Severe internet trouble

Howell

Howell

0
Joined
Feb 24, 2003
Messages
4,740
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Anyone else having trouble?

Code: 
 1     1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  ????????
 2     1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  ????????
 3    12 ms    11 ms    11 ms  sl-gw21-atl-0-2-ts5.sprintlink.net [160.81.220.1
5]
 4    16 ms    11 ms    16 ms  sl-bb23-atl-5-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.12.17]
 5    12 ms    11 ms    11 ms  sl-bb20-atl-9-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.12.13]
 6    13 ms    12 ms    13 ms  144.232.18.14
 7    13 ms    12 ms     *     0.so-0-0-0.XL1.ATL5.ALTER.NET [152.63.87.90]
 8  5364 ms     *        *     0.so-5-0-0.XL1.NYC9.ALTER.NET [152.63.0.174]
 9  5441 ms     *        *     POS6-0.GW1.NYC9.ALTER.NET [152.63.99.177]
10     *     5587 ms     *     nac-nj-oc12-gw.customer.alter.net [157.130.60.18
]
11  5546 ms  5558 ms  5683 ms  0.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.49]
12  5630 ms     *        *     [url]www.dslreports.com[/url] [209.123.109.175]
13  5555 ms     *     5551 ms  [url]www.dslreports.com[/url] [209.123.109.175]
 
Ouch.

Nope. I appear to be on a 6/1 link right now. I'm torrenting like a fiend and I can't seem to hit my DL cap.
 
Nope, mine is working fine.

Code: 
Tracing route to dslreports.com [209.123.109.175]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  ?????????????
  2     8 ms    10 ms     7 ms  ?????????????
  3    15 ms     8 ms     7 ms  68.87.149.13
  4     9 ms     8 ms     9 ms  10g-9-1-ur01.sterling.ma.boston.comcast.net [68.
87.144.217]
  5    10 ms    12 ms    16 ms  10g-9-2-ur01.marlboro.ma.boston.comcast.net [68.
87.144.77]
  6    12 ms     9 ms    10 ms  10g-8-1-ur01.natick.ma.boston.comcast.net [68.87
.144.197]
  7    10 ms     9 ms     9 ms  10g-8-3-ar02.woburn.ma.boston.comcast.net [68.87
.145.9]
  8    11 ms    13 ms    10 ms  12.118.88.9
  9    13 ms    12 ms    13 ms  12.123.40.210
 10    17 ms    17 ms    18 ms  tbr2-cl1.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.10.22]
 11    18 ms    17 ms    17 ms  gar1-p340.nwrnj.ip.att.net [12.123.214.185]
 12     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 13    16 ms    18 ms    19 ms  2.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.nwr.nac.net [209.123.11.213]
 14    22 ms    19 ms    28 ms  0.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.49]
 15    25 ms    18 ms    17 ms  [url]www.dslreports.com[/url] [209.123.109.175]
 
Everything returned to normal yesterday.

My understanding is that Sprint had a fight with a backhoe and lost. I'm guessing somewhere around Reston, VA.
 
Sucks that they don't have a redundant connection for situations like that. For our SAN networks, we always advise customers to run redundant connections in different locations.
 
Obviously it was redundant, or the connection would have been completely down. It just appears to me like their backup didn't have the capacity to be transparent.
 
OK, I see your point, but from my point of view (with my SAN analogy) their would have been zero difference in performance when one line was cut and I mistakenly assumed a provider would use identical redundant connections. They obviously shouldn't bother with a redundant line since the traffic makes it practically unusable.
 
Most likely they just have multiple connections that are load ballanced. If one (or perhpas several) where cut the remaining pipes were either not prepared for the load or the failover routing wasn't performed as effectivley as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top