10ms to 168ms?

Hi, i've just tried playing a little CS and found i was pinging at 140+ ms

Tracing route to wh1.brightdawn.net [195.20.109.130]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms 6 ms 192.168.0.1
2 16 ms 9 ms 10 ms gadamer-dsl.zen.net.uk [62.3.83.3]
3 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms bolzano-ge-0-0-1-1.wh.zen.net.uk [62.3.80.225]
4 15 ms 16 ms 10 ms 193.189.130.26
5 168 ms 168 ms 168 ms pc-62-30-249-153-ha.blueyonder.co.uk [62.30.249.
153]
6 169 ms 172 ms 169 ms 194.117.136.178
7 171 ms 171 ms 168 ms 194.117.136.150
8 177 ms 173 ms 173 ms 194.117.136.166
9 164 ms 170 ms 173 ms tele2-gw4.telewest.net [194.117.136.197]
10 350 ms 207 ms 202 ms telewest.transit.as25369.net [194.117.147.66]
11 177 ms 162 ms 171 ms sov-r1-rtr1.4u.net.uk [217.146.81.254]
12 165 ms 174 ms 167 ms wh1.brightdawn.net [195.20.109.130]

Trace complete.

I have friends on the same exchange as myself but with a different ISP who were pinging around 30+. Any ideas why the large increase at hop 5?

Cheers.

In reply to:

---

Any ideas why the large increase at hop 5?

---

Sure - it leaves Zen's network and enters the Telewest network.

A similar issue with routing via Telewest has been discussed here.

cheers. Think i will ring support about it tomorrow, can't have friends on another ISP getting better pings than me!

let us know what they say pls.

oh hello...I'm the owner of that server!

And I think you might be under the impression that it's the U75CLAN gaming server.

It isn't. That's that just a Linux server running cpanel. It runs the clan website and a few other websites.

I think you really want to be running ping tests on our GAMING server, which lives at

195.20.109.175

Chris Barnett / Layabout / His Royal Highness Defender Of The Realm.

P.S. Google Alerts is a great tool for finding out who's talking about you!

;-)

Pinging 195.20.109.175 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=119

Ping statistics for 195.20.109.175:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 37ms, Maximum = 39ms, Average = 37ms

Pinging 195.20.109.175 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=119

Ping statistics for 195.20.109.175:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 22ms, Average = 21ms

Pinging 195.20.109.175 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.20.109.175: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=119

Ping statistics for 195.20.109.175:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 18ms, Maximum = 19ms, Average = 18ms

Nice and zippy here..

andrew@Penguin:~$ ping 195.20.109.175
PING 195.20.109.175 (195.20.109.175) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=1 ttl=119 time=25.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=2 ttl=119 time=25.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=3 ttl=119 time=24.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=4 ttl=119 time=23.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=5 ttl=119 time=24.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=6 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=7 ttl=119 time=25.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=8 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=9 ttl=119 time=25.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=10 ttl=119 time=24.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=11 ttl=119 time=25.2 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=12 ttl=119 time=24.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=13 ttl=119 time=23.6 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=14 ttl=119 time=23.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=15 ttl=119 time=25.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=16 ttl=119 time=24.7 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=17 ttl=119 time=24.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=18 ttl=119 time=25.4 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=19 ttl=119 time=24.0 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=20 ttl=119 time=23.9 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=21 ttl=119 time=24.1 ms
64 bytes from 195.20.109.175: icmp_seq=22 ttl=119 time=25.0 ms

--- 195.20.109.175 ping statistics ---
22 packets transmitted, 22 received, 0% packet loss, time 21000ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 23.666/24.578/25.720/0.664 ms

Yet again ppl post pings at times other than between 2000-2200 when the pings shoot up from 40ish to over 150-200. We all could post fast pings at 0200 but thats not the point.

Edited by deleted (Thu 26-Jul-07 14:04:39)