newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
| Sometimes it pays to ask . . . pings cut in half
I noticed a somewhat odd high ping jump on sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net anytime I ran a traceroute to DSLR. I posted an example and asked for input in this thread. Although I didn't receive as many examples in that thread as I would have liked, it prompted me to also search the forum for examples . . . which I found.
»Re: HEEELLLLP!!!!
»Re: Slow throughput /High latency in Maryland tonight?
»Re: RANT: Comsucks in NJ (McGuire AFB)
»Re: The End of Sprintlink?
»Re: sprint routers are at it again...crazy pings
A WHOIS on sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net
[144.223.72.30] indicated it was a Sprintlink.net IP, but on contacting them, they replied that it actually belonged to Williams Communications Group . . . which I should have seen. Anyway, I contacted Williams Communications Group with a simple question (edited for brevity).
quote:
ME: According to Sprintlink.net, sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net belongs
to you . . . Williams Communication Group.
I'm hoping you can help me . . .
Why is there such a HUGE ping increase on hop 15?
This is an ongoing and persistent problem, not an isolated incident.
I'm not the only one who experiences this . . .
»Re: HEEELLLLP!!!!
»Re: Slow throughput /High latency in Maryland tonight?
»Re: RANT: Comsucks in NJ (McGuire AFB)
»Re: The End of Sprintlink?
»Re: sprint routers are at it again...crazy pings
C:\WINDOWS>tracert dslreports.com
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 12 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10.159.32.1
2 12 ms 15 ms 11 ms 172.30.5.209
3 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms 172.30.5.238
4 14 ms 12 ms 12 ms 172.30.5.174
5 15 ms 16 ms 14 ms 172.30.5.110
6 13 ms 14 ms 13 ms 172.30.5.60
7 14 ms 13 ms 14 ms 172.30.4.108
8 15 ms 16 ms 19 ms 172.30.10.177
9 14 ms 16 ms 17 ms 172.30.10.186
10 23 ms 19 ms 17 ms 68.34.76.50
11 17 ms 16 ms 18 ms sl-gw26-rly-2-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.238.233]
12 17 ms 16 ms 18 ms sl-bb20-rly-3-3.sprintlink.net [144.232.14.33]
13 19 ms 17 ms 17 ms sl-bb26-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.7.250]
14 18 ms 17 ms 19 ms sl-gw33-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.14.98]
15 56 ms 49 ms 49 ms sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net [144.223.72.30]
16 55 ms 60 ms 56 ms hrndva1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.95.73]
17 54 ms 55 ms 54 ms nycmny2wcx2-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.240.45]
18 55 ms 57 ms 55 ms nycmny2wcx1-netaccess-atm.wcg.net [64.200.86.178]
19 58 ms 56 ms 57 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
20 53 ms 54 ms 55 ms dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
THEM: Your return path was traversing through Dallas.. You should now be exiting our network on the east coast..
Please try again..
Thanks,
{Name Deleted}
Network Engineering
IP/Data Services
WilTel Communications
Well, I did try again . . . and now pings through their network have been cut in half.
C:\WINDOWS>tracert dslreports.com
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175] over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10.159.32.1
2 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 172.30.5.209
3 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms 172.30.5.238
4 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms 172.30.5.174
5 12 ms 14 ms 17 ms 172.30.5.110
6 13 ms 14 ms 13 ms 172.30.5.60
7 18 ms 15 ms 15 ms 172.30.4.108
8 14 ms 14 ms 23 ms 172.30.10.177
9 14 ms 17 ms 15 ms 172.30.10.186
10 22 ms 17 ms 18 ms 68.34.76.50
11 16 ms 21 ms 17 ms sl-gw26-rly-2-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.238.233]
12 22 ms 18 ms 18 ms sl-bb20-rly-3-3.sprintlink.net [144.232.14.33]
13 17 ms 19 ms 17 ms sl-bb26-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.7.250]
14 21 ms 18 ms 17 ms sl-gw33-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.14.98]
15 20 ms 21 ms 21 ms sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net [144.223.72.30]
16 26 ms 25 ms 26 ms hrndva1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.95.73]
17 25 ms 27 ms 30 ms nycmny2wcx2-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.240.45]
18 27 ms 28 ms 29 ms nycmny2wcx1-netaccess-atm.wcg.net [64.200.86.178]
19 28 ms 28 ms 28 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
20 27 ms 27 ms 26 ms dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
I'm not really sure what the Williams NOC meant when he said "Your return path was traversing through Dallas" . . . but since I'm not anywhere near Dallas, I did see the traceroute improvement immediately. 
Can anyone confirm that their traceroutes to DSLR through sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net have also improved, most specifically the posters in the original examples;
Estandon in Salisbury, MD
Spector42 in Owings Mills, MD
aadic in Trenton, NJ
eco in Wilmington, DE
eliteone in Reading, PA
(example was actually a post by commtech, which gave me clue that it was a Williams Communication Group problem)
If I'm full of BS on this, please tell me so . . .
--
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? |
|
halfband
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Huntsville, AL
| said by newview  :
THEM: Your return path was traversing through Dallas.. You should now be exiting our network on the east coast..
Please try again..
I'm not really sure what the Williams NOC meant when he said "Your return path was traversing through Dallas" . . . but since I'm not anywhere near Dallas, I did see the traceroute improvement immediately.
One of the issues with a tracert is that it only shows you the path one way. Your return data path may be through a completely different route that you never see. What the Williams NOC is telling you is that they had a bad router table that had a return data path routed through Dallas when some other route would have been better.
Nice job researching and getting this issue corrected.
--
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812 |
|
gnubeest
Gnu
join:2001-10-28
Nashville, TN | reply to newview
Now THAT'S going over Comcast's head. Good job. |
|
Estandon
join:2002-12-03
Salisbury, MD
| reply to newview
it seems to have gotten better on my end as well..
Starting trace - Jan 22, 2003 14:03:39
Tracing to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]....
Hops IP Address RTT(ms) DNS Name
1 10.159.32.1 0
2 172.30.5.209 14
3 172.30.5.238 13
4 172.30.5.174 14
5 172.30.5.110 82
6 172.30.5.60 13
7 172.30.4.108 14
8 172.30.10.177 13
9 172.30.10.186 41
10 68.34.76.50 14
11 144.232.238.233 14 sl-gw26-rly-2-0.sprintlink.net
12 144.232.14.33 14 sl-bb20-rly-3-3.sprintlink.net
13 144.232.7.250 14 sl-bb26-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net
14 144.232.14.98 14 sl-gw33-rly-9-0.sprintlink.net
15 144.223.72.30 28 sl-williamscom-10-0.sprintlink.net
16 64.200.95.77 27 hrndva1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net
17 64.200.240.45 14 nycmny2wcx2-oc48.wcg.net
18 64.200.86.178 28 nycmny2wcx1-netaccess-atm.wcg.net
19 64.21.102.2 96 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net
20 209.123.109.175 55 www.dslreports.com |
|
beerbum
Premium
join:2000-05-06
Reading, PA
clubs:
| reply to newview
said by newview :
I'm not really sure what the Williams NOC meant when he said "Your return path was traversing through Dallas" . . .
ahhh.. sprintlink's asymmetric routing strikes again..
basically what is happening is the ping packets take a different path getting back to you than they took when going to the destination.
without getting into too much detail, basically someone messed up a routing table (or don't use BGP - unlikely since this is between two large carriers) and as a result outbound traffic will take a drastically different path to get back to you instead of going back a similar path.
sprintlink is notorious for this.. had similar routing problems going back to 1995 and I doubt they will ever go away..
a way one can see this in action would be to try one of the many sites found at »www.traceroute.org/ - do a traceroute to your IP then do a traceroute TO the server, some you will see a totally different return route.
it in itself is not a problem, it's when one of the routers on the return is saturated/overloaded/broke - all you see are the high pings on that one hop and never see the true source of the bottleneck.
forget about troubleshooting, unless you have admin priv on the remote site you are tracing the route, or you are in contact with a tier 1 NOC, it will be near impossible to track down (believe me, I've been there before and it ain't fun tracking down why a link that is only 3% util is giving 400ms pings because some bozo fubared up a routing table half way across the country).
[text was edited by author 2003-01-22 17:44:33] |
|
Estandon
join:2002-12-03
Salisbury, MD
| reply to newview
Help! |
|
aadic
Premium
join:2002-12-14
Trenton, NJ | reply to newview
I am getting mid teens now consistantly! |
|
Go Chargers7
Fa Shizzle Ma Nizzle
Premium
join:2002-09-24
Huntington Beach, CA |  reply to newview
I must say, excellent job. You not only solved your own issue but certainly helped a ton of other users wondering about the same problem but not knowing what to do about it.
--
Nuclear fission: made in America; tested in Japan. |
|
v0nBek187
join:2002-11-07
Hattiesburg, MS
| look at this horrible mess:
C:\>tracert www.dslreports.com
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 70 ms 70 ms 30 ms 10.177.0.1
2 80 ms 70 ms 70 ms 172.30.184.81
3 40 ms 30 ms 31 ms 12.118.168.17
4 50 ms 110 ms 30 ms gbr2-p51.hs1tx.ip.att.net [12.123.212.26]
5 70 ms 40 ms 80 ms gbr3-p40.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.2.97]
6 120 ms 70 ms 50 ms gbr4-p20.attga.ip.att.net [12.122.2.90]
7 50 ms 60 ms 110 ms gbr4-p30.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.122.2.226]
8 180 ms 50 ms 90 ms gbr2-p100.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.122.1.186]
9 91 ms 150 ms 70 ms tbr1-p012801.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.122.11.165]
10 80 ms 71 ms 70 ms tbr1-p013701.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.10.53]
11 131 ms 100 ms 110 ms gar1-p3100.nwrnj.ip.att.net [12.123.214.181]
12 60 ms 71 ms 120 ms 12.119.140.30
13 60 ms 110 ms 180 ms 1189.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.69]
14 130 ms 140 ms 80 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
15 60 ms 100 ms 120 ms www.dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
Trace complete.
|
|
eliteone
Clear Your Cache And Cookies, Sir
join:2001-10-13
Reading, PA
| reply to newview
Yes I am seeing the improvement as well. Pings to DSLR used to be in the 50s now im seeing aronud 24-26ms avg. Actually my bud items from this board contacted me and told me about the ping drop so I did a few traces myself and see that to most locations the ping was cut in half. Nice goin man!
[text was edited by author 2003-01-23 21:15:34] |
|
Estandon
join:2002-12-03
Salisbury, MD
| reply to newview
My ping is still crappy and irregular. Any other ideas? |
|
Jeff_B
Premium
join:2000-09-24
Brick, NJ | Those pings are no so bad. It looks like your average is around 30ms and never goes above 50ms. That little bit of packet loss looks nasty though. |
|
jwtr6
join:2001-10-31
Alexandria, VA
 ·Comcast
| reply to newview
My improvement is dramatic.....thanks to whomever made the decision to switch me OFF sprintlink.....and back to att
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 7 ms 7 ms 8 ms 10.75.224.1
2 8 ms 9 ms 8 ms 172.30.103.65
3 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 172.30.100.177
4 10 ms 9 ms 16 ms 172.30.100.186
5 9 ms 11 ms 9 ms 68.48.0.50
6 27 ms 44 ms 11 ms 12.126.168.5
7 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms tbr1-p012201.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.123.9.74]
8 15 ms 16 ms 15 ms tbr1-p013701.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.10.53]
9 16 ms 14 ms 16 ms gar1-p3100.nwrnj.ip.att.net [12.123.214.181]
10 15 ms 15 ms 16 ms 12.119.140.30
11 16 ms 19 ms 16 ms 1189.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.69]
12 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
13 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms www.dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
Trace complete.
[text was edited by author 2003-01-23 23:04:57] |
|
rightSide01
join:2003-01-08
Kinzers, PA
| reply to newview
Wow, nice work. I can't explain to you in words that YOU, got to the bottom of something people who are Comcast customers affected by this problem and have WRITTEN routing algorithms and proven them to be efficient were not able to take a peak at, diagnose and get to the bottom of. Nice work to you, and shame on Comcast, all you have to be is nice sometimes. If only their engineers were as nice as the people they send out to customers. |
|
newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
| reply to newview
WOW . . . looks like some happy people! I guess my email to Williams NOC with my simple question solved some problems for a few of you. It was really no big deal, it only affected subscribers in Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Virginia and Pennsylvania. 
Maybe I should send an invoice to Comcast for services rendered.
And now for my next trick . . .
--
The Rules of Spam | Maryland's New Anti-Spam Law
Where are we going? And what's with the hand basket? |
|
eliteone
Clear Your Cache And Cookies, Sir
join:2001-10-13
Reading, PA | reply to newview
No my friend, it was a big deal :P. |
|
Estandon
join:2002-12-03
Salisbury, MD | reply to newview
I forwarded it too both of them. Can't wait for the responses... |
|
newview
Ex .. Ex .. Exactly
Premium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
| said by Estandon :
I forwarded it too both of them. Can't wait for the responses...
Please let me know what they say . . . thanks. |
|
gax2
Premium
join:2002-07-14
Philadelphia, PA
| reply to newview
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 9 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10.90.8.1
2 10 ms 32 ms 10 ms 172.30.140.81
3 10 ms 7 ms 12 ms 172.30.140.118
4 10 ms 13 ms 8 ms 68.80.0.230
5 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms POS4-0.hsipaccess2.Philadelphia1.Level3.net [63.
208.100.69]
6 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms ge-6-2-1.mp2.Philadelphia1.level3.net [209.247.9
.37]
7 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms so-4-3-0.mp2.NewYork1.Level3.net [209.247.8.66]
8 16 ms 11 ms 11 ms gigabitethernet5-1.core1.NewYork1.Level3.net [64
.159.17.101]
9 18 ms 12 ms 13 ms unknown.wcg.net [209.244.160.138]
10 16 ms 19 ms 14 ms nycmny2wcx1-netaccess-atm.wcg.net [64.200.86.178
]
11 15 ms 17 ms 13 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
12 14 ms 13 ms 13 ms www.dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
Trace complete.
--
reboot. cycle. repeat. |
|
