 NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9
 ·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Suit Up
Re: Ping times said by Suit Up:Cable ping times are going to be higher than DSL in general. For me, pinging google I'll normally get between 12-20ms, with occasional spikes up to 200ms.
My observation is that ADSL on "Fastpath" is about the same as cable, with a lower deviation. ADSL2+ and VDSL on "Interleaved" adds 10 ms to 20 ms to latency over "Fastpath". So, no, cable latency should not be higher than DSL "in general", and may even be lower; albeit with slightly higher deviation.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
 Suit Up
join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
 ·Time Warner Cable
2 edits | said by NormanS:albeit with slightly higher deviation. That's the problem. Due to the nature of TDMA/CDMA, your ping times are going to depend on node congestion. During peak hours they will usually be higher than during non-peak times. So that's why I say in general Cable ping times are going to be higher. But yes, in perfect conditions, they can be lower. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| Congestion can afflict DSL, as well. A congested DSL aggregation router can send latency through the roof. OTOH, a well managed HFC can avoid congestion.
Deviation is a measure of the spread around the average. With my Interleaved ADSL2+ connection, deviation is normally 1ms to 2ms; same as my old Fastpath ADSL connection. My observation of cable latency is a deviation of 4ms to 5ms.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Suit Up
join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
| said by NormanS:Congestion can afflict DSL, as well. A congested DSL aggregation router can send latency through the roof. OTOH, a well managed HFC can avoid congestion. Yes that's true, but that aspect can affect cable as well, but DSL doesn't have the same problem as the TDMA/CDMA management at the first hop.
If your deviation is only 4-5ms, then that's pretty good. Right now mine is 46.651ms: even though I managed to get a min of 11.140ms, the max was still 210.431ms. |
|
| said by Suit Up:If your deviation is only 4-5ms, then that's pretty good. Right now mine is 46.651ms: even though I managed to get a min of 11.140ms, the max was still 210.431ms. The only times I've ever seen pings that high is when I'm also up/downloading stuff. I just ran 2 tests back to back, the first one with an idle connection and the next while running a speed test (got 29.8 Mbps on my 30/5 connection BTW).
1st one, all <11.5 ms:
PING www.google.com (74.125.224.212) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=1 ttl=54 time=11.2 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=2 ttl=54 time=11.3 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=3 ttl=54 time=8.55 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=4 ttl=54 time=8.45 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=5 ttl=54 time=11.4 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=6 ttl=54 time=8.56 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=7 ttl=54 time=10.1 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=8 ttl=54 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=9 ttl=54 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=10 ttl=54 time=11.4 ms
--- www.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 8.456/10.140/11.472/1.194 ms
2nd one, while downloading at 29.8 Mbps:
PING www.google.com (74.125.224.176) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=1 ttl=54 time=99.9 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=2 ttl=54 time=151 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=3 ttl=54 time=197 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=4 ttl=54 time=234 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=5 ttl=54 time=284 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=6 ttl=54 time=336 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=7 ttl=54 time=12.3 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=8 ttl=54 time=21.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=9 ttl=54 time=16.7 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=10 ttl=54 time=37.6 ms
--- www.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 12.309/139.249/336.479/113.838 ms
So yes, if you're downloading something large then your pings will creep up. Otherwise they stay rather low. If yours are creeping while not downloading then I would replace your router as it's the most likely cause.
/M |
|
Suit Up
join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA | I wasn't downloading or uploading anything. My guess is it's just congestion and still being on DOCSIS 2. |
|
