Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

<hangs his head in shame> :blush:

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Its the same again for me tonight and i dont live in Robin Hood country.

The only connection i have to Robin Hood Country is that my local NTL franchise covers that area.

Im getting :sick: of changing proxys at peek times of the night just to view local web forums.

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Do a trace route, if your pings are not excessive after and including "t2core" it would be safe to assume you have a different fault not related to the problems t2 is having routing data.

If t2core is not in the trace then it definatly not related to the problem with t2.

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

It's not that easy Neil :(

For Telephone Number 01522793xxx on Exchange WASHINGBOROUGH

Sorry - ADSL broadband is not yet available in your area, but we are currently assessing demand.

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

i'm getting abysmal download speeds (in newark) - downloading at a miserable 3.4k when it should be maxed out - WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THIS DAMNED SERVICE?

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

You can register your interest but you dont have to have ADSL when your local BT exchange becomes ADSL enabled.

___

When doing a tracert to this forum when i have problems like "this page cannot be displayed" (i could be moving from forum to forum and i get this error when im already browsing the NTHell forum) passing via the ntl servers is ok till the trace moves outside then the pings shoot up and time out, using a different DNS to the NTL's transparent web cache the path is clear and i get no problems.

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

a little more info and we might be able to tell you!

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Surely just about every other post on this thread gives that info!!

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

do i have the t2core issue?

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms [192.168.0.1]
2 12 ms 7 ms 7 ms 10.145.23.254
3 11 ms 11 ms 15 ms nott-t2cam1-a-v127.inet.ntl.com [80.4.46.81]
4 150 ms 152 ms 148 ms not-t2core-a-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [80.1.79.57]

5 141 ms 142 ms 139 ms lee-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.33]
6 148 ms 150 ms 153 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]

7 153 ms 146 ms 145 ms pop-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.78]
8 156 ms * 135 ms so-7-0.hsa2.London1.Level3.net [212.113.14.129]

9 129 ms 128 ms 127 ms so-4-0-0.mp1.London1.Level3.net [212.187.131.121
]
10 151 ms 154 ms 146 ms so-1-0-0.mp1.London2.Level3.net [212.187.128.49]

11 193 ms 191 ms 196 ms so-1-0-0.bbr1.Washington1.Level3.net [212.187.12
8.138]
12 254 ms 252 ms 245 ms so-0-1-0.mp2.Phoenix1.Level3.net [64.159.1.122]

13 258 ms 258 ms 258 ms ge-11-0.hsa1.Phoenix1.Level3.net [64.159.3.110]

14 256 ms 251 ms 257 ms ge2-2-1000M.4iron.phx1.puregig.net [63.214.160.1
54]
15 257 ms 256 ms 253 ms ge2-4-1000m.sw1.core.phx1.puregig.net [140.99.96
.45]
16 256 ms 254 ms 255 ms zip.members.easynews.com [140.99.99.100]

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Seems we both do:

Tracing route to zip.members.easynews.com [140.99.99.100]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.*.*
2 16 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10.145.*.*
3 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms nott-t2cam1-a-ge-wan53-137.inet.ntl.com [80.4.46
.65]
4 129 ms 148 ms 127 ms not-t2core-a-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [80.1.79.57]

5 120 ms 121 ms 148 ms lee-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.33]
6 127 ms 125 ms 124 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]

7 128 ms 124 ms 131 ms pop-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.78]
8 125 ms 132 ms 127 ms so-7-0.hsa2.London1.Level3.net [212.113.14.129]

9 129 ms * 108 ms so-4-0-0.mp1.London1.Level3.net [212.187.131.121
]
10 107 ms 106 ms 113 ms so-1-0-0.mp1.London2.Level3.net [212.187.128.49]

11 179 ms 178 ms 180 ms so-1-0-0.bbr1.Washington1.Level3.net [212.187.12
8.138]
12 234 ms 253 ms 232 ms so-0-1-0.mp2.Phoenix1.Level3.net [64.159.1.122]

13 233 ms 231 ms 230 ms ge-11-0.hsa1.Phoenix1.Level3.net [64.159.3.110]

14 238 ms 261 ms 242 ms ge2-2-1000M.4iron.phx1.puregig.net [63.214.160.1
54]
15 231 ms 245 ms 238 ms ge2-4-1000m.sw1.core.phx1.puregig.net [140.99.96
.45]
16 230 ms 234 ms 236 ms zip.members.easynews.com [140.99.99.100]

Also from Robin's Test:

Thu, 18 Dec 2003 18:12:43 UTC
1st 128K took 1781 ms = 73595 Bytes/sec = approx 612 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1844 ms = 71080 Bytes/sec = approx 591 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 2844 ms = 46087 Bytes/sec = approx 383 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 22453 ms = 5838 Bytes/sec = approx 49 kbits/sec

thats normally constant around the top 600 mark

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here - tracert shows the direct IP path from you to the target IP, it has no connection with any proxy servers or the dns servers they may be using.

JSS & Nikko - yes, as Nikko has observed - you are both routing through the dodgy router (80.1.79.57).

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Im in notts too, and im getting the same problem, funnily enough my gaming pings are fine and dandy on UK server, but amazingly shabby with alot of packetloss on servers outside of the uk (NL, Sweden, etc)

Quite annoying too, missed 2 clan games cause of this and ill probably miss more

Heres a Tracert to one of those foreign game servers.

Tracing route to alpha.es-servers.nl [81.173.116.140]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 11 ms 8 ms 24 ms 10.144.191.254
2 8 ms 11 ms 9 ms nott-t2cam1-a-ge-wan53-136.inet.ntl.com [80.4.46
.21]
3 1192 ms 159 ms 151 ms not-t2core-a-pos41.inet.ntl.com [80.1.79.61]
4 134 ms 131 ms 134 ms lee-bb-a-so-200-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.33]
5 148 ms 143 ms 146 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]

6 137 ms 140 ms 143 ms so-3-0-0.cr1.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.185.188.41]

7 159 ms 137 ms 145 ms so-0-0-0.cr2.lhr3.uk.above.net [208.184.231.146]

8 177 ms 151 ms 177 ms pos9-0.cr2.ams2.nl.above.net [64.125.31.158]
9 156 ms 158 ms 151 ms pos1-0.mpr2.ams1.nl.above.net [208.184.231.253]

10 126 ms 123 ms 140 ms amsix.globalswitch.netholding.nl [195.69.144.79]

11 * 127 ms 130 ms alpha.es-servers.nl [81.173.116.140]

Trace complete.

(I think this problem started on tuesday, when ntl were supposed to be doing their so called maintenance? =/ i think they broke it :P)

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Using an NTL transparent cache

Tracing route to nthellworld.co.uk [216.40.241.59]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 134 ms 131 ms 131 ms
2 160 ms 111 ms 161 ms midd-t2cam1-a-ge-wan34-103.inet.ntl.com [213.106.238.17]
3 143 ms 110 ms 112 ms midd-t2core-a-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [213.106.237.33]
4 112 ms 110 ms 112 ms lee-bb-a-so-130-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.89]
5 117 ms 117 ms 155 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 120 ms 126 ms 119 ms tele-ic-1-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 319 ms 319 ms 321 ms lndnuk1icx1.wcg.net [195.66.224.105]
8 330 ms 338 ms 352 ms nycmny2wcx2-oc12.wcg.net [64.200.87.149]
9 331 ms 331 ms 359 ms hrndva1wcx2-pos5-0.wcg.net [64.200.210.97]
10 * * * Request timed out.
11 * * * Request timed out.
12 * * * Request timed out.
13 * * * Request timed out.
14 * * * Request timed out.
15 * * * Request timed out.
16 * * * Request timed out.
17 * * * Request timed out.
18 * * * Request timed out.
19 * * * Request timed out.
20 * * * Request timed out.


_______
Tracing route to nthellworld.co.uk [216.40.241.59]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 11 ms 10 ms 10 ms
2 11 ms 9 ms 10 ms midd-t2cam1-a-ge-wan34-103.inet.ntl.com [213.106.238.17]
3 9 ms 10 ms 12 ms midd-t2core-a-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [213.106.237.33]
4 11 ms 12 ms 11 ms lee-bb-a-so-130-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.89]
5 17 ms 16 ms 20 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 18 ms 20 ms 19 ms tele-ic-1-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]
7 22 ms 22 ms 20 ms lndnuk1icx1.wcg.net [195.66.224.105]
8 131 ms 132 ms 130 ms nycmny2wcx2-oc12.wcg.net [64.200.87.149]
9 130 ms 130 ms 130 ms hrndva1wcx2-pos5-0.wcg.net [64.200.210.97]
10 130 ms 130 ms 129 ms hrndva1wcx3.oc48.wcg.net [64.200.95.78]
11 131 ms 129 ms 129 ms drvlga1wcx2-pos.wcg.net [64.200.210.57]
12 130 ms 135 ms 129 ms drvlga1wcx1-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.127.29]
13 131 ms 129 ms 155 ms dllstx1wcx3-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.240.21]
14 130 ms 129 ms 129 ms dllstx1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.110.73]
15 130 ms 129 ms * hstntx1wce2-pos4-0.wcg.net [64.200.240.74]
16 135 ms 133 ms * hstntx1wce2-everyonesinternet-gige.wcg.net [65.77.93.54]
17 119 ms 120 ms 153 ms ivhou-207-218-223-34.ev1.net [207.218.223.34]

Big difference between the two even though the pings are v high

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

80.1.79.57 seems to have woken up, pem:


Tracing route to www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.*.* 2 27 ms 13 ms 8 ms 10.145.*.*
3 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms nott-t2cam1-a-ge-wan53-137.inet.ntl.com [80.4.46
.65]
4 11 ms 45 ms 11 ms not-t2core-a-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [80.1.79.57]

5 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms lee-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.33]
6 23 ms 16 ms 34 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]

7 16 ms 18 ms 17 ms pop-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.78]
8 48 ms 17 ms 18 ms win-bb-b-so-500-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.202]

9 22 ms 18 ms 20 ms win-bb-a-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.161]
10 22 ms 16 ms 21 ms win-dc-a-v900.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.162]
11 19 ms 19 ms 22 ms www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

Trace complete.

Re: Bad connection Nottingham
 

Well hopefully someone has given it a good kicking ;)


Both those traces show what I said, they are both taking exactly the same route on the NTL network to the Telehouse LINX ;

2 midd-t2cam1-a-ge-wan34-103.inet.ntl.com [213.106.238.17]
3 midd-t2core-a-ge-wan61.inet.ntl.com [213.106.237.33]
4 lee-bb-a-so-130-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.89]
5 pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]
6 tele-ic-1-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.82]

Once they leave NTL's network they are still taking the same route but then the trace on the first one stops in the middle of the Williams Communications (US) network for some reason;

First;
7 lndnuk1icx1.wcg.net [195.66.224.105]
8 nycmny2wcx2-oc12.wcg.net [64.200.87.149]
9 hrndva1wcx2-pos5-0.wcg.net [64.200.210.97]
10 * * * Request timed out.
Second;
7 lndnuk1icx1.wcg.net [195.66.224.105]
8 nycmny2wcx2-oc12.wcg.net [64.200.87.149]
9 hrndva1wcx2-pos5-0.wcg.net [64.200.210.97]
10 hrndva1wcx3.oc48.wcg.net [64.200.95.78]
11 drvlga1wcx2-pos.wcg.net [64.200.210.57]
12 drvlga1wcx1-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.127.29]
13 dllstx1wcx3-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.240.21]
14 dllstx1wcx2-oc48.wcg.net [64.200.110.73]
15 hstntx1wce2-pos4-0.wcg.net [64.200.240.74]
16 hstntx1wce2-everyonesinternet-gige.wcg.net [65.77.93.54]
17 ivhou-207-218-223-34.ev1.net [207.218.223.34]


Having said all this, your second trace starts out badly on the first step [for which you seem to have removed the IP & name details] - this is your UBR so it may be you have a local problem. (This may have been what interrupted the first trace as well).