of 200ms and I talked to frontier and they kept on saying "it would be fixed soon" -- never was. It mostly happened towards the evening hours and not all the time.

That left me with the choice of buying a VPS to setup OpenVPN in order to bypass their routing -- worked wonderfully and my latency went back to what I consider normal.

However, the only cheapish VPS in my area happen to be in Seattle and with this new issue -- I no longer have that option.

So yes, I want them to fix this. I'd like to know who I can contact directly about this -- that way I can avoid the CS reps altogether.


Ben J
Triple Play Architect
Premium
join:2011-09-16
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:10
said by Darksoul:

I'd like to know who I can contact directly about this -- that way I can avoid the CS reps altogether.

That would be me. I'll check into this for you tomorrow.
--
Transparency Disclosure and Disclaimer: I am a Frontier employee posting in my own personal capacity. The opinions and positions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Frontier.

Darksoul

join:2010-04-17
said by Ben J:

said by Darksoul:

I'd like to know who I can contact directly about this -- that way I can avoid the CS reps altogether.

That would be me. I'll check into this for you tomorrow.

Ah, sorry about that Ben -- didn't read your signature.

I appreciate that you're taking the time to look into this for me. I know this VPS host who uses SoftLayer in Seattle and I may end up using them if the routing doesn't get better. It still routes through or/cal, but because SoftLayer has their own network the latency is reduced.
C:\Users\Tyler>tracert explorer.quickweb.co.nz

Tracing route to explorer.quickweb.co.nz [67.228.216.22]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 4 ms 4 ms 4 ms 50-35-176-1.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net [50.35.176.1
]
3 4 ms 4 ms 3 ms G14-0-6-110.STTLWA-LCR-01.ncnetwork.net [184.19.
242.14]
4 4 ms 4 ms 3 ms 50.34.2.1
5 59 ms 32 ms 33 ms ae3---0.cor02.sttl.wa.frontiernet.net [74.40.1.1
01]
6 32 ms 42 ms 32 ms ae0---0.cor01.sttl.wa.frontiernet.net [74.40.3.1
37]
7 32 ms 33 ms 32 ms ae1---0.cor02.ptld.or.frontiernet.net [74.40.2.1
53]
8 34 ms 33 ms 34 ms ae0---0.cor01.ptld.or.frontiernet.net [74.40.4.1
09]
9 33 ms 32 ms 33 ms ae1---0.cor01.plal.ca.frontiernet.net [74.40.2.1
58]
10 68 ms 33 ms 33 ms so--0-0-0---0.br01.plal.ca.frontiernet.net [74.4
0.3.150]
11 33 ms 34 ms 34 ms ge9-26-1G.ar1.pao2.gblx.net [64.215.195.45]
12 30 ms 29 ms 31 ms ae12.bbr01.eq01.sjc02.networklayer.com [208.48.2
37.238]
13 29 ms 29 ms 29 ms ae0.bbr02.wb01.sea02.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.146]
14 28 ms 29 ms 28 ms ae1.dar02.sr01.sea01.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.185]
15 30 ms 30 ms 31 ms po2.fcr01.sr01.sea01.networklayer.com [67.228.11
8.138]
16 29 ms 29 ms 29 ms explorer.quickweb.co.nz [67.228.216.22]

Trace complete.


Ben J
Triple Play Architect
Premium
join:2011-09-16
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:10
That destination appears to be instructing Spectrum (AS 11404) via their control communities (»as11404.net/communities.html) to prefer their traffic transit NTT by withholding routes and padding the AS path from a number of better paths for Frontier. For example, Level3 (a better path for us in Seattle) peers directly with Spectrum, but sees that block triple-padded via Comcast instead of direct which makes it worse than NTT. We don't peer with NTT in Seattle, only Palo Alto, Chicago, and Ashburn, so thus the hop down to California.
--
Transparency Disclosure and Disclaimer: I am a Frontier employee posting in my own personal capacity. The opinions and positions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Frontier.

Darksoul

join:2010-04-17
reply to Darksoul
Thanks Ben. So I've been talking with Spectrum directly and they've said the following:

"After some poking around, it doesn't appear that Frontier Peers with any of our upstreams locally in Seattle. We will try to prod their peering coordinator to see if they will peer locally, but that is doubtful, if they aren't even peering with any of our upstreams."

"We don't use level3. Frontier buys transit from level3 in Seattle but I don't see that same return path via anyone, they do buy transit from several other providers, but none of them appear to have connections to them locally. Frontier is new to the northwest and thus hardly has any peering here at the moment, we have reached out to them to see if we can bring up a peer directly."
Expand your moderator at work


Ben J
Triple Play Architect
Premium
join:2011-09-16
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:10
reply to Darksoul

Re: [FiOS] Who do I need to contact to fix this?

I know we have intermediary matches with them, but it sounds like we just may not line up with any of them in Seattle. I don't want to speak for our peering team, but it's unlikely we'll turn up a new large peer for a single location like that (because of all the downstream effects it would have on our other peering), but it could definitely influence transit choices to find somebody in the middle that doesn't take us out of the region. May I ask what specific services you're attempting to reach? Are these mostly gaming servers?
--
Transparency Disclosure and Disclaimer: I am a Frontier employee posting in my own personal capacity. The opinions and positions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Frontier.


theman
Premium
join:2000-08-02
Dallas, TX
reply to Darksoul
Interestingly enough, SoftLayer lurks around here as well

I've reached out to FrontierNet to try and establish some direct peering with them in Seattle (and a few other locations that we're common at). Hopefully we can get the ball rolling here soon enough.
--
Director of Engineering -- SoftLayer Technologies, Inc.

Darksoul

join:2010-04-17
said by theman:

Interestingly enough, SoftLayer lurks around here as well

I've reached out to FrontierNet to try and establish some direct peering with them in Seattle (and a few other locations that we're common at). Hopefully we can get the ball rolling here soon enough.

That's excellent! You guys are absolutely brilliant. Prices are higher then everywhere else but you make up for it in every other aspect.

Thanks for taking the time to do this, seriously appreciate it.


Smith6612
Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:25
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Frontier Communi..
reply to theman
The more peering the better! If you have any points in NJ/Virginia (near Ashburn), or even New York where you can peer with them that'd be awesome. Beats routing to Washington DC or Dallas to hit the SoftLayer network, which ultimately goes over congested routes.


theman
Premium
join:2000-08-02
Dallas, TX

1 edit
said by Darksoul:

said by theman:

Interestingly enough, SoftLayer lurks around here as well

I've reached out to FrontierNet to try and establish some direct peering with them in Seattle (and a few other locations that we're common at). Hopefully we can get the ball rolling here soon enough.

That's excellent! You guys are absolutely brilliant. Prices are higher then everywhere else but you make up for it in every other aspect.

Thanks for taking the time to do this, seriously appreciate it.

We appreciate the kind words. We're always willing to work with our customers or ultimately their end users to improve routing to them.

said by Smith6612:

The more peering the better! If you have any points in NJ/Virginia (near Ashburn), or even New York where you can peer with them that'd be awesome. Beats routing to Washington DC or Dallas to hit the SoftLayer network, which ultimately goes over congested routes.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like they're in Ashburn or NYC. When you mention congested routes, were you referring to the SoftLayer network or an intermediary transit provider?
--
Director of Engineering -- SoftLayer Technologies, Inc.


Smith6612
Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:25
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Frontier Communi..

1 edit
Mainly Frontier's network/main transit peering. Seems that throughput hit or miss based on the sites. I don't know how their network is built specifically and how they peer, but almost all of my traffic definitely goes to Virginia. Here's a Line Quality Test, if it helps determine where they are.

»/pingtest/b9a4···/2891820

Notice: Ashburn, VA hop in one of the traces. I'm sure they have something in Ashburn. There's a post above from Ben J who confirms Frontier's peering point in VA.

I've not had an issue with the SoftLayer network.


theman
Premium
join:2000-08-02
Dallas, TX
said by Smith6612:

Mainly Frontier's network/main transit peering. Seems that throughput hit or miss based on the sites. I don't know how their network is built specifically and how they peer, but almost all of my traffic definitely goes to Virginia. Here's a Line Quality Test, if it helps determine where they are.

»/pingtest/b9a4···/2891820

Notice: Ashburn, VA hop in one of the traces. I'm sure they have something in Ashburn. There's a post above from Ben J who confirms Frontier's peering point in VA.

I've not had an issue with the SoftLayer network.

I would agree with you based on those traceroutes. They obviously have their core network in those locations, but aren't participating in the public exchange point in NYC. They are participating in Ashburn. If you're in NYC, I'm willing to bet to reach SoftLayer you'd enter in Chicago or Ashburn ultimately depending on where Frontier takes you.
--
Director of Engineering -- SoftLayer Technologies, Inc.


theman
Premium
join:2000-08-02
Dallas, TX
reply to Darksoul
Update:

We just turned peering up with FrontierNet in a variety of locations. Please let me know if that has resolved your issue. An updated traceroute would be fantastic if you can.
--
Director of Engineering -- SoftLayer Technologies, Inc.

Darksoul

join:2010-04-17
said by theman:

Update:

We just turned peering up with FrontierNet in a variety of locations. Please let me know if that has resolved your issue. An updated traceroute would be fantastic if you can.

Tracing route to 174.37.137.154-static.reverse.softlayer.com [174.37.137.154]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
2 4 ms 3 ms 3 ms 50-35-176-1.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net [50.35.176.1
]
3 4 ms 3 ms 4 ms G14-0-6-110.STTLWA-LCR-01.ncnetwork.net [184.19.
242.14]
4 3 ms 4 ms 4 ms 50.34.2.1
5 5 ms 4 ms 4 ms ae3---0.cor02.sttl.wa.frontiernet.net [74.40.1.1
01]
6 4 ms 5 ms 4 ms ae1---0.cbr01.sttl.wa.frontiernet.net [74.40.5.1
26]
7 5 ms 4 ms 4 ms te1-5.bbr01.wb01.sea01.networklayer.com [206.81.
80.140]
8 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms ae0.dar02.sr01.sea01.networklayer.com [173.192.1
8.159]
9 5 ms 5 ms 4 ms po2.fcr01.sr01.sea01.networklayer.com [67.228.11
8.138]
10 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms explorer.quickweb.co.nz [67.228.216.22]
11 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms 174.37.137.154-static.reverse.softlayer.com [174
.37.137.154]

You are awesome.


theman
Premium
join:2000-08-02
Dallas, TX
Glad that fixed your issue. If you run into anything else, please feel free to PM me here and I'll take a look.
--
Director of Engineering -- SoftLayer Technologies, Inc.