dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
636
jbanks
join:2011-02-28
Columbus, OH

jbanks

Member

FUD or something to be concerned about?

Click for full size

RootWyrm
join:2011-05-09

RootWyrm

Member

Be worried. The excuses about "we deprioritize ICMP" are pure bullshit. I have built and run many networks MUCH larger than WOW's. If you see packet loss, there is a problem. End of story.

However, in your case, the issue appears to most likely be your modem. Most likely the levels are out of spec.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA

NormanS to jbanks

MVM

to jbanks
Is that packet loss end-to-end? I am guessing that it is. End-to-end packet loss to a destination which is not ignoring ICMP is never good.

mix
join:2002-03-19
Romeo, MI

mix

Member

I don't think it is... also I get trolled.

»Terrible latency in Columbus, Ohio 05/11/2014

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS to jbanks

MVM

to jbanks
Fascinating. I have seen more of your Visual Traceroute graphs in the other linked thread. They have pretty visuals at the top but the interesting data is truncated, so we never see the whole trace, end-to-end. If you must have a pretty picture, at least Ping Plotter will show the entire trace:

Ping Plotter to Google.


Much more useful for analysis.

RootWyrm
join:2011-05-09

RootWyrm

Member

The interesting portion is right there in the table if you look. First hop, 33.3% packet loss.

Indicates an issue between customer computer and the CMTS every time. Once you have packet loss first hop, all other numbers go out the window. Problem is could be anything from a bad ethernet cable or WiFi crapping out to a CMTS problem and everything in between. So more data would be required to do any sort of troubleshooting.
Expand your moderator at work