dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to kovy

Re: How will my ping be affected moving from Bell to Teksavvy?

said by kovy:

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

Agreed - that's why I moved to teksavvy. When I started getting 5-15ms ping times I was blown away at how crappy Bhell really was. And it does make sense, the simplified routing would be Modem->DSLAM->DPI server (takes time to determine what packets are what and how to influence them, it's one of the core technical arguments behind net neutrality)->Destination

kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

Agreed - that's why I moved to teksavvy. When I started getting 5-15ms ping times I was blown away at how crappy Bhell really was. And it does make sense, the simplified routing would be Modem->DSLAM->DPI server (takes time to determine what packets are what and how to influence them, it's one of the core technical arguments behind net neutrality)->Destination

Is Bell really had pings of 250ms.... everybody would of left the ship... it makes absolutly no sense. My pings were the same before the DPI and after DPI wich was in the 30ms.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

Agreed - that's why I moved to teksavvy. When I started getting 5-15ms ping times I was blown away at how crappy Bhell really was. And it does make sense, the simplified routing would be Modem->DSLAM->DPI server (takes time to determine what packets are what and how to influence them, it's one of the core technical arguments behind net neutrality)->Destination

Is Bell really had pings of 250ms.... everybody would of left the ship... it makes absolutly no sense. My pings were the same before the DPI and after DPI wich was in the 30ms.

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8

1 edit
reply to JMJimmy

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.

I'm on IPTV profile... which is like a interleaved DSL profile.

Bring some testing if you wanna... I'm waiting... btw no where near 250ms though...

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to jmck

said by jmck:

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

Flash 11.3 = no buffering issues for me.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..

said by JMJimmy:

said by jmck:

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

Flash 11.3 = no buffering issues for me.

yes, lets keep pretending it's a flash issue. let's ignore that people still had issues with youtube even without using flash (mobile devices, iPads, etc). let's also ignore that there's a huge thread going on where people who just came from other ISPs aren't having the issue or that people who just left TSI and went to another provider aren't seeing the issue.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by jmck:

said by JMJimmy:

said by jmck:

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

Flash 11.3 = no buffering issues for me.

yes, lets keep pretending it's a flash issue. let's ignore that people still had issues with youtube even without using flash (mobile devices, iPads, etc). let's also ignore that there's a huge thread going on where people who just came from other ISPs aren't having the issue or that people who just left TSI and went to another provider aren't seeing the issue.

Did I say that was the only thing that could be causing it? Cable users/time of day issues I don't doubt it's congestion. All I know is that's what resolved it for me. I've had no issues since downgrading.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON

well you probably don't want to run an outdated version of flash too btw, it's one of the biggest ways to get malware on your system these days along with older java plugin versions.



BliZZardX
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Toronto, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile

4 edits
reply to JMJimmy

said by JMJimmy:

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.

Remember when you are using domain names you are relying on DNS. Google.ca has several IP addresses. If you were using third party DNS which most of the time is not local and not configured to resolve specific IPs for a every netblock, you will not resolve your local google servers.

Here is an example of a misconfigured network with 202.83.95.227 (Australia OpenNIC Public DNS). The only way I know of you can ping over 200ms to google.ca without being on a congested network or dial up.

:~$ nslookup google.ca 202.83.95.227
Server:         202.83.95.227
Address:        202.83.95.227#53
 
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:   google.ca
Address: 74.125.237.127
Name:   google.ca
Address: 74.125.237.119
Name:   google.ca
Address: 74.125.237.120
 
:~$ sudo traceroute -i eth1 74.125.237.127
traceroute to 74.125.237.127 (74.125.237.127), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  0.293 ms  0.358 ms  0.476 ms
 2  bas10-toronto01_lo0_SYMP.net.bell.ca (64.230.200.232)  5.655 ms  5.728 ms  6.211 ms
 3  dis9-toronto01_7-1-0_100.net.bell.ca (64.230.97.228)  5.040 ms  5.399 ms  5.409 ms
 4  bx1-torontoxn_xe0-0-0.net.bell.ca (64.230.48.57)  6.145 ms  6.250 ms bx1-torontoxn_xe3-3-0.net.bell.ca (64.230.49.55)  6.390 ms
 5  google_bx1-torontoxn_xe0-2-0.net.bell.ca (64.230.97.130)  6.173 ms  6.086 ms  6.207 ms
 6  209.85.255.232 (209.85.255.232)  6.600 ms  5.490 ms  5.516 ms
 7  216.239.46.160 (216.239.46.160)  18.439 ms 216.239.46.162 (216.239.46.162)  18.143 ms 216.239.46.160 (216.239.46.160)  18.817 ms
 8  72.14.232.141 (72.14.232.141)  31.450 ms  31.492 ms  31.724 ms
 9  72.14.239.49 (72.14.239.49)  39.060 ms  39.016 ms  39.104 ms
10  216.239.46.159 (216.239.46.159)  69.653 ms 216.239.46.157 (216.239.46.157)  72.785 ms 216.239.46.159 (216.239.46.159)  69.605 ms
11  209.85.240.228 (209.85.240.228)  69.975 ms  69.750 ms 209.85.248.220 (209.85.248.220)  83.531 ms
12  72.14.239.247 (72.14.239.247)  69.023 ms 72.14.233.59 (72.14.233.59)  69.681 ms 72.14.239.247 (72.14.239.247)  68.580 ms
13  209.85.250.124 (209.85.250.124)  158.494 ms  158.701 ms  158.918 ms
14  66.249.95.167 (66.249.95.167)  254.916 ms  254.902 ms  254.952 ms
15  72.14.237.135 (72.14.237.135)  255.288 ms  254.992 ms  254.859 ms
16  syd01s12-in-f31.1e100.net (74.125.237.127)  254.634 ms  254.640 ms  254.990 ms
 

And then a proper configuration:
:~$ nslookup google.ca 8.8.8.8
Server:         8.8.8.8
Address:        8.8.8.8#53
 
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:   google.ca
Address: 74.125.226.88
Name:   google.ca
Address: 74.125.226.87
Name:   google.ca
Address: 74.125.226.95
 
:~$ sudo traceroute -i eth1 74.125.226.88
traceroute to 74.125.226.88 (74.125.226.88), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  0.364 ms  0.414 ms  0.502 ms
 2  bas10-toronto01_lo0_SYMP.net.bell.ca (64.230.200.232)  5.544 ms  5.613 ms  5.628 ms
 3  dis9-toronto01_7-1-0_100.net.bell.ca (64.230.97.228)  5.327 ms  5.337 ms  5.355 ms
 4  bx1-torontoxn_xe3-3-0.net.bell.ca (64.230.49.55)  5.873 ms  6.683 ms  6.570 ms
 5  google_bx1-torontoxn_xe0-2-0.net.bell.ca (64.230.97.130)  7.245 ms  7.225 ms  6.922 ms
 6  216.239.47.114 (216.239.47.114)  8.403 ms  4.713 ms  9.896 ms
 7  64.233.175.98 (64.233.175.98)  5.828 ms  6.127 ms  6.454 ms
 8  yyz06s07-in-f24.1e100.net (74.125.226.88)  5.796 ms  5.501 ms  5.225 ms
 

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

Absolutely true, however, by using the DNS that is setup it's indicative of how data is being routed. You can isolate issues on your network by seeing how DNS is handling it and then pinging an IP directly. If they don't match you've got a misconfiguration as you say. In addition I'd ping my server in the US for a comparison since I know geographically where it is and that it's IP never varies. Not fool proof but without going hardcore and getting at least 16 samples locally and another 16 remotely it's not ever going to be 100% accurate.

I've personally never messed with DNS and just left it to auto-configure.