dslreports logo
site
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search Topic:
uniqs
91542
share rss forum feed


Chris123NT

join:2001-11-24
Nesconset, NY
reply to AlanM

Re: Horrible youtube speeds

I just remembered I have a giganews diamond account which includes vyprvpn, so I fired up the VPN, and bang, youtube was at full speed. Now if only I could devise a way to only use the VPN for youtube and let everything else go direct.

Anyone know how to do that?


JohnGalt21

join:2012-12-14
Ridgefield, NJ
reply to Pos

said by Pos :

Spoke with them again. Basically he told my to open up cmd and type in "tracert youtube"..

From the results he told me there is "latency" on the "7th hop". At that point I was like DAFUQ. Basically google and verizon are trying to work out a way to sustain more users. He said it is a known issue and they are trying to resolve it.

Just tried that, and I also got *Request Timed Out* on the 7th hop.


danclan

join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA
reply to Chris123NT

said by Chris123NT:

I just remembered I have a giganews diamond account which includes vyprvpn, so I fired up the VPN, and bang, youtube was at full speed. Now if only I could devise a way to only use the VPN for youtube and let everything else go direct.

Anyone know how to do that?

You cannot with the Actiontec since it doesnt support VPN client or server functions...at least not that I've ever seen

If you have 3rd party router running a different firmware (dd-wrt or other) you can usually use OpenVPN client and have all traffic route through the viper vpn that way.


houkouonchi

join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

said by danclan:

said by Chris123NT:

I just remembered I have a giganews diamond account which includes vyprvpn, so I fired up the VPN, and bang, youtube was at full speed. Now if only I could devise a way to only use the VPN for youtube and let everything else go direct.

Anyone know how to do that?

You cannot with the Actiontec since it doesnt support VPN client or server functions...at least not that I've ever seen

If you have 3rd party router running a different firmware (dd-wrt or other) you can usually use OpenVPN client and have all traffic route through the viper vpn that way.

If giganews vypervpn is really just openvpn then its pretty easy to do and you can just do it on your comp as openvpn works on mac/linux/windows. I am very familiar with openvpn but ive never really used giganews 'vypervpn'.

Curious if slowness will show up in my latency plots i just setup for youtube.com:

Daily:


Weekly:


Monthly:

--
300/150 mbit Bonded Verizon FiOS connection FTW!


Chris123NT

join:2001-11-24
Nesconset, NY

1 edit

said by houkouonchi:

said by danclan:

said by Chris123NT:

I just remembered I have a giganews diamond account which includes vyprvpn, so I fired up the VPN, and bang, youtube was at full speed. Now if only I could devise a way to only use the VPN for youtube and let everything else go direct.

Anyone know how to do that?

You cannot with the Actiontec since it doesnt support VPN client or server functions...at least not that I've ever seen

If you have 3rd party router running a different firmware (dd-wrt or other) you can usually use OpenVPN client and have all traffic route through the viper vpn that way.

If giganews vypervpn is really just openvpn then its pretty easy to do and you can just do it on your comp as openvpn works on mac/linux/windows. I am very familiar with openvpn but ive never really used giganews 'vypervpn'.

Curious if slowness will show up in my latency plots i just setup for youtube.com:

Daily:
[att=1]

Weekly:
[att=2]

Monthly:
[att=3]

I bet it won't. The problem isn't really youtube.com itself, but rather the servers that the videos are being streamed from.


houkouonchi

join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

said by Chris123NT:

I bet it won't. The problem isn't really youtube.com itself, but rather the servers that the videos are being streamed from.

Actually it should. Youtube itself is hosted off of the same AS number (AS15169) as the server serving the content (atleast for me). When links get saturated it should show in latency graphs. It is very likely it will take the same path when going to the same AS number. I see it going through alter.net (vz) -> alternet customer (gw) link just like with the content server.

Look at the traceroute:

traceroute to youtube.com (74.125.224.166), 30 hops max, 46 byte packets
 1  router.houkouonchi.jp (1.1.1.1)  0.072 ms  0.930 ms  0.098 ms
 2  * * *
 3  G0-3-1-7.LSANCA-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (130.81.140.224)  5.872 ms  7.182 ms  3.608 ms
 4  130.81.199.38 (130.81.199.38)  3.584 ms  28.155 ms  4.203 ms
 5  0.xe-2-1-3.XL3.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.8.41)  3.800 ms  4.007 ms  4.485 ms
 6  TenGigE0-6-2-0.GW4.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.114.213)  9.345 ms TenGigE0-6-4-0.GW4.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.114.217)  7.831 ms TenGigE0-4-0-0.GW4.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.112.73)  6.393 ms
 7  google-gw.customer.alter.net (63.125.112.154)  4.358 ms  4.530 ms  5.932 ms
 8  64.233.174.238 (64.233.174.238)  3.496 ms  4.429 ms  4.076 ms
 9  72.14.236.11 (72.14.236.11)  5.645 ms  4.081 ms  5.376 ms
10  youtube.com (74.125.224.166)  3.642 ms  3.861 ms  3.751 ms
root@dekabutsu: 12:41 AM :~#
 

The possible bad hop is 7 (63.125.112.154) which is google's border router (transit to VZ)

Now when I traceroute an IP of one of the servers that was actually sending me the video stream it goes through the same 63.125.112.154:

 
root@dekabutsu: 12:45 AM :~# traceroute -I 173.194.8.230
traceroute to 173.194.8.230 (173.194.8.230), 30 hops max, 46 byte packets
 1  router.houkouonchi.jp (1.1.1.1)  0.171 ms  0.395 ms  0.097 ms
 2  * * *
 3  G0-3-1-7.LSANCA-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (130.81.140.224)  7.760 ms  4.948 ms  4.321 ms
 4  130.81.199.38 (130.81.199.38)  3.613 ms  18.408 ms  3.794 ms
 5  0.xe-2-1-3.XL3.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.8.41)  3.895 ms  3.930 ms  3.658 ms
 6  TenGigE0-4-0-0.GW4.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.112.73)  7.282 ms TenGigE0-6-0-0.GW4.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.114.205)  7.594 ms  8.861 ms
 7  google-gw.customer.alter.net (63.125.112.154)  5.010 ms  6.408 ms  6.543 ms
 8  216.239.43.197 (216.239.43.197)  5.755 ms  4.168 ms  4.398 ms
 9  173.194.8.230 (173.194.8.230)  3.735 ms  3.389 ms  3.421 ms
 

Now of course this is VZ -> google. I don't have access to google's servers so I can't do a reverse traceroute to see if the return route is coming back the same way on both but its a likely possibility that is the case considering they both have similar forward routes and about the same latency.

I haven't really been noticing any bad youtube performance though here in Socal. That is with 720/1080p videos. As always 360/480p videos are throttled by youtube itself and load much slower than their 720p/1080p counter-parts.

--
300/150 mbit Bonded Verizon FiOS connection FTW!

batsona
Maryland

join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Verizon FiOS
reply to AlanM

It would seem that the best way to fix this, if you had two connections at your house, is to buy a firewall that had at least 2 external connections on it, and connect FiOS, and [let's say], a tier-2 cable modem provider for another carrier. Then put static routing statements in your firewall so that all YouTube traffic goes to the tier-2 provider, and everything else goes to FiOS. --assuming that the tier-2 provider has adequate bandwidth to Google's network [unlike UUNET]?


zippoboy7

join:2006-06-18
USA

1 recommendation

said by batsona:

It would seem that the best way to fix this, if you had two connections at your house, is to buy a firewall that had at least 2 external connections on it, and connect FiOS, and [let's say], a tier-2 cable modem provider for another carrier. Then put static routing statements in your firewall so that all YouTube traffic goes to the tier-2 provider, and everything else goes to FiOS. --assuming that the tier-2 provider has adequate bandwidth to Google's network [unlike UUNET]?

I solved the issue without having to pay for another provider, I just added a IPv6 tunnel using Tunnelbroker to my firewall and all youtube content now flows over that, I no longer have any buffering and other then the occasional error about DRM saying I do not live in the US (Using a Virgina tunnel... Google needs to fix there geo-location crap) it works great.


wampdog29

@verizon.net

I am also noticing this speed issue with Verizon FiOS and Youtube. However, I just wanted to throw in my two cents and correct something a few people are saying. Is Youtube free to use? Sure, but, Google Play Movies & TV is a service that is ran from within Youtube as well, and these movies I DO pay for yet they are rarely playable. I get better playback/streaming with 3G compared to my 50/35 FiOS!!!


batsona
Maryland

join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD
reply to zippoboy7

Since it looks like there's little valid resolution here, zippoboy7 might want to post a step by step procedure on how to do the tunneling he did. It looks like the only resolution at this point (tunneling into another carrier)


zippoboy7

join:2006-06-18
USA

Sadly my instructions would be worthless to 99% of the people here. I do not use the router provided by Verizon, I am using pfsence as my router which allows me to do a lot more advanced configurations. For anyone who is using pfsence and wants to do it they can follow these instructions and get there »doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Using_···l_Broker

That being said there are ways to use www.tunnelbroker.net with a single PC, they have some fairly simple instructions for that on the website when you register and create a tunnel. The only downside to this is you are stuck with only one system that can use youtube.



bigbeard

@verizon.net

since switching youtube access to html5, i never had anymore issues, wether it be on wired desktop, wireless laptop or ipad. 720 and 1080p plays perfectly fine. someone in this thread gave out the advice, forgot who it was.



28619103
Premium
join:2009-03-01
21435
reply to AlanM

Not completely scientific, but it is an interesting analysis I did in March...

Do the following Google searches:

youtube slow = 1/2 a BILLION results
youtube slow isp1...ispX

Now compare each ISPs number weighted by number of subscribers.

I think you will find a cross section of ISPs and variable results per ISP. Results below

»/speak/slidesh···YQ%3D%3D


batsona
Maryland

join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD
reply to AlanM

Can someone post this procedure to 'switch' youtube to HTML5? I know that newer versions of IE and FF handle it...


JohnGalt21

join:2012-12-14
Ridgefield, NJ

said by batsona:

Can someone post this procedure to 'switch' youtube to HTML5? I know that newer versions of IE and FF handle it...

I'm pretty sure you just opt into it on Youtube page:
»www.youtube.com/html5

batsona
Maryland

join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Verizon FiOS

OK, I don't want to yell "Eureka" just yet -- more people need to try opting-in to the HTML5 trial. I just did (FF 19) and it turned night into day Everything buffers as fast as it does for me at work (and "we" peer directly with Google!)

Everyone try opting into the HTML5 trial & post your results here.


JohnGalt21

join:2012-12-14
Ridgefield, NJ

Switching to HTML 5 gets around the buffering issue, but I noticed not all videos support it.



buzby

@verizon.net

1 edit
reply to AlanM

on 150/65 not even 3 seconds at 111kbps pitiful, have comcast too no issue, i even changed my dns no such luck....



inajeep4

join:2004-11-07
Sewell, NJ
reply to JohnGalt21

Switching to HTML5 version and it seemed to get worse. Couldn't buffer via the pause and change res trick anymore.


JohnGalt21

join:2012-12-14
Ridgefield, NJ

said by inajeep4:

Switching to HTML5 version and it seemed to get worse. Couldn't buffer via the pause and change res trick anymore.

Are you sure you are truly in HTML5 mode? The best way to find out is right-click on the video. If the bottom entry in the resulting pop-up says: 'About HTML5', then you're good, but if it's 'About Adobe Flash Player' then you are watching the video in old format.

Any video I watch in HTML5, buffers the whole bar in a matter of seconds.


Jamin

@verizon.net
reply to AlanM

OMG I thought I was the only one with youtube and this issue. I even bought 100 foot Ethernet cable to run it to my PC cause they told me it was the wireless and I still cannot watch anything unless it's like mid-day I hope this issue is fixed soon. What I do not understand is my cell phone using the same internet can run videos better over the WiFi.


lolwatpear

join:2012-07-03
Wesley Chapel, FL
reply to AlanM

HTML5 does not help at help at all. If you saw a speed increase, it was only a coincidence. Throughout the day I occasionally have good youtube speeds.

All I know is that I'm paying a shit ton of money and not getting my moneys worth. Whether it be google or verizon, they better fix this nonesense as youtube is my primary entertainment medium.


JohnGalt21

join:2012-12-14
Ridgefield, NJ

said by lolwatpear:

HTML5 does not help at help at all. If you saw a speed increase, it was only a coincidence. Throughout the day I occasionally have good youtube speeds.

Maybe you are having a different issue than me and the other poster then, because I never had good youtube speeds before (with FiOS that is). In my case youtube videos would be really slow at buffering. I would be able to watch it for 10 seconds, and then it would stop for like a minute, before it buffered another small piece, and pause again.

Now any video I open in HTML5 mode, buffers the entire stream right away, instead of stopping after a few seconds. This is something I've been able to reproduce every single time on a number of different videos. And the moment I go back to the Flash version, the problem comes back. It is also independent of the browser I use (tried with Firefox and IE).

Granted, I've only been trying HTML5 for 2 days, so it may change. I'll give it another week, and if there are no more problems, then I'm a happy customer.


somebodeez
Premium,MVM
join:2001-09-24
here
reply to AlanM

YouTube is pretty much ok for me during the day. Towards the evening, it's unusable.



Vamp
5c077
Premium
join:2003-01-28
MD
kudos:1

said by somebodeez:

YouTube is pretty much ok for me during the day. Towards the evening, it's unusable.

Yup.. I think if I plan to use youtube at all later in the evening I will just connect to phone hotspot. Which is sad cause I get VERY poor cell signal, yet its like 20x faster than fios on youtube. Atleast it's reliable and I know my videos will never buffer and not work.

It's ridiculous and I don't care what anyone says I know it's a problem with FIOS, this doesn't happen EVER with my poor signal cellphone wifi hot spot.

--
75/35 FIOS || MSN Msgr: scott001^gmail_com


houkouonchi

join:2002-07-22
Ontario, CA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 recommendation

said by Vamp:

It's ridiculous and I don't care what anyone says I know it's a problem with FIOS, this doesn't happen EVER with my poor signal cellphone wifi hot spot.

I love ignorant responses like this. Only people who have no clue how the internet works would say something like that. Google gets its access to the internet by buying peering/transit from various providers (like Cogent, Level3, Alter.net (Verizon), XO, above.net, etc...). BGP is used to decide which transit/peer link the traffic should go through when they send traffic to $X prefix/subnet. In the case of sending to VZ's AS number they probably always send it over their transit to alter.net (VZ) which they pay VZ for.

Eventually they are running this link at capacity but they are still sending more and more traffic over it and then it gets high latency/packetloss during peak hours where usage is highest.

Google has two options.

1) Buy more transit/peering from VZ so they aren't saturating their current link.
2) Modify their BGP to route to some of VZ's prefixes over one of their other less used transit providers (like level3, which google does have but I don't know what the usage looks like) to lessen their load on their saturated connections to VZ. This would be trans-versing more routers and be less efficient but vs going over a saturated connection would offer superior performance.

What is VZ capable of doing?

1) Inform their customer they are saturating their links and to buy more transit.
2) Desperate to please FIOS customers bitching about youtube offer google more transit/bandwidth for free even though they have every right to charge for said links/bandwidth usage.

Do you really expect them to do the second option? I seriously doubt it and there is no reason they should. When you are a tier1 provider like VZ is (due to its aquisition of then UUnet (now alter.net) its pretty much never the tier1 providers fault for saturation unless its between two tier1 providers and said providers haven't added more capacity where its needed. However this is rarely the case. Its usually customers saturating their links who don't want to pay more money or try to strong-arm the providers into cheap prices for bandwidth due to complaints from their customers.

Atleast VZ providers support. Support is completely non-existent from google. I wonder why everyone seems to think Google is the Greatest thing since sliced bread and they can do no wrong?

I can just about guarantee you that in the case of a residential ISP google -> VZ the traffic is hugely lop-sided on google's side for outbound traffic. The reverse is true when your a web-hosting provider. At my old job we peered with google and it was primarily outbound due to the crawlers eating up bandwidth. The point is that the person with the most control to re-direct traffic is the sender of said traffic. You can somewhat change how traffic is received by what you are advertising on BGP but this issue is definitely more in the control of google to fix.
--
300/150 mbit Bonded Verizon FiOS connection FTW!

batsona
Maryland

join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Verizon FiOS
reply to AlanM

I've done the HTML5 opt-in on 3 computers in my house, and I get perfect buffering about 8 out of 10 times. This is an improvement over zero-out-of-ten attempts. I'll take it....

Weird..if we're seeing these results, does it mean that bandwidth is actually NOT the issue being talked about in this thread? Google / Youtube is prioritizing HTML5 traffic?


batsona
Maryland

join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Verizon FiOS
reply to houkouonchi

To Mr. houkouonchi: Since VZ is a tier-1 provider, that means 'everyone-elses' traffic is transiting VZ's network and help to saturate that peering point with Google. Oddly enough, if we were to be on any other tier-2 provider, we might not have this problem, as long as they didn't use VZ as transit to get to Google?

An other interesting question: What would make Google care enough to increase their bandwidth with VZ? a.)Massive numbers of customer complaints? b.)Google mgmt asking, hey, why have our hits-per-timeperiod become flat?? (no more views can be accomplished, if all bandwidth is saturated...)



Smith6612
Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:24
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Frontier Communi..

4 edits

said by batsona:

To Mr. houkouonchi: Since VZ is a tier-1 provider, that means 'everyone-elses' traffic is transiting VZ's network and help to saturate that peering point with Google. Oddly enough, if we were to be on any other tier-2 provider, we might not have this problem, as long as they didn't use VZ as transit to get to Google?

An other interesting question: What would make Google care enough to increase their bandwidth with VZ? a.)Massive numbers of customer complaints? b.)Google mgmt asking, hey, why have our hits-per- become flat?? (no more views can be accomplished, if all bandwidth is saturated...)

Not necessarily. It could mean Verizon is supplying Dark Fiber to other providers, and they're allowed to manage how they route things. If they're using Lit Fiber services then perhaps you'll get Verizon's own peering point or perhaps you'll get some more private paths (it's not uncommon to set up virtual circuits or tunnels across a path shared with the Tier1's own traffic or other networks' traffic). Don't forget, it's been well known that some providers already run their own caches on-network to cut on bandwidth costs associated with having to transverse other networks (esp. if you pay for peering or pay for volume rather than capacity, or are cash-strapped enough to not be able to afford huge pipes as a small provider). There have also been projects out there that crawl and benchmark YouTube on a local standpoint, that proves how YouTube routes, what servers are being hit, and in the process they benchmark response, throughput, any anomalies with video download and also log popularity. These projects show plenty as to what is happening.

What I've personally noticed in the Northeast with YouTube is what seems to be server load issues rather than peering issues when it comes to Verizon. While all data has to transverse the Verizon network and make it's way directly to Google's network, I don't have latency issues with other Google services or encounter slow speeds to other Google resources (SVN, GMail, Maps, etc) that go over the same exact circuits and peering points. In addition with YouTube, I can server/cache hop and almost all of the time dramatically improve the throughput to maxing out my connection. In the past when YouTube first turned on HQ and HD Streaming, yes there were peering issues as bandwidth demand grew too fast, too soon, and back then all Google properties had issues with latency. Regardless, unless someone here works for Google, it's hard to also say if Google is not supplying enough capacity in their very own network for YouTube traffic but supplies enough to handle all of the rest of their own traffic. It's quite a complex system and needs a lot more analysis than simply blaming Verizon and looking at a traceroute and blaming a single router.

To add to the flame, Time Warner cable is also in this area as an ISP, and YouTube runs equally as bad on them as it does on Verizon, if not a bit worse and that traffic is all coming in from Chicago or New York City which is a more diverse route than Verizon has. Frontier is also in this area and they've not had too many YouTube issues, but they've also been known to run cache servers for Google's website on-network too.

Also, consider the following: Google hosts their own Advertisements on YouTube. Why do the ads never have problems, if they go over the same network and a bunch are also in HD? Even if Videos load slowly, the advertising revenue still comes in as the ads rotate or as the user reloads the player to try to get a better server.


Dirk Daring

join:2000-08-03
Ashburn, VA

/rude Verizon. Still slow as sin. I really didn't want to buy a VPN somewhere but now I'm seriously considering it.