|reply to djrobx |
Re: Bad Gateway
said by djrobx:I understand deprioritation in routers, what I'm trying to figure out is, why is the gateway not responding anymore, is it because Sandy made a damage to the infrastructure? It used to answer to pings within 30ms or less anytime since I have this service before Sandy and now it's taking a very long time to answer the request(timeout). You agree with me it's harder to diagnose performance problem without the missing data. It's easy to say to ignore the gateway not answering and focus on the rest of the hops. It's true all the traceroute I posted have good acceptable hop readings except for the gateway but before this storm, those hops that answers @15ms were @10ms or less. If you were a gamer, those are better ping times. All I'm saying here is, I understand Sandy made some damages in our area and probably is the cause of all of these abnormal readings. I've checked the maintenance site in my area and there are areas that are still down plus hub maintenances this week and next. Maybe this is just a temporary setback, I believe once TWC lit the rest of my area and finish the maintenance next week, it will be back to normal.
What a lot of us are trying to tell you is that ICMP deproritization in routers is common, not specifically indicative of a problem, and that you should focus on a different method of testing.
DrDrewSo that others may surf.Premium
said by bluepoint:15ms is still EXCELLENT, especially 4 hops out.
It's true all the traceroute I posted have good acceptable hop readings except for the gateway but before this storm, those hops that answers @15ms were @10ms or less.
Besides the last hop time is what matters. If it's 90ms now and the intermediate hops drop to 5ms, the last hop can still be 90ms and that 10ms drop on the intermediate hops won't have made any difference. If that gateway hop starts responding, even at 30ms, and the last hop is still at 90ms, again it won't have made any difference.
Just for some perspective.... a blink of an eye take 200-300ms.
If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes.
|reply to bluepoint |
It's getting better. :)
Host Information for "myservices.timwewarnercable.com":
IP address: 188.8.131.52
Host name: myservices.timwewarnercable.com
Tracing route to "184.108.40.206" over max. 30 hops:
1: 0 ms 192.168.1.1
2: 30 ms 220.127.116.11 (cpe-68-174-228-1.si.res.rr.com)
3: 15 ms 18.104.22.168 (24-164-129-218.si.rr.com)
4: 15 ms 22.214.171.124 (tenge-0-4-0-4-nycmny1-rtr02.si.rr.com)
5: 0 ms 126.96.36.199 (bun119.nycmnytg-rtr001.nyc.rr.com)
6: 0 ms 188.8.131.52 (bun6-nycmnytg-rtr002.nyc.rr.com)
7: 15 ms 184.108.40.206
8: 15 ms 220.127.116.11 (ae-1-0.pr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com)
9: 15 ms 18.104.22.168
10: 78 ms 22.214.171.124 (vb1011.rar3.washington-dc.us.xo.net)
11: 78 ms 126.96.36.199 (te-3-0-0.rar3.atlanta-ga.us.xo.net)
12: 93 ms 188.8.131.52 (te-3-0-0.rar3.dallas-tx.us.xo.net)
13: 79 ms 184.108.40.206 (ae0d0.mcr2.sandiego-ca.us.xo.net)
14: 78 ms 220.127.116.11
15: 95 ms 18.104.22.168 (ge5-2-6509-a.castleaccess.com)
16: 109 ms 22.214.171.124
17: 93 ms 126.96.36.199
The target host "188.8.131.52" have been reached.
Still 93ms at the destination just like your first post, so I say not different.