Gaming Connections / Leicester - Page 5

Dreaming · 01-11-2005, 20:02

unfortunately that's not much good for me with school, since i play between 4 - 10pm ish.

ive recently been playing guild wars which doesn't need so much bandwidth and have found the response time to be good (with the occasional spikes still)

Scopeuk · 01-11-2005, 20:07

the issue is proberbly exasibated by the fact that most cheep and resonable hosting services for games are in the immediate area of amsterdamn this is definately the case with ut2004 adn i should imagine it is the same with other games

Chrysalis · 02-11-2005, 17:31

and amsterdam is where the congestion is occuring.

Scopeuk · 02-11-2005, 17:41

you have to wonder if it whould bebenficial to have to proxys/routers reconfigured to direct web and ftp trafic thorough a diferent peering but that whould invoke cost for ntl so it isent going to happen

Chrysalis · 03-11-2005, 13:38

The solution whatever it is will need money put into it, the question is are ntl prepared to do it. If they shaped the traffic they could probably make things better for gamer's at least but that would just be a workaround and not a solution, because it looks to me we been contended at multiple places. Really it should just be ubr contention but it isn't.

uno · 03-11-2005, 14:37

Does anybody know what all the upgrades and loss of service in Leicester have been for this week basically what have they done and will we see any difference ?

Scopeuk · 03-11-2005, 15:20

they play around with some componants of the network someone may pull your wire out the box and hece you may temporerly use service (far more technical that that im sure but thats the idea)
couldent agree mroe cystalis and lets face it unless there is overwelming comercial resoning for ntl to pay for a solution it isent going to hapen (overwhelming as in every customer leaves).
tbh i whould settle for ntl to offer me a "gaming" conection where gaming trafic takes prioity and the peering is takes as close to server clusters as possible even if it meant going back to 300k and sufferign poor fiel transfers (or alternativly paying more for gaming trafic prority on there network if it was a resonable nominal fee)

V3n0m · 03-11-2005, 16:50

Yes that would be a good idea for NTL to offer a gaming connection

Scopeuk · 03-11-2005, 17:26

wow im not the only one that thinks like me and in response to your sig the cat still lands on its feet (tested experimentaly)

Chrysalis · 03-11-2005, 20:49

Ok concerning amsterdam link (this should be a national problem not just leics) I checked out the return path. Packet loss on trace starts from this hop.

7 amst-ic-1.inet.ntl.com (195.69.144.40) 8.774 ms * 8.409 ms

so did 100 pings on hop before it and all rock solid stable without fluctuation but when I did on 195.69.144.40 there is ping spikes galore and some minor packet loss.

PING 195.69.144.40 (195.69.144.40): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=0 ttl=249 time=8.795 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=1 ttl=249 time=8.438 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=2 ttl=249 time=8.492 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=3 ttl=249 time=9.384 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=4 ttl=249 time=9.310 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=5 ttl=249 time=23.270 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=6 ttl=249 time=8.655 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=7 ttl=249 time=8.825 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=8 ttl=249 time=13.601 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=9 ttl=249 time=8.952 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=10 ttl=249 time=8.900 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=11 ttl=249 time=10.005 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=12 ttl=249 time=8.933 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=13 ttl=249 time=24.967 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=14 ttl=249 time=8.770 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=15 ttl=249 time=27.178 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=16 ttl=249 time=18.274 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=17 ttl=249 time=9.093 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=18 ttl=249 time=8.605 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=20 ttl=249 time=8.836 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=21 ttl=249 time=8.623 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=22 ttl=249 time=13.177 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=23 ttl=249 time=8.803 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=24 ttl=249 time=78.593 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=25 ttl=249 time=24.611 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=26 ttl=249 time=8.686 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=27 ttl=249 time=8.763 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=28 ttl=249 time=9.102 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=29 ttl=249 time=9.237 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=30 ttl=249 time=12.738 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=31 ttl=249 time=9.103 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=32 ttl=249 time=9.106 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=33 ttl=249 time=8.629 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=34 ttl=249 time=8.884 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=35 ttl=249 time=11.785 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=36 ttl=249 time=22.417 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=37 ttl=249 time=11.481 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=38 ttl=249 time=8.983 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=39 ttl=249 time=15.101 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=40 ttl=249 time=9.349 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=41 ttl=249 time=8.828 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=42 ttl=249 time=8.508 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=43 ttl=249 time=8.763 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=44 ttl=249 time=15.890 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=45 ttl=249 time=24.797 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=46 ttl=249 time=20.557 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=47 ttl=249 time=13.193 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=48 ttl=249 time=8.887 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=49 ttl=249 time=8.899 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=50 ttl=249 time=9.273 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=51 ttl=249 time=71.320 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=52 ttl=249 time=13.707 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=53 ttl=249 time=8.579 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=54 ttl=249 time=11.224 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=55 ttl=249 time=27.874 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=56 ttl=249 time=16.589 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=57 ttl=249 time=9.020 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=58 ttl=249 time=12.840 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=59 ttl=249 time=8.670 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=60 ttl=249 time=15.640 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=61 ttl=249 time=9.150 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=62 ttl=249 time=9.336 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=63 ttl=249 time=8.574 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=64 ttl=249 time=8.674 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=65 ttl=249 time=8.495 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=66 ttl=249 time=9.205 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=67 ttl=249 time=20.830 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=68 ttl=249 time=16.040 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=69 ttl=249 time=9.283 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=70 ttl=249 time=8.963 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=71 ttl=249 time=8.981 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=72 ttl=249 time=8.711 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=73 ttl=249 time=9.359 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=75 ttl=249 time=22.621 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=76 ttl=249 time=8.809 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=77 ttl=249 time=9.175 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=78 ttl=249 time=29.474 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=79 ttl=249 time=9.018 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=80 ttl=249 time=21.601 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=82 ttl=249 time=8.945 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=83 ttl=249 time=9.128 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=84 ttl=249 time=8.725 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=85 ttl=249 time=9.254 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=86 ttl=249 time=12.985 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=87 ttl=249 time=9.437 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=88 ttl=249 time=20.718 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=89 ttl=249 time=11.870 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=90 ttl=249 time=12.411 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=91 ttl=249 time=18.043 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=92 ttl=249 time=10.648 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=93 ttl=249 time=8.745 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=94 ttl=249 time=9.072 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=95 ttl=249 time=9.238 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=96 ttl=249 time=24.228 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=97 ttl=249 time=8.731 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=98 ttl=249 time=8.788 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=99 ttl=249 time=8.932 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=100 ttl=249 time=9.214 ms
--- 195.69.144.40 ping statistics ---
101 packets transmitted, 98 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 8.438/13.438/78.593/10.398 ms

note this is from a dedicated 100mbit server so isnt subject to the normal fluctuations you would get on a cable connection. If I am awake I can do another 100 pings at a quiet time of day and show the difference.
__________________

Concerning the Leics upgrades, I am seeing congestion on my ubr for the first time in about 6 month's so whatever they did it looks like they shoved some heavy user's onto my segment.

1 16 ms 10 ms 45 ms UBR [10.8.143.254]
2 65 ms 52 ms 44 ms leic-t2cam1-b-ge914.inet.ntl.com [82.3.35.213]
3 14 ms 31 ms 8 ms leic-t2core-b-ge-210-0.inet.ntl.com [82.3.33.134
]
4 16 ms 15 ms 11 ms nth-bb-b-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.114]

5 58 ms 43 ms 15 ms pop-bb-a-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.14]

6 59 ms 83 ms 29 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 22 ms 26 ms 29 ms amst-ic-1-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.94]

look at all the ping spikes, the first few hops 2 days ago were all single figures which were not spiking very often, in this trace taken at 10pm only hop 4 didnt spike. So to me I am guessing they have just been moving users around to rebalance the network rather then doing actual upgrades.

2nd trace ubr spiked to 3 figures

1 118 ms 9 ms 8 ms UBR [10.8.143.254]
2 10 ms 41 ms 20 ms leic-t2cam1-b-ge914.inet.ntl.com [82.3.35.213]
3 16 ms 11 ms 9 ms leic-t2core-b-ge-210-0.inet.ntl.com [82.3.33.134
]
4 11 ms 10 ms 17 ms nth-bb-b-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.114]

5 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms pop-bb-a-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.14]

6 33 ms 72 ms 47 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 25 ms 36 ms 82 ms amst-ic-1-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.94]

and a 3rd ubr looked normal but still rest of leics hops poor

1 9 ms 7 ms 9 ms UBR [10.8.143.254]
2 8 ms 55 ms 61 ms leic-t2cam1-b-ge914.inet.ntl.com [82.3.35.213]
3 68 ms 16 ms 9 ms leic-t2core-b-ge-210-0.inet.ntl.com [82.3.33.134
]
4 35 ms 68 ms 43 ms nth-bb-b-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.114]

5 12 ms 22 ms 19 ms pop-bb-a-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.14]

6 17 ms 14 ms 43 ms pop-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.77]
7 66 ms 23 ms 59 ms amst-ic-1-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.94]

Scopeuk · 03-11-2005, 20:51

could you not script it crystalis or setup a one off cron job for some obscure hour

Chrysalis · 03-11-2005, 21:03

now here is a trace on my cable to london 100mbit server I have.

1 7 ms 114 ms 14 ms UBR [10.8.143.254]
2 10 ms 10 ms 46 ms leic-t2cam1-a-ge914.inet.ntl.com [82.3.35.149]
3 18 ms 10 ms 13 ms leic-t2core-a-ge-220-0.inet.ntl.com [82.3.33.10]

4 11 ms 96 ms 70 ms lee-bb-a-so-220-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.188.110]

5 21 ms 20 ms 17 ms pop-bb-b-so-100-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.238]

6 18 ms 23 ms 46 ms gfd-bb-a-so-500-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.137]

7 15 ms 65 ms 69 ms gfd-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [213.105.172.6]
8 21 ms 16 ms 25 ms tele-ic-2-so-110-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.74]

9 60 ms 63 ms 49 ms linx2.teleglobe.net [195.66.226.51]
10 23 ms 39 ms 18 ms ix-9-1-3032.core2.LDN-London.Teleglobe.net [195.
219.67.226]
11 29 ms 31 ms 18 ms x.x.xt [1.1.1.1]

as you can see numbers all over the place so because of the ubr cant diagnose anything from it, but speeds are normal download, and upload is almost normal with tiny blips in graph.

the return path

1 195.242.213.254 (195.242.213.254) 0.176 ms 0.122 ms 0.212 ms
2 84-45-252-145.no-dns-yet.enta.net (84.45.252.145) 0.434 ms 0.621 ms 0.391 ms
3 telehouse-east2.bdr.enta.net (84.45.193.194) 0.458 ms 0.539 ms 0.415 ms
4 195.66.226.23 (195.66.226.23) 203.678 ms * 198.927 ms
5 gfd-bb-b-so-320-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.73) 2.339 ms 2.279 ms 2.507 ms
6 nth-bb-a-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.97) 5.704 ms 6.167 ms 6.263 ms
7 nth-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.185.118) 6.564 ms 5.938 ms 5.899 ms
8 leic-t2core-b-so-000-0.inet.ntl.com (62.253.188.113) 13.368 ms 6.470 ms 6.358 ms
9 leic-t2cam1-b-ge-wan31.inet.ntl.com (82.3.33.133) 6.305 ms 6.293 ms 6.204 ms
10 leic-leic-ubr-8-ge02.inet.ntl.com (82.3.35.214) 7.182 ms 7.129 ms 6.891 ms

in this case there is 1 spike on hop 8 but it looks a one off and hops 9 and 10 were not affected, hop 4 looks to be configured to simply have icmp as low priority. This server itself isnt giving me latency issues so there is nothing wrong other then the ubr problem I posted above.

To scopeuk sure I will crontab at 3am and echo it to a file so I have the results ready to post.

Scopeuk · 04-11-2005, 11:32

that hwould be great crystalis thanks

Chrysalis · 04-11-2005, 19:55

ok here is the output taken at 3.10am curtousy of my crontab this morning.

PING 195.69.144.40 (195.69.144.40): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=0 ttl=249 time=8.533 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=1 ttl=249 time=9.890 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=2 ttl=249 time=8.594 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=3 ttl=249 time=8.458 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=4 ttl=249 time=8.556 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=5 ttl=249 time=8.450 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=6 ttl=249 time=8.654 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=7 ttl=249 time=8.546 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=8 ttl=249 time=8.434 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=9 ttl=249 time=8.447 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=10 ttl=249 time=9.087 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=11 ttl=249 time=18.485 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=12 ttl=249 time=8.538 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=13 ttl=249 time=8.675 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=14 ttl=249 time=8.472 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=15 ttl=249 time=8.396 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=16 ttl=249 time=8.581 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=17 ttl=249 time=8.401 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=18 ttl=249 time=8.395 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=19 ttl=249 time=14.846 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=20 ttl=249 time=8.740 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=21 ttl=249 time=8.480 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=22 ttl=249 time=8.475 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=23 ttl=249 time=8.589 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=24 ttl=249 time=8.406 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=25 ttl=249 time=8.391 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=26 ttl=249 time=8.461 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=27 ttl=249 time=13.047 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=28 ttl=249 time=8.530 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=29 ttl=249 time=8.489 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=30 ttl=249 time=61.857 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=31 ttl=249 time=8.567 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=32 ttl=249 time=8.705 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=33 ttl=249 time=8.467 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=34 ttl=249 time=8.436 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=33 ttl=249 time=8.467 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=34 ttl=249 time=8.436 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=35 ttl=249 time=8.452 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=36 ttl=249 time=8.370 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=37 ttl=249 time=8.502 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=38 ttl=249 time=13.615 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=39 ttl=249 time=8.605 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=40 ttl=249 time=8.593 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=41 ttl=249 time=8.380 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=42 ttl=249 time=8.434 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=43 ttl=249 time=8.596 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=44 ttl=249 time=8.393 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=45 ttl=249 time=8.536 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=46 ttl=249 time=8.442 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=47 ttl=249 time=8.419 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=48 ttl=249 time=8.393 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=49 ttl=249 time=11.474 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=50 ttl=249 time=8.429 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=51 ttl=249 time=19.944 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=50 ttl=249 time=8.429 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=51 ttl=249 time=19.944 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=52 ttl=249 time=8.819 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=53 ttl=249 time=8.460 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=54 ttl=249 time=8.384 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=55 ttl=249 time=8.619 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=56 ttl=249 time=8.414 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=57 ttl=249 time=8.454 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=58 ttl=249 time=8.481 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=59 ttl=249 time=8.613 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=60 ttl=249 time=8.509 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=61 ttl=249 time=13.713 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=62 ttl=249 time=8.605 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=63 ttl=249 time=62.604 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=64 ttl=249 time=8.510 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=65 ttl=249 time=11.942 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=66 ttl=249 time=8.664 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=67 ttl=249 time=8.398 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=68 ttl=249 time=8.626 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=69 ttl=249 time=10.914 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=70 ttl=249 time=8.546 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=71 ttl=249 time=8.418 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=72 ttl=249 time=8.373 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=73 ttl=249 time=8.416 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=74 ttl=249 time=8.547 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=75 ttl=249 time=8.535 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=76 ttl=249 time=11.992 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=77 ttl=249 time=8.472 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=78 ttl=249 time=8.482 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=79 ttl=249 time=8.450 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=80 ttl=249 time=8.429 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=81 ttl=249 time=8.630 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=82 ttl=249 time=8.494 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=83 ttl=249 time=8.627 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=84 ttl=249 time=8.544 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=85 ttl=249 time=8.512 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=86 ttl=249 time=8.512 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=87 ttl=249 time=8.528 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=88 ttl=249 time=8.616 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=89 ttl=249 time=8.463 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=90 ttl=249 time=8.574 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=91 ttl=249 time=8.559 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=92 ttl=249 time=8.424 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=93 ttl=249 time=8.573 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=94 ttl=249 time=8.669 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=95 ttl=249 time=12.155 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=96 ttl=249 time=63.130 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=97 ttl=249 time=8.420 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=98 ttl=249 time=8.427 ms
64 bytes from 195.69.144.40: icmp_seq=99 ttl=249 time=8.419 ms

--- 195.69.144.40 ping statistics ---
100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 8.370/10.733/63.130/9.306 ms

not perfect but a defenite improvement, the fast there is 2 big spikes still at 3am shows how dire it has become. Have to say tho the glitches at that time of day are not normally noticeable on my throughput and ssh usage.

uno · 06-11-2005, 16:42

does anybody have any more technical information about the upgrades have been in the Leicester area as my connection has been slower since the work this week.