Speed Rochdale - Page 2

th'engineer · 30-05-2005, 09:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignition

*nod* local problem to him, thought as much.

Not a local one to me apprently still being worked on been sending a few tracerts as requested

Still a problem between rochdale UBR and manchester core its being investigated

Bill,
Andy saw the problem first hand and also noted that all the equipment here is working correctly .

In fact between here and UBR no problem.

All data streams checked meter on them

Understand its being investigated by someone update tommorow

See how patient i am these days

Bet its these UBR configs

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 09:16:45
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 16 ms 57 ms 8 ms 16 ms 9 ms 69 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 146 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 10 ms 28 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 79 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms * oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 11 ms 159 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 14 ms 11 ms 10 ms 128 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 129 ms 13 ms 162 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms 217 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 100 ms 10 ms 132 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 199 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 17 ms 74 ms 16 ms 108 ms 19 ms 15 ms 22 ms 16 ms 176 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 48 ms 16 ms 78 ms 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 22 ms 146 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 194 ms 23 ms 15 ms 51 ms 18 ms 15 ms 17 ms 233 ms 120 ms * www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

30-05-2005, 13:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by th'engineer

Not a local one to me apprently still being worked on been sending a few tracerts as requested

Still a problem between rochdale UBR and manchester core its being investigated

Bill,
Andy saw the problem first hand and also noted that all the equipment here is working correctly .

In fact between here and UBR no problem.

All data streams checked meter on them

Understand its being investigated by someone update tommorow

See how patient i am these days

Bet its these UBR configs

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 09:16:45
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 16 ms 57 ms 8 ms 16 ms 9 ms 69 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 146 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 10 ms 28 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 79 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms * oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 11 ms 159 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 14 ms 11 ms 10 ms 128 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 129 ms 13 ms 162 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms 217 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 100 ms 10 ms 132 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 199 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 17 ms 74 ms 16 ms 108 ms 19 ms 15 ms 22 ms 16 ms 176 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 48 ms 16 ms 78 ms 17 ms 15 ms 15 ms 22 ms 146 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 194 ms 23 ms 15 ms 51 ms 18 ms 15 ms 17 ms 233 ms 120 ms * www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

Will have to have a chat with Andy tomorrow as that is not what i was told the other day. Plus looking at your trace route i DO think you have a local problem. BTW do you have 2 lots of nat on that connection ? IE 2 routers

th'engineer · 30-05-2005, 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

IE 2 routers

Yes Bill Two routers and firewall on each PC

I was under the impression that it was being sorted

its up and down like a sail

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 18:22:31
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 18 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 15 ms 10 ms 10 ms 69 ms 10 ms 9 ms 22 ms 9 ms 72 ms 49 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 18 ms 10 ms 11 ms 38 ms 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms 126 ms 11 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 94 ms 11 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 62 ms 10 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 18 ms 28 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 16 ms 18 ms 16 ms 40 ms 17 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 15 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 19 ms 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

**Paul** · 30-05-2005, 18:22

Two routers ? - why

th'engineer · 30-05-2005, 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Two routers ? - why

why not double security one single port

**Paul** · 30-05-2005, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by th'engineer

why not double security one single port

Well, because it's completely pointless would be one reason .....

30-05-2005, 18:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by th'engineer

Yes Bill Two routers and firewall on each PC

I was under the impression that it was being sorted

its up and down like a sail

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 18:22:31
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 4 ms 2 ms 2 ms 5 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 18 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 15 ms 10 ms 10 ms 69 ms 10 ms 9 ms 22 ms 9 ms 72 ms 49 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 18 ms 10 ms 11 ms 38 ms 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms 126 ms 11 ms mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 9 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 94 ms 11 ms man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 62 ms 10 ms man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 18 ms 28 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 16 ms 18 ms 16 ms 40 ms 17 ms win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 17 ms 15 ms win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 19 ms 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

Looking at those trace routes i still think this is local. Will talk to Andy in the morning.

th'engineer · 30-05-2005, 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

Looking at those trace routes i still think this is local. Will talk to Andy in the morning.

Bill whats the NTL definition of Local

Local UBR,local manc, local UK,

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 21:23:02
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 11 ms 21 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 15 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 21 ms 10 ms 9 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 12 ms 16 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 47 ms 21 ms 20 ms 17 ms 16 ms 19 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 34 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 16 ms 15 ms 20 ms 18 ms 18 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms * www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

Same place as other day for problems 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]

30-05-2005, 22:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by th'engineer

Bill whats the NTL definition of Local

Local UBR,local manc, local UK,

Target Name: www.ntlworld.com
IP: 62.253.162.30
Date/Time: 30/05/2005 21:23:02
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms [192.168.2.1]
2 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms [192.168.0.1]
3 11 ms 21 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 15 ms 9 ms [10.23.48.1]
4 11 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms 9 ms 21 ms 10 ms 9 ms oldh-t2cam1-a-v115.inet.ntl.com [80.5.164.61]
5 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]
6 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms 10 ms 9 ms 11 ms 10 ms * man-bb-a-so-230-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.184.57]
7 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 10 ms 12 ms 16 ms 11 ms 11 ms 11 ms * man-bb-b-ae0-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.187.178]
8 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms 47 ms 21 ms 20 ms 17 ms 16 ms 19 ms * win-bb-a-so-300-0.inet.ntl.com [62.253.185.138]
9 34 ms 16 ms 17 ms 17 ms 16 ms 15 ms 20 ms 18 ms 18 ms * win-dc-a-v903.inet.ntl.com [213.105.174.34]
10 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms * www.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.30]

Same place as other day for problems 295 ms 207 ms 51 ms 13 ms 43 ms 10 ms 10 ms 11 ms 17 ms * mant-t2core-a-ge-wan62.inet.ntl.com [213.104.242.41]

Ok

I will stand corrected if i am wrong here. But you should not be worried about routers in the middle. They could be set to not reply to pings. You should be looking at the first and last ping. Local is you to the ubr Which is where i think the problem will be.

Look at the ping plotter result. Now my connection is fine but it might not look it when you look at that.

Chris W · 30-05-2005, 22:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

Ok

I will stand corrected if i am wrong here. But you should not be worried about routers in the middle. They could be set to not reply to pings. You should be looking at the first and last ping. Local is you to the ubr Which is where i think the problem will be.

correct

ICMP traffic gets the lowest priority and i believe they are configured to reply slowly for security reasons.

**Paul** · 30-05-2005, 22:59

Indeed - the tele-ic routers being a prime example of this. Also, you only need to worry if the ping is consistantly bad from a particular hop and beyond. Intermittant large ones in the middle mean very little when you are untimately getting "17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms" from the destination.

th'engineer · 31-05-2005, 06:56

Can we have some sense on this, the connection was working correctly my equipment has been checked including the NTL Samsung Box.

I can get good tracerts to local UBR, between local UBR and Man core there are high numbers on the tracerts.

It was evident when NTL Eng was here

31-05-2005, 08:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Indeed - the tele-ic routers being a prime example of this. Also, you only need to worry if the ping is consistantly bad from a particular hop and beyond. Intermittant large ones in the middle mean very little when you are untimately getting "17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms" from the destination.

This is my point as well. I get the same ping times to Ntlworld.com and there is nothing wrong with my connection.

th'engineer · 31-05-2005, 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

This is my point as well. I get the same ping times to Ntlworld.com and there is nothing wrong with my connection.

But i have a NTL eng that agreed that there was something wrong with my connection .

Stuart · 31-05-2005, 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Quote:

Originally Posted by th'engineer

why not double security one single port

Well, because it's completely pointless would be one reason .....

And it's something else to go wrong in future. Multiple firewalls on one connection can lock each other out.

Th'eng it sounds like Ignition is right. The problem appears to start with hop no 3, which (I think) is your cable modem. It's either that or your local UBR.