ldg
join:2001-08-24
Norman, OK
|  reply to Micheal64
Re: Latency in Oklahoma City
SCREW IT!!
Still dealing with this damn packet loss. I'm sick and damn tired of paying for this crap. First it was pings of 4000 to the head end server for about 8 months, then it's 100% packet loss every 10 seconds.
I QUIT!!
I just completed my order for SWBell DSL.
Scheduled to be activated on the 14th.
All I can say is that it CANNOT be any worse. Of course, friggin' pigeons with 1.4mb floppies strapped on their backs flying back and forth from me to the server can't be worse, either. |
|
cwren
join:2001-01-03
Oklahoma City, OK | Let us know how it goes on DSL. |
|
Zar
Premium
join:2001-08-04
Platte City, MO
| reply to Micheal64
It went 90% packet loss around 1:30am. With 6000 samples, 1 every second it has over 30% packet loss.
And I thought it was fixed.
tisk tisk..
(This download brought to you via SWB DSL..
--
Don't knock on deaths door, ring the bell and run, he hates that. |
|
jparn1
join:2002-01-29
Oklahoma City, OK
|  reply to Micheal64
Here are a couple of line quality test from this morning and one I just did at 4pm central.
»/quality/nil/778307
»/quality/nil/778615
The second test is the latest.
I have seen much worse.
Just did these speed tests 4:20pm central:
2002-06-07 17:22:46 Speed test (lax.speakeasy.net) 1135/268 kbps
2002-06-07 17:21:47 Speed test (sfo.speakeasy.net) 858/268 kbps
2002-06-07 17:20:28 Speed test (dslcheck.speakeasy.net) 951/241 kbps
2002-06-07 17:19:16 Speed test (wdc.speakeasy.net) 1266/268 kbps
2002-06-07 17:18:15 Speed test (nyc.speakeasy.net) 2068/268 kbps
2002-06-07 17:16:55 Speed test (dfw.speakeasy.net) 2586/273 kbps
2002-06-07 17:16:05 Speed test (den.speakeasy.net) 2235/268 kbps
2002-06-07 17:15:21 Speed test (chi.speakeasy.net) 1574/249 kbps
2002-06-07 17:14:26 Speed test (atl.speakeasy.net) 2387/268 kbps
Still Watching in S.W.OKC.
[text was edited by author 2002-06-07 17:25:55] |
|
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:   | reply to Zar
Zar - next time, can you save the output to a text file or something - real hard to read that .jpg. That's just downright NASTY (the test results, I mean - not the .jpg).
--
Waste is such a terrible thing to mine. |
|
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:
| Three points I see in the last few test results that look like real problems:
mtc3bbrc01-pos0102.rd.ok.cox.net 0% 60 60 78.18 84.85 276.79 IP=68.1.0.104
mtc3dsrc01-pos0901.rd.ok.cox.net 0% 60 60 78.20 82.09 268.40 IP=68.1.0.105
mtc3dsrc01-gew03010998.rd.ok.cox.net 2% 59 60 67.12 70.97 277.12 IP=68.12.15.2 That's a combined latency going thru the 3 points at times of over 750 ms.
--
Waste is such a terrible thing to mine. |
|
jparn1
join:2002-01-29
Oklahoma City, OK | reply to Micheal64
Line quality test 7:15pm 6/7/2002
»/quality/nil/778744
S.W.OKC |
|
Zar
Premium
join:2001-08-04
Platte City, MO
| reply to Micheal64
Its back to normal now. 1% packet loss from over 18000 pings.
Next time I will save it to a text file and upload that.
That is if it comes back, it looked like my headend was on the fritz, or maybe they did some work on it. Today the pings are running at 20ms average.
--
Don't knock on deaths door, ring the bell and run, he hates that. |
|
AirP
Premium
join:2002-06-08
Oklahoma City, OK
| reply to Micheal64
Thank GOD you don't live in Norman OK... I seem to lose connection every 20-30 seconds for about 3-10 seconds with Cox, they've been out time after time, I'm actually on the direct line(they moved me there trying to fix the problem).
I'm averaging nearly 15-35% packetloss during the day. I was told it was by a tech that came out it was a server problem in the Cox network. That same tech told me in my own words... either move to OKC or get dial up for a more consistant connection. He also said the engineers have told him for the last 2 weeks the problem should be fixed in 2-3 days...
To my findings, it seems to be the 2nd or 3rd hop from my machine, usually the gateway isn't a problem but doing a traceroute shows a different problem today. I've included a traceroute and ping to yahoo for your pleasure, some of us paying for Cox HSI are having more of a problem then you guys.... this has been happening since I got Cox HSI in December... Still no fix in sight.
C:\>tracert www.yahoo.com
Tracing route to www.yahoo.akadns.net [64.58.76.176]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 922 ms 911 ms 961 ms ip68-97-0-1.ok.ok.cox.net [68.97.0.1]
2 1002 ms 1081 ms * 68.12.10.217
3 20 ms 41 ms 20 ms mtc3bbrc02-pos0101.rd.ok.cox.net [68.1.0.108]
4 30 ms 281 ms 530 ms mtc1bbrc02-pos0102.rd.om.cox.net [68.1.0.111]
5 591 ms 1061 ms 701 ms mtc1bbrc01-pos0100.rd.om.cox.net [68.1.0.122]
6 891 ms 651 ms 741 ms 12.125.72.49
7 190 ms 330 ms 441 ms gar1-p370.mpsmn.ip.att.net [12.122.2.218]
8 531 ms 421 ms 290 ms gbr6-p30.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.2.222]
9 591 ms 901 ms 741 ms tbr1-p013502.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.11.33]
10 671 ms 901 ms 831 ms gbr2-p10.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.11.38]
11 1251 ms 691 ms 912 ms gr2-p3100.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.123.5.138]
12 771 ms 872 ms 550 ms ibr02-p0-0.okbr01.exodus.net [209.1.169.173]
13 630 ms 461 ms 791 ms bbr01-g3-0.okbr01.exodus.net [216.34.183.65]
14 861 ms 601 ms 561 ms bbr01-p8-0.whkn01.exodus.net [216.32.132.54]
15 1022 ms 1021 ms * 216.74.171.18
16 90 ms 281 ms 110 ms bbr01-p1-0.stng02.exodus.net [216.32.132.193]
17 521 ms 150 ms 170 ms 209.1.169.197
18 60 ms 60 ms 60 ms dcr03-g10-0.stng01.exodus.net [216.33.96.161]
19 50 ms 60 ms 60 ms csr21-ve242.stng01.exodus.net [216.33.98.11]
20 60 ms 50 ms 60 ms 216.35.210.122
21 60 ms 60 ms 60 ms www7.dcx.yahoo.com [64.58.76.176]
C:\>ping www.yahoo.com -n 30
Pinging www.yahoo.akadns.net [66.218.71.83] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=53
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.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=120ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=121ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=150ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=120ms TTL=53
Reply from 66.218.71.83: bytes=32 time=150ms TTL=53
Ping statistics for 66.218.71.83:
Packets: Sent = 30, Received = 19, Lost = 11 (36% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 50ms, Maximum = 150ms, Average = 53ms |
|
AirP
Premium
join:2002-06-08
Oklahoma City, OK
| reply to Micheal64
Just to add...
Windows 2000 IP Configuration
Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : *****
Primary DNS Suffix . . . . . . . :
Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcast
IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : Yes
WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No
DNS Suffix Search List. . . . . . : ok.cox.net
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : ok.cox.net
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Accton EN1207D Series PCI Fast Ether
net Adapter
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : deleted by mod
DHCP Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.x.x.x
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.192.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 68.97.0.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 172.19.57.25
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 68.12.16.30
68.1.208.30
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Friday, June 07, 2002 11:48:02 AM
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, June 08, 2002 11:48:02 AM
[text was edited by moderator] |
|
jparn1
join:2002-01-29
Oklahoma City, OK
| reply to jparn1
6:30am central
»/quality/nil/779100
10:20am central
»/quality/nil/779218
S.W.OKC
[text was edited by author 2002-06-08 11:33:49] |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to AirP
Route looks ok inbound to you...
Mod Note: Graphic replaced to keep other member's IP private. And I concur - the trace looked good right to your doorstep.
[text was edited by moderator]
[text was edited by author 2002-06-08 21:05:51] |
|
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:
| reply to AirP
A couple of things: first, not always safe to post your IP in a public place like this, so I've gotten rid of it in your post and in Bill Roland's reply.
I then pinged your gateway (68.97.0.1) and noticed a couple of interesting things: For the most part the pings were in pretty good shape, around 19 to 22 ms for much of the time, with every once in a while jumping up into 30s or even 40s, then WHAM! there was one with a 1516 ms latency! That's 1 and a half seconds. Not good for a gateway. The summary looked like this:
Ping statistics for 68.97.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 100, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 19ms, Maximum = 1516ms, Average = 37ms
What you need to do/where you need to start is with that gateway. Hammer that rascal a couple of times a day - during light traffic times and heavy. Make sure your results go to a file where you can retrieve them to show to Cox. If you're unfamiliar with the "ping" command here is how to do it:
Open the MS-DOS window, either from the Start/Programs bar or by using RUN and entering "Command.com".
Use a command format like this:
ping -n 100 -l 1440 68.97.0.1 >> c:\windows\temp\mygateway.txt
what will happen is that your system will start pinging that address 100 times with 1440 byte packets (that is a dash ell, not dash one) and it will keep sending the results of that test and any subsequent ones to the file named after the >>. The >> says append this to that file if it exists, start new file if it doesn't. So, all of your results are going into that single file. You can then use Notepad.exe or wordpad.exe to examine the file and find any huge latency times.
If you prefer to put each test into a separate file, use a command like:
ping -n 100 -l 1440 68.97.0.1 > c:\windows\temp\Test_01.txt
and change the "_01" to "_02", "_03" etc for each test.
While the test is running and results are being sent to the file, the cursor will just sit and flash. When it is done, you'll get the C:\ prompt back.
If you want to just see how things are doing for the moment, try the command without the > or >> and filename, as
ping -n 50 -l 1440 68.97.0.1
and the results will be displayed on your monitor.
--
Waste is such a terrible thing to mine. |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| Sorry 2k, I guess in my eagerness to show him the clean trace, I wasn't thinking when I posted that. I will hide IP addresses like that in the future. Would you mind if I re-upload a "corrected" version of the plot?
[text was edited by author 2002-06-08 19:34:52] |
|
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:
| Not at all - no problem as far as I'm concerned. We've all got to cover one another's butts when we can. It's just a bit easier for me than you in cases like this.
You might also try the trick I did: hit a couple of those points with a bunch of 128 or larger ping packets and see if you don't get those huge spikes like I did. If you review some of the tracerts of late, you'll see the 3 or 4 points that are almost consistently above 100-150ms or worse, and they are points that I think would affect a large number of users.
--
Waste is such a terrible thing to mine. |
|
BillRoland
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Ocala, FL
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| Here is what I just got, and it looks pretty good:
Ping statistics for 68.97.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 100, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 50ms, Maximum = 101ms, Average = 64ms
--
"Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less." Robert E. Lee |
|
cinnamon
How Smart Is Your Card?
Premium
join:2002-01-19
Tulsa, OK
| reply to Micheal64
The results from 'ping -l 1472 -n 250' to gateway IP:Ping statistics for 10.1.176.1:
Packets: Sent = 250, Received = 249, Lost = 1 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 19ms, Maximum = 224ms, Average = 59ms
Small  roller coaster ride in the LQ ping plots.
»/quality/nil/779668 |
|
Zar
Premium
join:2001-08-04
Platte City, MO
| reply to Micheal64
Getting hammerd by some multicast crap.
I wish cox could filter this, my modem light is flashing like crazy.
--
Don't knock on deaths door, ring the bell and run, he hates that. |
|
Zar
Premium
join:2001-08-04
Platte City, MO
| reply to Micheal64
Here is a text file of a pingplot tonight. |
|
vtechgsx8
join:2001-04-07
Fairfax, VA
| reply to Zar
Can someone from OKC tell me if they see lots of arp traffic on their network? Out here in Fairfax, VA the data light is constantly on. Checked out what was happening and all of it is arp traffic from the gateway. On the order of 5-12 / sec. I'm looking at Zar's packet sniff and seeing that you don't have this problem. Just wondering if its normal or not. Thanks.
said by Zar:
Getting hammerd by some multicast crap.
I wish cox could filter this, my modem light is flashing like crazy.
|
|
