dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
906
share rss forum feed

apum

join:2012-11-10

[Cable] Routing issues to toronto.voip.ms

Anyone having issues connecting to toronto.voip.ms? I'm getting huge packet loss. No problems with Montreal or New York servers.

Pinging toronto.voip.ms [174.137.63.206] with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 174.137.63.206: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 174.137.63.206:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 1, Lost = 9 (90% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 29ms, Maximum = 29ms, Average = 29ms

Tracert results:
Tracing route to toronto.voip.ms [174.137.63.206]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms 10.125.250.129
3 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 69.63.242.217
4 9 ms 7 ms 7 ms richmond1.cable.teksavvy.com [24.246.55.14]
5 15 ms 15 ms 13 ms richmond2.cable.teksavvy.com [69.196.175.65]
6 15 ms 13 ms 14 ms peer1.bdr01.tor.packetflow.ca [76.74.242.121]
7 * 19 ms * 72.51.9.92
8 * * * Request timed out.
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 * * * Request timed out.
11 * * * Request timed out.
12 * * * Request timed out.
13 * * * Request timed out.
14 * * * Request timed out.
15 * * * Request timed out.
16 * * * Request timed out.
17 * * * Request timed out.
18 * * * Request timed out.
19 * 28 ms * dns2-c.crtnetworks.net [174.137.63.206]
20 * * * Request timed out.
21 * * * Request timed out.
22 26 ms * * dns2-c.crtnetworks.net [174.137.63.206]
23 * * * Request timed out.
24 * * * Request timed out.
25 * * * Request timed out.
26 * * * Request timed out.
27 32 ms * * dns2-c.crtnetworks.net [174.137.63.206]
28 * * * Request timed out.
29 * * * Request timed out.
30 * * 31 ms dns2-c.crtnetworks.net [174.137.63.206]


apum

join:2012-11-10

Turns out to be a voip.ms server issue in Toronto.


graniterock

join:2003-03-14
London, ON

Really annoying too. Nothing like having an important phone call and the other person can't hear you. Good thing I had cell phone backup.


vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON

Just use a different server. I gave up on the toronto server a while back. Montreal and Chicago have good latency and are more reliable.


decx
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Vancouver, BC

said by vikingisson:

Just use a different server. I gave up on the toronto server a while back. Montreal and Chicago have good latency and are more reliable.

That would work, but only if the user notices that the server he's currently on is down. Ideally, Voip.ms needs to implement some sort of automatic failover to switch users to another server if one is down. Especially important since the current failover rules are server based so if the user's server is down, no calls goes through at all.

vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON

I can't help if you don't know there's a problem. And I can't make service providers automate failover practices. Meanwhile I can only do the next best thing. My logs have long told me that toronto.voip isn't reliable so I switched servers and POP. I still keep a toronto trunk active as *my* failover and to see if they ever fix the problem, they haven't.


decx
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Vancouver, BC

A number of servers have had periods of relative instability. In addition to the Toronto servers, the NY and Montreal POP have had issues. Even other like Seattle have the occasional fit.

As well, most users don't have the ability to continually monitor the registration status for their accounts. Most Voip.ms users just use it as a hosted solution and don't have an Asterisk server with status monitoring scripts. Also Voip.ms doesn't provide an option that notifies users an account is offline like a few other providers do. Consequently, expecting the average user to know when their DID is unreachable due to server issue is unreasonable.


vikingisson

join:2010-01-22
Mississauga, ON

Then they should use a different service. The OP question isn't about what is reasonable or what should happen or any of that nonsense. The user has a problem and did check the right things, I'm answering to that. I dare say that the "average" user shouldn't use a service such as TSI given all that logic.


taytong888

join:2005-06-20
Nepean, ON
reply to apum

No problem here in Nepean (Ottawa west end), based on ping and tracert results for toronto.voip.ms two minutes ago.

Mod: What code & how can I post screen shots to show the above results?

Thank you.



TSI Duty Mgr
Premium
join:2012-10-23
Chatham, ON

1 edit

My bad, responded to the wrong post,
--
TSI Duty Mgr
Operations Manager on Duty


taytong888

join:2005-06-20
Nepean, ON
reply to taytong888


toronto ping result
Click for full size
toronto tracert result
Oh! I see:

Preview/Attach -> +upload attachment

graniterock

join:2003-03-14
London, ON
reply to taytong888

Voip.ms says on the their page the problem was solved sometime this morning. I've switched back over to montreal.


taytong888

join:2005-06-20
Nepean, ON

Hello graniterock,

Any reasons for choosing montreal over toronto, especially when you are closer to TO than montreal?

I am closer to montreal so I would have selected that server were it not for the longer ping time, as compared to that of toronto (34 ms vs. 22 ms).


yabos

join:2003-02-16
London, ON
reply to vikingisson

I had problems with both the Toronto servers also. They told me to use Chicago or some other one because the Toronto ones were the oldest servers and probably have problems and out of date software.


oldsam

join:2011-05-30
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
reply to apum

I honestly gave up on toronto.voip.ms a very long time ago. Very unreliable and just not worth it. I've been using the seattle server for a while now without any issues. Best fix is to just use a different server, not worth the trouble as ping times will always be too small to be noticeable.



RMerlin

join:2009-10-09
Montreal, QC
reply to apum

I also use the Chicago server here, because the Toronto one didn't play nice with my Cisco ATA (a problem that Cisco should have since resolved with a firmware upgrade). The latency difference between Toronto and Chicago was negligible.

I find it odd that voip.ms doesn't seem to upgrade software versions over time, they rather refer you to other servers that are running newer Asterisk versions (such as Chicago).


apum

join:2012-11-10
reply to taytong888

said by taytong888:

Hello graniterock,

I am closer to montreal so I would have selected that server were it not for the longer ping time, as compared to that of toronto (34 ms vs. 22 ms).

Nepean may be closer to Montreal geographically, but the TekSavvy connection out of the Rogers POIs in Ottawa are to Toronto so a Toronto server will give better ping times. The few ms is not going to make a difference, and looks like the Toronto servers have not had a good week. The only potential downside to switching is that voice-mail is tied to the server you were connected to at the time it was recorded.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to oldsam

said by oldsam:

I honestly gave up on toronto.voip.ms a very long time ago. Very unreliable and just not worth it. I've been using the seattle server for a while now without any issues. Best fix is to just use a different server, not worth the trouble as ping times will always be too small to be noticeable.

I assume you're on the west coast.. if so it would make sense to use the Seattle server anyway over the Toronto server.


xsbell

join:2008-12-22
Canada
kudos:8
reply to taytong888

28ms ain't the greatest to Toronto, Chicago for me is 23ms, Toronto is 11ms, Montreal 17ms.