Author Topic: Package loss 60% (Read 1174 times)

Skuzzy · « **Reply #45 on:** May 05, 2002, 05:12:06 PM »

Sure Alino,..would be happy to help them anyway I can. Until they get involved the problem will drag on forever.

ccvi · « **Reply #46 on:** May 05, 2002, 08:53:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by tofri

The ISP had problem with the bandwith?? It seems, that they have solved the problem in a very unorthodox way.

No, that's common practice I think.

Das oben war nicht wirklich als Witz gemeint, fliegt irgendjemand von hier fuer Tuerme?

Kronos · « **Reply #47 on:** May 05, 2002, 11:43:11 PM »

Hahaha told u guys it was telekom all along

Dangnabbit.

Monk · « **Reply #48 on:** May 06, 2002, 01:18:00 AM »

LOL ..hehehe ...hohoho ......ya'll want help from Telekom, .....good luck.

fffreeze220 · « **Reply #49 on:** May 06, 2002, 01:58:21 AM »

Quote

FedEx P0WNX0RZ UPS, both in prices, delivery time, and they dont play soccer with your packages.

Maybe not soccer but after a look in the back of the guy from UPs delivering our company it could be maybe "catch the packet"

Alino · « **Reply #50 on:** May 06, 2002, 08:00:19 AM »

Day 4 still the same

C:\WINDOWS>tracert 216.234.247.240

Routenverfolgung zu 216.234.247.240 über maximal 30 Abschnitte

1 55 ms 68 ms 55 ms 217.5.98.143
2 55 ms 55 ms 55 ms 217.237.156.110
3 137 ms 151 ms 151 ms Vienna-gw12.USA.net.DTAG.DE [62.156.131.182]
4 * 151 ms 151 ms dt-gw.wswdc.ip.att.net [194.25.6.234]
5 138 ms 151 ms 151 ms gbr4-p50.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.123.9.54]
6 152 ms 164 ms 165 ms gbr4-p10.attga.ip.att.net [12.122.2.161]
7 179 ms 178 ms 179 ms gbr3-p10.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.3.37]
8 * 192 ms * gbr2-p60.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.5.229]
9 179 ms 164 ms 165 ms gar1-p370.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.123.16.237]
10 179 ms 164 ms 179 ms gar1-p340.dlrtx.ip.att.net [12.123.196.97]
11 165 ms 178 ms 179 ms 12.119.136.22
12 179 ms 164 ms 179 ms border3.ge3-1-bbnet1.ext1.dal.pnap.net [216.52.
91.22]
13 165 ms 178 ms 192 ms theplanet-2.border3.003.dal.pnap.net [216.52.18
.222]
14 357 ms 371 ms 357 ms 216.234.247.240

Ablaufverfolgung beendet.

No way to get into MA

Skuzzy · « **Reply #51 on:** May 06, 2002, 08:18:05 AM »

Alino, the problem still exists. Here is a traceroute back to 217.5.98.143 (number 1 hop in your trace) from the MA location.
Notice how the trace just stops at 217.237.156.109. This router/system seems to think it owns the 217.5.98.x Class C IP Block.
Get this to the Telekom folks and see if they can do something about it.

traceroute 217.5.98.143
traceroute to 217.5.98.143 (217.5.98.143), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 core0.dllstx.theplanet.com (216.234.234.1) 2.926 ms 0.740 ms 5.180 ms
2 border3.fe5-1.theplanet-2.003.dal.pnap.net (216.52.189.221) 1.294 ms 0.876
ms 1.758 ms
3 core2.ge1-0-0-bbnet2.ext1.dal.pnap.net (216.52.191.97) 6.289 ms 2.136 ms
1.812 ms
4 500.POS2-2.GW2.DFW13.ALTER.NET (65.208.15.145) 4.327 ms 5.386 ms 2.897 ms
5 0.so-1-0-0.XL2.DFW13.ALTER.NET (152.63.103.230) 1.282 ms 6.191 ms 6.727 m
s
6 0.so-3-0-0.XL2.DFW9.ALTER.NET (152.63.103.221) 3.786 ms 6.512 ms 4.213 ms
7 POS7-0.BR2.DFW9.ALTER.NET (152.63.99.213) 9.329 ms 8.845 ms 11.555 ms
8 204.255.168.166 (204.255.168.166) 6.173 ms 4.457 ms 5.226 ms
9 p6-0.crtntx1-br1.bbnplanet.net (4.24.9.249) 6.636 ms 2.423 ms 10.329 ms
10 p9-0.iplvin1-br2.bbnplanet.net (4.24.10.214) 26.556 ms 23.030 ms 25.021 m
s
11 p15-0.iplvin1-br1.bbnplanet.net (4.24.10.153) 31.194 ms 26.280 ms 23.405
ms
12 p13-0.phlapa1-br1.bbnplanet.net (4.24.10.181) 40.704 ms 38.460 ms 46.529
ms
13 p13-0.nycmny1-nbr2.bbnplanet.net (4.24.10.178) 46.965 ms 48.385 ms 47.859
ms
14 so-7-0-0.nycmny1-hcr3.bbnplanet.net (4.0.7.13) 58.426 ms 44.158 ms 38.728
ms
15 p12-2.deutscheti.bbnplanet.net (4.25.133.6) 48.411 ms 42.967 ms 49.990 ms
16 BN-EB1.BN.DE.net.dtag.de (62.154.66.38) 129.821 ms 136.463 ms 130.239 ms
17 217.237.156.109 (217.237.156.109) 145.336 ms 134.128 ms 131.499 ms

Alino · « **Reply #52 on:** May 06, 2002, 10:32:33 AM »

Ok Skuzzy i will transmitit to them. Thx for your work.

Duedel · « **Reply #53 on:** May 06, 2002, 01:32:36 PM »

Here we go again. Maybe Telekom knows that we play AH and that this is very expencive for them?

tofri · « **Reply #54 on:** May 06, 2002, 02:02:23 PM »

Now we have a few more trace routes on other postings, that do not go over the 217.x.x.x block.
And they have also problems of lags and packet losses.
What's about them?
I have some time, (I cannot log into the Main, remember?) so I traced down ervery goddoed IP from 216.234.247.1 to 216.234.247.100
The whole C-Class 216.234.247.x is owned by Internap.
I made first a traceroute and then checked the answering IPs with a browser.

There was one thing I noticed at once.
All Ips with the same nasty behviour as the TPL , refer to servers, that do not answer to standard browser requests (means no www or ftp...) and errr.... to porno sites

I have no idea what that might mean, just want to mention it.

a very frustrated Tofri

Alino · « **Reply #55 on:** May 06, 2002, 02:10:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Duedel
Here we go again. Maybe Telekom knows that we play AH and that this is very expencive for them?

LOL Duedel. You never loose Humor he ? ,-)

Duedel · « **Reply #56 on:** May 06, 2002, 03:10:45 PM »

Could it be interesting to compare our traceroutes to the MA with those to the TA or CT? Maybe we could get new hints where the problem is?
Whats the adress of the TA?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #57 on:** May 06, 2002, 03:14:11 PM »

All the traces I see in this thread have a 217.x.x.x IP address in them. Which ones are you talking about tofri?

tofri · « **Reply #58 on:** May 06, 2002, 04:53:38 PM »

I checked the dsl news forum of t-online.
There are many complaints about the connection to US sites.
Seems that there is really a problem at the telekom lines.
Problem is the lack of response to complaints of customers.

tofri

Skuzzy · « **Reply #59 on:** May 06, 2002, 05:15:16 PM »

Is it lack of response, or lack of information? ISP's need a lot of data to get routing problems ironed out. Sometimes they are not even aware of where the problem may be. This holds especially true of large ISP's.
I posted that trace back to the 217.x.x.x block to help show where one of the potential problems are. It has to be sent to the ISP so they can see a place to start fixing the problem.

I can categorically say the 217.5.98.x Class C block has a serious routing problem. The trace I posted shows the problem and at what router the problem is ocurring.