Pings again

I see the pings have gone down the pan again. Over 300ms to idnet.net

MAC time

all good here:

C:\>tracert news.bbc.co.uk



Tracing route to newswww.bbc.net.uk [212.58.226.8]

over a maximum of 30 hops:



  1     3 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  www.routerlogin.com [192.168.0.1]

  2    21 ms    25 ms    22 ms  telehouse-bb-gw1-vpdn.idnet.net [212.69.63.45]

  3    25 ms    24 ms    22 ms  telehouse-gw-bb.idnet.net [212.69.63.9]

  4    22 ms    23 ms    24 ms  redbus-gw.idnet.net [212.69.63.1]

  5    23 ms    25 ms    25 ms  80.253.100.113

  6    22 ms    23 ms    21 ms  212.58.238.153

  7    24 ms    24 ms    24 ms  newslb14.thdo.bbc.co.uk [212.58.226.8]



Trace complete.

This can't be right

Tracing route to newswww.bbc.net.uk [212.58.226.8]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms *****************************
2 88 ms 76 ms 81 ms telehouse [212.69.63.45]
3 90 ms 84 ms 89 ms telehouse [212.69.63.9]
4 77 ms 87 ms 119 ms redbus-gw.idnet.net [212.69.63.1]
5 122 ms 119 ms 137 ms 80.253.100.113
6 91 ms 97 ms 101 ms 212.58.238.153
7 192 ms 198 ms 182 ms newswww.bbc.net.uk [212.58.226.8]

Trace complete.



ping -t idnet.net

Pinging idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=176ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=136ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=131ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=144ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=159ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=149ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=165ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=147ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=175ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=168ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=145ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=148ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=160ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=148ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=138ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=129ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=139ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=167ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=184ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=157ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=144ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=153ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=98ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=60
Request timed out.
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=62ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=52ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=103ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=104ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=72ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=88ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=98ms TTL=60
Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=106ms TTL=60

Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:
Packets: Sent = 43, Received = 42, Lost = 1 (2% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 50ms, Maximum = 184ms, Average = 121ms

For comparison: (I'm not gloating btw! )

C:\>ping -t idnet.net



Pinging idnet.net [212.69.36.10] with 32 bytes of data:



Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=60

Reply from 212.69.36.10: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=60



Ping statistics for 212.69.36.10:

    Packets: Sent = 48, Received = 48, Lost = 0 (0% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

    Minimum = 20ms, Maximum = 65ms, Average = 27ms

That's what I normally get. You've robbed me of my pings!

You been playing with that MTU again John??

lol

I wish that was the problem, but I put everything back to where it was before it got broken. Seriously though, the latency that I'm getting has rubbished a days work.
Oh well start again tomorrow.

Would a problem at my exchange cause this, even though line speeds are ok?

Just a thought.

Edited by oleo (Thu 19-Oct-06 18:52:13)

I think it only takes a glitch on any one of the servers between you and where you're trying to access. Unfortunately no-one along the way seems to be able/can be bothered to put it right. Probably because it would be a bigger job than they are willing to do!

On the IDNetters forum they reckon a good cure for high pings is to use the BT speed-test. Apparently when you re-connect to IDNet, there's an odds-on chance you do so via a different, improved, 'channel' (Dunno if that's the right terminology!).

If it persists it may be worth a try!

Worth a try. I'll have to leave that one for the morning as the speedtester seems broke as well. The 'Force' does not seem to be with me today.

Edited by oleo (Thu 19-Oct-06 20:08:33)