your WhatsApp ping is 10x higher though,.....

With all due respect, it doesn't matter if only WhatsApp ping is so high because I don't care about it.

What's important is that the overall pings are low throughout all websites. And in my case that is all that matters.

I just tested Viber now C:\Windows\system32>ping viber.com

Pinging viber.com [2.22.132.47] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 2.22.132.47:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 6ms, Maximum = 6ms, Average = 6ms

Viber is an alternative program that can be used instead of WhatsApp and in this case I am pinging at 6ms response time, which is great.

I am also pinging Facebook at 4-6ms which is also something I use for voice chat.

I would only complain if I had 77ms in majority of the websites. But if the majority pings at 3-6ms then I have nothing to complain about!

This thread is somewhat confusing because it creates the impression that the latencies are high throughout the entire TalkTalk ping tests. And this is simply not true, at least not in my case.

The OP is also complaining about packet loss. But as you can see from my tests there are no packets lost in any of my ping tests.

In reply to a post by Myth:

your WhatsApp ping is 10x higher though,.....

Not that surprising given the server the request went to is in the United States. Light can only travel so fast.

In reply to a post by CarlTSpeak:

In reply to a post by Myth:

your WhatsApp ping is 10x higher though,.....

Not that surprising given the server the request went to is in the United States. Light can only travel so fast.

Well I am not sure if this is necessarily true. Because as we can see https://ipinfo.io/2.22.132.47

2.22.132.47 Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States

C:\Windows\system32>ping viber.com

Pinging viber.com [2.22.132.47] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51
Reply from 2.22.132.47: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 2.22.132.47:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 6ms, Maximum = 6ms, Average = 6ms

Viber.com pings are displaying for me 6ms from a US server, how do you explain that?

That IP address is on the Akamai Content Delivery Network so could be pretty much anywhere. The geolocation is meaningless, that's just where Akamai are registered as a business.

Hope that helps.

In reply to a post by CarlTSpeak:

That IP address is on the Akamai Content Delivery Network so could be pretty much anywhere. The geolocation is meaningless, that's just where Akamai are registered as a business.

Hope that helps.

Here ya go:

Non-authoritative answer:
Name: viber.com
Address: 2.22.132.47

Non-authoritative answer:
47.132.22.2.in-addr.arpa name = a2-22-132-47.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com.

traceroute to 2.22.132.47 (2.22.132.47), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 3.692 ms 2.068 ms 1.060 ms
2 10.93.56.1 (10.93.56.1) 10.937 ms 9.051 ms 10.852 ms
3 leed-core-2b-xe-812-0.network.virginmedia.net (80.0.241.177) 10.236 ms 11.965 ms 13.534 ms
4 * * *
5 * * *
6 86.85-254-62.static.virginmediabusiness.co.uk (62.254.85.86) 27.026 ms 24.256 ms 33.220 ms
7 * * *
8 uk-lon03a-ri1-ae-2-0.aorta.net (84.116.135.46) 21.572 ms 21.992 ms 21.313 ms
9 ae11-209.rt.tc2.lon.uk.retn.net (87.245.245.22) 21.352 ms 20.985 ms 42.402 ms
10 gw-akamai.retn.net (87.245.245.29) 23.362 ms 21.736 ms 23.188 ms
11 * * *

For those of us in the UK t'is in Londonium

Viber.com pings are displaying for me 6ms from a US server, how do you explain that?

He did explain it below.

I'd much rather hear your explanation of how your connection can break the laws of physics.

Never seen 6ms from Scotland to London, nevermind London to Massachusetts.

Well here's a bit of potentially useless knowledge.

Back in the day when I was involved in the sale of fibre inter-connectivity for remote data centres we used a rule of thumb of 1 ms for every 150 miles.

A lot of things have changes since then, but I suspect not the speed of light.

Edited by iefbr14 (Fri 14-Feb-20 12:28:01)

Fibre with better refractive index is a thing but I'm not sure how many production networks, if any, it is in.

High frequency traders continue to use microwave links in preference to fibre for good reasons. Still getting about 2/3rds c from fibre while microwave gets you really close to it.

In reply to a post by BLaZiNgSPEED:

With all due respect, it doesn't matter if only WhatsApp ping is so high because I don't care about it.

....

......
The OP is also complaining about packet loss. But as you can see from my tests there are no packets lost in any of my ping tests.

I see your issue, we're currently not replying to the OP, but to someone who resurrected this thread this year, who specifically is investigating an issue with WhatsApp

Edited by deleted (Sun 16-Feb-20 10:10:02)