Sky IP range changes?

[Qtx]

Notice my connection and another one I monitor changed to a 151.* range this morning when they have always been 94.* before. Anyone know if there is a particular reason we are in the 151 DHCP pool now?

[Graham M]

Just a guess really, but they could have been running out of addresses in your original range so changed the range your network segment uses to free up some where they would be useful?

[craigj2k12]

Indeed mine has also changed to a 151.* range where is has been 94.* or 2.*

I would assume they are trying to fix the IP location problem that has been ongoing for months, but even with the new IP, websites still think I am in Dunfermline

[Qtx]

Not a range I have seen before but it is reassuring to know its not just me. Probably wouldn't have thought any more about it if the change was from a 94.* to a 95.*. Never seen a 151.* range anywhere before and I get a lot of exposure to public IP addys.

Geo-location is correct for me but it is a generic town anyway.

[pabscars]

Still on 94. here, geo-location still has me in London and has never been correct.

[Qtx]

Maybe it is just the south of the country then. I am in London so probably luck that the IP range is registered there.

[Qtx]

For me its seems to be more than just an IP change, my latency has dropped too.

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.251.195] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.58.251.195: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=120
Reply from 212.58.251.195: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=120
Reply from 212.58.251.195: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=120
Reply from 212.58.251.195: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=120

Ping statistics for 212.58.251.195:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 4ms, Maximum = 5ms, Average = 4ms

---------- Post added at 23:54 ---------- Previous post was at 23:50 ----------

In-game ping of 10 in QuakeLive too!

[qasdfdsaq]

Not sure why it would seem unusual? On BT I can get 31.xxx 81.xxx 86.xxx 109.xxx 217.xxx and all are just as normal as each other...

[Edit]

Oh, the latency change is nice

[craigj2k12]

Originally Posted by Qtx

For me its seems to be more than just an IP change, my latency has dropped too.

Ditto, having run the new TBB graph for a while I see the same drop as you

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by craigj2k12

Ditto, having run the new TBB graph for a while I see the same drop as you

Brilliant! Not sure if just re-routing is the reason or some major upgrade somewhere.

TBB graphs look so wrong now they are so empty

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

[craigj2k12]

Mine looks like a VM graph at the moment, with all this upstream bandwidth, skype decides to host a supernode (not to mention the fact I am running a web server - hehe)

[qasdfdsaq]

Derp

---------- Post added at 14:20 ---------- Previous post was at 14:20 ----------

I remember when 512k upstream bandwidth was "high" and caused you to host a supernode...

[craigj2k12]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Derp

---------- Post added at 14:20 ---------- Previous post was at 14:20 ----------

I remember when 512k upstream bandwidth was "high" and caused you to host a supernode...

took me a while to work out what it was, I just put it down to the web server hogging bandwidth, I only noticed after the IP change as mentioned above that the web server was effectively offline and upstream was still being maxed (18mbit constant)

Never happened with VM although their sucky upload speed probably werent worth Skypes effort

[gooner4life]

Same here btw - changed to a 151 address

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by craigj2k12

took me a while to work out what it was, I just put it down to the web server hogging bandwidth, I only noticed after the IP change as mentioned above that the web server was effectively offline and upstream was still being maxed (18mbit constant)

It's easy enough in Windows - just run Resource Monitor and it'll show you network utilization by each individual application.