3 ms·
A truly great way to demo a product while also making use of unallocated resources. Unfortunately the latency to the servers from Australia is so poor and make
by mrmondo 12y ago
A truly great way to demo a product while also making use of unallocated resources.
Unfortunately the latency to the servers from Australia is so poor and makes it practically unusable.
Here is a trace from my 100Mbit fibre:
samm ~ % mtr -n --report 212.47.250.196
Start: Fri Apr 10 19:36:45 2015
HOST: samm-mbp Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1.|-- 192.168.0.1 0.0% 10 1.7 2.0 1.6 4.7 0.7
2.|-- 150.101.212.44 0.0% 10 2.7 3.1 2.5 4.2 0.0
3.|-- 150.101.208.65 0.0% 10 5.3 6.9 2.7 38.1 11.0
4.|-- 150.101.33.28 0.0% 10 28.3 20.8 14.6 28.3 5.6
5.|-- 150.101.33.149 0.0% 10 170.6 170.4 170.1 170.8 0.0
6.|-- 62.115.33.97 0.0% 10 170.8 170.8 170.1 171.4 0.0
7.|-- 213.155.135.156 0.0% 10 240.9 240.7 240.2 241.2 0.0
8.|-- 80.91.251.103 0.0% 10 322.3 335.0 321.4 413.3 30.2
9.|-- 213.155.136.209 20.0% 10 319.7 329.8 317.9 355.6 14.4
10.|-- 62.115.40.86 0.0% 10 319.1 319.3 318.7 320.0 0.0
11.|-- 195.154.1.41 0.0% 10 332.5 333.0 332.3 333.9 0.0
12.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
13.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
14.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
15.|-- 212.47.250.196 0.0% 10 395.0 334.8 319.4 395.0 23.5
Edit: Spelling (Typo)
- TheSpiceIsLife 12y agoI recognise those Internode IPs at a glance. I used to work in the ADL6 data centre. I'm told that traceroute isn't a reliable way to determine end point latency. I can ping 212.47.250.196 and get a round-trip time of ~365ms. That the intermediate hops each take 170 - 333ms to response in the trouceroute is meaningless. Or so I thought? Maybe I'm not sure what you're getting at? (Edit: I mean iiNet. I mean TPG.)
- mrmondo 12y agoThat's mtr, not traceroute so it actively measures latency to each hop. You are correct in saying that the connection is from Internode (owned by iiNet). Here's an example from PIPE networks (TPG): root@dev-samm:~ # mtr -n --report 212.47.250.196 HOST: dev-samm Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1.|-- <removed> 0.0% 10 0.9 1.1 0.9 2.0 0.3 2.|-- <removed> 0.0% 10 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.1 3.|-- <removed> 0.0% 10 1.1 2.4 1.0 9.1 2.8 4.|-- <removed> 0.0% 10 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.3 0.1 5.|-- 203.219.106.21 0.0% 10 2.5 2.8 1.1 4.7 1.1 6.|-- 202.7.171.25 0.0% 10 11.2 13.1 11.2 14.6 1.3 7.|-- 203.29.129.195 0.0% 10 11.1 12.9 11.1 14.7 1.2 8.|-- 64.86.21.53 0.0% 10 210.2 212.2 210.0 229.9 6.2 9.|-- 64.86.21.2 0.0% 10 373.1 373.2 372.9 373.9 0.3 10.|-- 66.198.127.1 0.0% 10 382.3 382.4 382.2 383.1 0.3 11.|-- 66.198.127.6 0.0% 10 382.1 382.0 381.8 382.1 0.1 12.|-- 66.198.70.21 0.0% 10 378.7 379.3 378.5 381.6 1.2 13.|-- 80.231.130.33 0.0% 10 380.6 381.0 380.6 383.0 0.8 14.|-- 80.231.130.86 20.0% 10 373.9 374.1 373.9 374.7 0.2 15.|-- 80.231.154.17 10.0% 10 371.3 371.5 371.3 371.9 0.2 16.|-- 80.231.153.58 10.0% 10 379.4 379.1 378.9 379.4 0.2 17.|-- 5.23.24.6 10.0% 10 354.1 354.4 353.9 355.6 0.5 18.|-- 195.154.1.39 10.0% 10 355.2 355.2 354.9 355.5 0.2 19.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.|-- 212.47.250.196 10.0% 10 354.5 354.3 354.0 354.9 0.3 A throughput test struggles to obtain 1Mbit: samm ~ % iperf -c 212.47.248.211 ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 212.47.248.211, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 129 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 4] local 192.168.0.22 port 56958 connected with 212.47.248.211 port 5001 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0-11.1 sec 1.38 MBytes 1.04 Mbits/sec
- TheSpiceIsLife 12y agoAh, yes, sorry, I was interpreting the numbers incorrectly. Should probably sleep more. Thanks.