Connection question

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Mon Dec 27, 2010 5:39 pm

When i ping my IP address i get the following results:

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\

Pinging with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=64
Reply from bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64
Reply from bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 140ms, Average = 36ms

C:\Users\

I am getting 100 milliseconds from what i am told. Should i be getting under 100 MS?

If so, is there anything my ISP can do to make sure it is equally fast all the time?

Hope this makes sense.

thx

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:00 pm

24giovanni wrote: Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 140ms, Average = 36ms

I am getting 100 milliseconds from what i am told. Should i be getting under 100 MS?

If so, is there anything my ISP can do to make sure it is equally fast all the time?

I guess I don't understand what your trying to do but the way I read it your getting 36ms so you are getting under 100.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Mon Dec 27, 2010 10:36 pm

Sava700 wrote:I guess I don't understand what your trying to do but the way I read it your getting 36ms so you are getting under 100.

I'll pm u more about it tomorrow if i remember.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 5:58 am

Are you pinging your WAN IP, your LAN IP, or your netbios name? Wireless or wired? For some reason the information used with ping is missing from the rest of the C:\Users line.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 11:46 am

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Are you pinging your WAN IP, your LAN IP, or your netbios name? Wireless or wired? For some reason the information used with ping is missing from the rest of the C:\Users line.

Cat, It is my ip out to the exterior world. I find it when I go out to website whatismyip.com.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 11:59 am

Might have to do with your routers ability to handle "loopback"...which is the ability to go out to the internet, and then come back...recognizing the destination that you entered is really a local source. First ping takes a bit longer to come back because of the router realizing it needs loopback. This is just a guess....I tried that right here at my clients network...but all the replies are <1ms...but then again I'm on some potent firewall hardware here plus a blazing Comcast 50/10 connection which benches at 65/11....and I'm wired in. You running wireless? I'm guessing because you do have high return ms there.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:04 pm

Mine are all 1ms as well, but if you do a ping -t and the IP, and the vast majority are 1-2ms I would say its nothing to worry about.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:50 pm

Here are results for ping -t for googles ip address

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\ping http://www.google.com

Pinging http://www.l.google.com [72.14.204.147] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=341ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=1095ms TTL=53

Ping statistics for 72.14.204.147:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 46ms, Maximum = 1095ms, Average = 386ms

C:\Users\>ping -t 72.14.204.147

Pinging 72.14.204.147 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=923ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=716ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=439ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=223ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=53
Reply from 72.14.204.147: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=53

Ping statistics for 72.14.204.147:
Packets: Sent = 47, Received = 47, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 43ms, Maximum = 923ms, Average = 100ms
Control-C
^C
C:\Users\>

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:54 pm

So, are you on wireless?

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:05 pm

YARDofSTUF wrote:So, are you on wireless?

Sorry, forgot to add I am hardwired.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:09 pm

Well, you definitely have a little hiccup in there. That would be annoying for playing games online.

Could give your ISP a call and let them know its happening and to just your own WAN IP as well.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:19 pm

Wow you're all over the place...got some latency issues there.
What ISP?
How does the line come in from the street? Single home? Old/new? Multi-familiy? Apartment or condo complex?

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:32 pm

Isp is verizon, just a single line dedicated to DSL line and vonage is hooked up as well. It is a single home. What should I tell my ISP plz?

thx guys

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 2:14 pm

What I've done for every place I've lived in since back in the dial up days.....have the phone company run brand new lines in from the street...up to the NID, and from the NID run a new dedicated line to where your modem will be. No splitters. Nice clean lines. Has always..always been a heck of a lot less expensive than you'd think it would be. And I've found I seem to avoid weird issues like this.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 2:21 pm

Yeah change out everything you can... phone cables are cheap.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 2:39 pm

YeOldeStonecat wrote:What I've done for every place I've lived in since back in the dial up days.....have the phone company run brand new lines in from the street...up to the NID, and from the NID run a new dedicated line to where your modem will be. No splitters. Nice clean lines. Has always..always been a heck of a lot less expensive than you'd think it would be. And I've found I seem to avoid weird issues like this.

Cat, This line is on 2 to 3 yrs old. I had them run new lines then with a new box outside and new phone jack and new line. So I dont think it is that. What else could I have my ISP do to fix this issue?

thx

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 2:55 pm

Not enough information yet...I don't know if there are any splitters or splices in the mix along the way. I don't know what tests looked like the day that job was done 2 years ago..has it gotten worse? Or is that how it started? Is that line really dedicated...going to your DSL modem? Based on many of your posts about dial up modems and called ID and other stuff...I raise an eyebrow about what your setup really looks like...and fear there are splitters here and there.

Unfortunately calling your ISP will usually just result in time being wasted..if you try to complain about pings of 30-150 or whatever...they won't care..they'll laugh in the background.
The way to get your phone companies attention is to complain of "static" or "noise" or "garbled voices" when you're on the phone.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 3:10 pm

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Not enough information yet...I don't know if there are any splitters or splices in the mix along the way. I don't know what tests looked like the day that job was done 2 years ago..has it gotten worse? Or is that how it started? Is that line really dedicated...going to your DSL modem? Based on many of your posts about dial up modems and called ID and other stuff...I raise an eyebrow about what your setup really looks like...and fear there are splitters here and there.

Unfortunately calling your ISP will usually just result in time being wasted..if you try to complain about pings of 30-150 or whatever...they won't care..they'll laugh in the background.
The way to get your phone companies attention is to complain of "static" or "noise" or "garbled voices" when you're on the phone.

Cat, It is a dedicated line for dsl only. It has been happening for about 1.5 years. I have 1 splitter on it coming out of dsl modem. One for vonage line and 1 for internal phone modem that isnt being used cause modem isnt 64 bit so thats currently not being used. So you think I should complain of noice or static. I assume they will say it's a vonage issue. So I assume I am stuck with this and there isnt anything I can do about it?

thx

CableDude · Post by **CableDude** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 3:58 pm

I blame the weather.

j/k

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:02 pm

Take the Vonage box out of the loop.
Actually...what's your exact setup.....starting with the DSL modem. Another router? Besides the Vonage unit? Vonage router behind another router, or in front of the other router...

Which also negatively impacts your VoIP quality...as the Westells really don't do it well...cannot properly prioritize your Vonage traffic.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 4:10 pm

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Take the Vonage box out of the loop.
Actually...what's your exact setup.....starting with the DSL modem. Another router? Besides the Vonage unit? Vonage router behind another router, or in front of the other router...

Dsl modem to vonage router to a switch and 2 PC's are connected to the switch.

Pettos · Post by **Pettos** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 7:04 pm

Hi,

How long has this problem been occuring?

Cheers.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 7:15 pm

24giovanni wrote:Dsl modem to vonage router to a switch and 2 PC's are connected to the switch.

I've never had the Vonage units out front, I've always put them behind a primary router. Possibly it might be QoS of the vonage lowering ICMP priority.
A test you could run...if you have a regular router..take the vonage router out of the setup, put in the regular router...run the tests. Compare.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:26 pm

Pettos wrote:Hi,

How long has this problem been occuring?

Cheers.

1.5 yrs

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:30 pm

The phone company will have test meters to find bad spots in the line.. pretty much exactly pin pointing how many feet from where they stand to the prob point.

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 10:36 am

Sava700 wrote:The phone company will have test meters to find bad spots in the line.. pretty much exactly pin pointing how many feet from where they stand to the prob point.

As always, ISP on their end everything is fine. They wouldnt say otherwise.

CableDude · Post by **CableDude** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 3:05 pm

24giovanni wrote:As always, ISP on their end everything is fine. They wouldnt say otherwise.

Of course not.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:30 pm

24giovanni wrote:As always, ISP on their end everything is fine. They wouldnt say otherwise.

It may be ok on their end... they are really only responsible for replacing stuff from their network to your home or outside box, everything else is yours. I'd run from the box directly to your modem then to your computer for a few tests and see if going through the rest of that stuff put it the way you have it now as in results. I remember when I was on dialup and even ISDN back in the day I was running special thicker cable than the regular cat3 that had better shielding and everything.

CableDude · Post by **CableDude** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 10:27 pm

You had ISDN?

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:26 am

CableDude wrote:You had ISDN?

Yeah 128k dual lines running in... That way when I had to use the phone it just dropped my connection to 64k till I got off the phone

I think I was running ISDN prob around 2000 and 2001, not exactly sure but it wasn't that expensive and much better than dialup!

At the time there wasn't much else available - of course I jumped to cable as soon as the local cable co gave internet which I think at the time was at max 3megs down...but you damn right I was glad to see it and pay less for more!

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:16 am

CableDude wrote:You had ISDN?

Stands for "It Still Does Nothing"

TonyT · Post by **TonyT** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 6:24 am

Try doing tracerts rather than pings. Tracerts will show you where the latency begins. Perhaps the delays are due to Verizon's DNS. I do know that Verizon default DNS servers are slower than average because they do some funky scripting with all lookups. For example, if type an invalid url in the address bar you get redirected to a Verizon search page populated with ads. It's one of the ways they make extra $. They call it DNS Assistance.

Try using different Verizon DNS servers, either in the router itself or in the adapter propertries.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:21 am

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Stands for "It Still Does Nothing"

lol yeah well it was enough to get a slight advantage on pings while playing Quake 1 back in the day... enough to where some servers that were "LPB" only would have peps complaining although I was just still high enough to claim I was still on dialup

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:55 am

Sava700 wrote:lol yeah well it was enough to get a slight advantage on pings while playing Quake 1 back in the day... enough to where some servers that were "LPB" only would have peps complaining although I was just still high enough to claim I was still on dialup

Yeah it was around 65ms on average. Typical dial up ISPs did around 160-200 back then....and the quality ISPs (like the one I eventually found) were about 100-120. I used to multi-link a pair of 56k modems for myself...albeit no advantage for gaming latency...but surfing was much nicer.
But good grief..the headaches on setting up ISDN sometimes....fidgity setups with those adapters...depending on the hardware that the clients ISP used.

CableDude · Post by **CableDude** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 9:12 am

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Stands for "It Still Does Nothing"

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:51 pm

TonyT wrote:Try doing tracerts rather than pings. Tracerts will show you where the latency begins. Perhaps the delays are due to Verizon's DNS. I do know that Verizon default DNS servers are slower than average because they do some funky scripting with all lookups. For example, if type an invalid url in the address bar you get redirected to a Verizon search page populated with ads. It's one of the ways they make extra $. They call it DNS Assistance.

Try using different Verizon DNS servers, either in the router itself or in the adapter propertries.

Tony, here are the results of tracert. Could you tell me where the lagging seems to be. thx

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7600]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\>tracert http://www.google.com

Tracing route to http://www.l.google.com [72.14.204.147]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 411 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
2 26 ms 35 ms 32 ms 10.9.48.1
3 56 ms 37 ms 26 ms P3-3.BSTNMA-LCR-01.verizon-gni.net [130.81.35.20
6]
4 26 ms 28 ms 26 ms so-7-0-0-0.BOS-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.2
9.164]
5 35 ms 34 ms 35 ms 0.so-0-2-0.XL3.BOS4.ALTER.NET [152.63.16.137]
6 61 ms 49 ms 47 ms 0.xe-6-1-2.XL3.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.0.166]
7 36 ms 34 ms 248 ms TenGigE0-6-1-0.GW8.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.21.113
]
8 134 ms 102 ms 75 ms google-gw.customer.alter.net [152.179.72.62]
9 109 ms 81 ms 38 ms 209.85.252.215
10 104 ms 55 ms 53 ms 209.85.249.11
11 54 ms 52 ms 55 ms 66.249.94.54
12 58 ms 53 ms 45 ms iad04s01-in-f147.1e100.net [72.14.204.147]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 6:15 pm

24giovanni wrote:Could you tell me where the lagging seems to be. thx
7 36 ms 34 ms 248 ms TenGigE0-6-1-0.GW8.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.21.113
]

The hop with the highest count in milliseconds.
However...keep running the test...as just seeing it once could be a hiccup in traffic. Does it happen on that hop every time you run this test?
Also this would not come into play when you just run a ping test to your own IP address...as you wouldn't even leave the nearest COs network.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:12 am

24giovanni wrote: 1 411 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1

Problem here... 411 ms to your router is a big problem!!! I'd love to see pictures of your layout from the phone box outside all the way up to your mouse!

CableDude · Post by **CableDude** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:19 am

sava700 wrote:problem here... 411 ms to your router is a big problem!!! I'd love to see pictures of your layout from the phone box outside all the way up to your mouse!

qft!

24giovanni · Post by **24giovanni** » Fri Dec 31, 2010 2:31 pm

Sava700 wrote:Problem here... 411 ms to your router is a big problem!!! I'd love to see pictures of your layout from the phone box outside all the way up to your mouse!

As i have said that this is a dedicated line for Dsl to my voange dsl modem hooked up to phone for peone service and router which is hooked up to vonage router which is then hooked up to a switch which has 2 PC's connected to it.