User comments on ISPs
  >> Virgin Media (Cable)


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)   Print Thread
Administrator MrSaffron
(staff) Mon 15-Oct-12 20:46:17
Print Post

How is latency tonight?


[link to this post]
 
Looking at BQM's it looks better, the pattern is much more like localised congestion with some VM areas actually looking pretty good now.

Andrew Ferguson, [email protected]
www.thinkbroadband.com - formerly known as ADSLguide.org.uk
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User Joppy
(learned) Mon 15-Oct-12 20:58:18
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
The general problem people had seems to be gone tonight, unless its just late. Everyone is waiting until just after 9pm before they say its ok now wink

My problems are just as bad, but probably a local problem:

S:\>tracert pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com

Tracing route to pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com [80.249.99.164]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 26 ms 10 ms 28 ms 10.89.184.1
2 25 ms 26 ms 10 ms croy-core-1a-ge339.network.virginmedia.net [81.96.224.213]
3 13 ms 14 ms 17 ms croy-core-2a-ae2-0.network.virginmedia.net [195.182.178.82]
4 22 ms 9 ms 13 ms brnt-bb-1a-ae9-0.network.virginmedia.net [81.96.226.1]
5 7 ms 7 ms 8 ms brnt-bb-1b-ae0-0.network.virginmedia.net [213.105.174.226]
6 * 23 ms 12 ms brnt-tmr-1-ae5-0.network.virginmedia.net [213.105.159.50]
7 14 ms 15 ms 14 ms telc-ic-1-as0-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.253.185.74]
8 18 ms 26 ms 23 ms linx-gw2.thdo.ncuk.net [195.66.236.240]
9 19 ms 26 ms 18 ms gi0-24-10-star1.core-rs2.thdo.ncuk.net [80.249.97.9]
10 16 ms 17 ms 14 ms pingbox1.thinkbroadband.com [80.249.99.164]

Trace complete.

S:\>tracert bbc.co.uk

Tracing route to bbc.co.uk [212.58.241.131]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 8 ms 10 ms 8 ms 10.89.184.1
2 14 ms 23 ms 17 ms croy-core-1a-ge339.network.virginmedia.net [81.96.224.213]
3 12 ms 23 ms 22 ms croy-core-2a-ae2-0.network.virginmedia.net [195.182.178.82]
4 14 ms 11 ms 13 ms brnt-bb-1a-ae9-0.network.virginmedia.net [81.96.226.1]
5 14 ms 14 ms 17 ms glfd-bb-1b-as1-0.network.virginmedia.net [212.43.163.105]
6 17 ms 33 ms 17 ms glfd-tmr-1-ae5-0.network.virginmedia.net [213.105.159.46] 7 * 29 ms 13 ms tcl5-ic-1-as0-0.network.virginmedia.net [62.253.185.78]
8 15 ms 20 ms 16 ms 212.58.239.249
9 * * * Request timed out.
10 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms ae1.er01.rbsov.bbc.co.uk [132.185.254.46]
11 27 ms 24 ms 30 ms 132.185.255.60
12 22 ms 15 ms 23 ms 212.58.241.131

Trace complete.

Edited by Joppy (Mon 15-Oct-12 20:59:18)

Standard User kwikbreaks
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Tue 16-Oct-12 09:15:40
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
VM posted this up on their board...
http://community.virginmedia.com/t5/Up-to-100Mb-Spee...
F002199132 - Hi we've identified an issue with our peering links to a company called Atrato who we publically peer with in Amsterdam and London. They were pushing abnormal amounts of traffic through our public peering links at LINX, overloading them. So we've shut down both of our peering links to Atrato at LINX which should resolve this issue. Meanwhile we're going to continue to investigate the root cause of this problem. Could you please continue to give us feedback on this so we can be sure the issue is resolved.


Considering this issue has been happening for at least a week and probably more it seems that VM's network monotoring must be pretty much non-existent.


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Tue 16-Oct-12 10:40:58
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kwikbreaks:
Considering this issue has been happening for at least a week and probably more it seems that VM's network monotoring must be pretty much non-existent.


On the up side at least not some misfiring traffic management as you were convinced earlier smile
Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Tue 16-Oct-12 10:54:41
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by MrSaffron:
Looking at BQM's it looks better, the pattern is much more like localised congestion with some VM areas actually looking pretty good now.


Something that is perhaps concerning more globally is that according to the LINX public lists BT have 24 x 10Gb and 1 x 100Gb interfaces to the London LINX LANs, VM have a total of 11 x 10Gb into them.

Speaking with a couple of different content providers they've more private peering to BT than VM, so it's debatable whether or not VM have lots of private peering taking the slack.

Maybe VM have tons of transit or loads of peering points elsewhere. Seems an anomaly that they've 50% less peering capacity than Talk Talk, 1/3rd the capacity of BT and just over 1/2 the capacity of Sky though.
Standard User Daemon66
(learned) Tue 16-Oct-12 11:05:57
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
My connection is back to 'remarkably good for VM' now.

They say they've cut a peering link to Atrato to resolve the issue, is this likely to cause other, different problems?
Standard User kwikbreaks
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Tue 16-Oct-12 11:15:39
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:
On the up side at least not some misfiring traffic management as you were convinced earlier smile
I'm not sure that's an upside as VM certainly need some traffic management that actually works if they intend to persist with their "unlimited" myth - of course more resource would help too.

I'm still surprised at how the sudden onset and cutoff could be caused by simple congestion on a peering link. Of course as we know VM do like to run their links hot so possibly just a little extra loading was enough.

Simply shutting the link down can't be a solution though as it will just cause their other peering links to run even hotter.
Standard User kwikbreaks
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Tue 16-Oct-12 11:16:24
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Daemon66] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Daemon66:
My connection is back to 'remarkably good for VM' now.

They say they've cut a peering link to Atrato to resolve the issue, is this likely to cause other, different problems?
Yes - extra traffic on the remaining links.
Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Tue 16-Oct-12 12:48:32
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kwikbreaks:
I'm still surprised at how the sudden onset and cutoff could be caused by simple congestion on a peering link. Of course as we know VM do like to run their links hot so possibly just a little extra loading was enough.

Simply shutting the link down can't be a solution though as it will just cause their other peering links to run even hotter.


That's exactly what congestion on Ethernet looks like. The link that was shut down was logical and will not affect VM's overall capacity. Traffic from this ISP will go via Amsterdam and the peering there if it was just London shut down else it'll go via IP transit.
Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Tue 16-Oct-12 12:50:47
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kwikbreaks:
In reply to a post by Daemon66:
My connection is back to 'remarkably good for VM' now.

They say they've cut a peering link to Atrato to resolve the issue, is this likely to cause other, different problems?
Yes - extra traffic on the remaining links.


No - overall capacity remains the same, traffic will have been moved to other links with capacity and won't affect the network as a whole.

No actual capacity was taken down.
Standard User kwikbreaks
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Tue 16-Oct-12 14:56:41
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:
No - overall capacity remains the same...

I don't understand that. How can they shut down an external link yet retain the same capacity. What am I missing?
Standard User ukhardy07
(experienced) Tue 16-Oct-12 15:00:08
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
Same question here...
Standard User Chrysalis
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Wed 17-Oct-12 02:40:57
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by MrSaffron:
Looking at BQM's it looks better, the pattern is much more like localised congestion with some VM areas actually looking pretty good now.


checked my live graph after seeing this thread, last 24 hours looks ok, now just looks like US channel congestion I got.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share-thumb/b57b9...
Standard User Chrysalis
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Wed 17-Oct-12 02:44:53
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:
In reply to a post by kwikbreaks:
I'm still surprised at how the sudden onset and cutoff could be caused by simple congestion on a peering link. Of course as we know VM do like to run their links hot so possibly just a little extra loading was enough.

Simply shutting the link down can't be a solution though as it will just cause their other peering links to run even hotter.

That's exactly what congestion on Ethernet looks like. The link that was shut down was logical and will not affect VM's overall capacity. Traffic from this ISP will go via Amsterdam and the peering there if it was just London shut down else it'll go via IP transit.

ignition you have any news on if VM are actually still planning to do a new traffic management system like comcast's? or has it been shelved.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 17-Oct-12 10:26:22)

Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Wed 17-Oct-12 09:29:20
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
They didn't shut a physical external link down, they shut down the logical link(s) to Atrato at LINX which allow the two to communicate directly over the LINX LAN(s).
Standard User kwikbreaks
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Wed 17-Oct-12 10:43:07
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
Thanks for the explanation. I've no idea why such connections should be present but I can see how removing it makes no difference to overall capacity.

I was also surprised to read that ethermet congestion could have such a sudden onset - I would have expected some earlier spikes to have shown producing a more gradual build up but once again I have no practical experience in this sort of thing and just go on how I would expect it to work.
Standard User Ignitionnet
(knowledge is power) Wed 17-Oct-12 10:56:25
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kwikbreaks:
Thanks for the explanation. I've no idea why such connections should be present but I can see how removing it makes no difference to overall capacity.


It's a vital part of a public peering point, wanting to control who your network talks to directly and who has to use a transit provider to reach you. Every ISP connecting to the LINX LAN has to configure their own kit to talk to other ISPs and vice-versa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Gateway_Protocol
Standard User qasdfdsaq
(committed) Wed 17-Oct-12 22:40:46
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Ignitionnet] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:
In reply to a post by MrSaffron:
Looking at BQM's it looks better, the pattern is much more like localised congestion with some VM areas actually looking pretty good now.


Something that is perhaps concerning more globally is that according to the LINX public lists BT have 24 x 10Gb and 1 x 100Gb interfaces to the London LINX LANs, VM have a total of 11 x 10Gb into them.

Speaking with a couple of different content providers they've more private peering to BT than VM, so it's debatable whether or not VM have lots of private peering taking the slack.

Maybe VM have tons of transit or loads of peering points elsewhere. Seems an anomaly that they've 50% less peering capacity than Talk Talk, 1/3rd the capacity of BT and just over 1/2 the capacity of Sky though.

They do to some extent - for example Virgin Media have their own trunk lines to Amsterdam and 80Gbps of interconnects into AMS-IX public peering, whereas BT only have 10Gbps. VM also peer at Edge-IX in Manchester through which they feed a great deal of their Youtube traffic, which BT do not have. BT on the other hand have quite a few minor interconnects in other places that VM don't have, but these are mostly single ~1Gbps ports that make little difference to the overall picture.
Standard User qasdfdsaq
(committed) Wed 17-Oct-12 23:27:32
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: kwikbreaks] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kwikbreaks:
I was also surprised to read that ethermet congestion could have such a sudden onset - I would have expected some earlier spikes to have shown producing a more gradual build up but once again I have no practical experience in this sort of thing and just go on how I would expect it to work.

I'm not - was going to say this a few days ago on CF but these sudden onsets and cutoffs are pretty much exactly how ethernet congestion/saturation is expected to look like, with the exception of the level of increase being higher than I'd anticipate (which I've mentioned before). That's the only thing that surprises me - the amount of buffering that seems to be getting used on core LINX nodes.

In fact the most recent events seem to have a less sudden onset than previous incidents of core congestion on VM's network.

Here's some more examples of the effects of pure congestion on fast ethernet networks, i.e. what these events normally look like:

O2/Be core network congestion on an end user line:
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/14329a7aa728789fbc750857d4...
O2/Be core network congestion on an edge router:
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/3534523ca7831de4796c3d0a16...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/3534523ca7831de4796c3d0a16...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/3534523ca7831de4796c3d0a16...

Single port Ethernet congestion:
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/59b931aa912c3dbd571e0fc777...

Previous incident of VM core network congestion (11th-14th May):
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/b2e8d8ebe946be54635aa2eafd...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/b2e8d8ebe946be54635aa2eafd...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/b2e8d8ebe946be54635aa2eafd...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/VM/0ec8f9b6b6d5ebc5ce12b7d...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/b2e8d8ebe946be54635aa2eafd...
And the effect of the above on an end user line:
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/4f0bcff6483ed06b4ae2a1932f...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/ea9c9dd3d4ac967344a4c54b2f...
Compared to the "current" incident a week ago:
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/b2e8d8ebe946be54635aa2eafd...
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/c3c367f023f83d3685408a227c...

And a fine example of what should *not* happen, i.e. when a network admin sets something up seriously wrong:
http://qasdfdsaq.com/ping/55c6f8599938ac6d0ecf98f881...

Edited by qasdfdsaq (Wed 17-Oct-12 23:29:30)

Standard User Joppy
(learned) Thu 18-Oct-12 20:43:29
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
Bump dead on 8pm tonight. Seems to only affect a handful of people this time though:

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share-thumb/38746...
Standard User Joppy
(learned) Thu 18-Oct-12 21:12:34
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: Joppy] [link to this post]
 
30 miles from me: http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share-thumb/dbd06...
Standard User metalhead41
(knowledge is power) Thu 18-Oct-12 21:45:15
Print Post

Re: How is latency tonight?


[re: MrSaffron] [link to this post]
 
My connection seems rather poor tonight frown My Broadband Ping

----------------------------------------------------
We may be human But we're still animals

My Blog | follow me @metalhead41 | Surfin' Bird Dance
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | >> (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to