View Full Version : Need some info please
PoiZoNouZ
13-01-2005, 06:18 PM
Ok, I have done my research a bit, and I am currently using DSL384, with Telkom as my ISP. All in all it works out to R 800p/m, not too bad. The max I have used is 2.6Gb in a month, not really a power user. I play a lot on local CS:S servers, Kazaa a bit and do general browsing and e-mail. D/L speeds are 38-40k/sec my pings average 30-60. What I want to know, because I'm moving and dont want to install a phone line if I dont have to, is:
1. What are D/L and U/L speeds like?
2. What can I expect my pings to be to local servers?
3. How is it for surfing compared to ADSL?
4. Could somebody ping 196.2.128.100 , 196.2.128.99 and 196.4.79.6 for me?
Your help is appreciated, I'll be moving to Sunninghill/Paulshof, whats the signal like there?
1. What are D/L and U/L speeds like?
2. What can I expect my pings to be to local servers?
3. How is it for surfing compared to ADSL?
4. Could somebody ping 196.2.128.100 , 196.2.128.99 and 196.4.79.6 for me?
1. Running multiple threads D/L 80 - 130 KB/s avarage 100 KB/s
2. 50 - 200 on local
3. burst to 60 KB/s on large pages
4. Can do tomorrow night, but I'm sure someone else can help you there.
I'm in Kyalami.
alchamy
13-01-2005, 07:19 PM
The second two kept timing out :confused:
Pinging 196.2.128.100 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 196.2.128.100: bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=116
Reply from 196.2.128.100: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=116
Reply from 196.2.128.100: bytes=32 time=88ms TTL=116
Reply from 196.2.128.100: bytes=32 time=74ms TTL=116
Ping statistics for 196.2.128.100:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 74ms, Maximum = 140ms, Average = 95ms
Decotey
13-01-2005, 08:09 PM
Those pings arent too bad 0.o.
kuberkoos
13-01-2005, 08:24 PM
last one times out.
###############################
PING 196.2.128.100 (196.2.128.100) 56(84) bytes of data.
--- 196.2.128.100 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19001ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 86.573/260.594/646.046/162.910 ms
###############################
PING 196.2.128.99 (196.2.128.99) 56(84) bytes of data.
--- 196.2.128.99 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19016ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 91.694/292.486/506.672/116.358 ms
###############################
PING 196.4.79.6 (196.4.79.6) 56(84) bytes of data.
--- 196.4.79.6 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 18996ms
###############################
alchamy
13-01-2005, 08:43 PM
WOW, which tower are you on? are your pings always that terrible?
kuberkoos
13-01-2005, 09:06 PM
that's what i'm getting. i'm in kyalami, so it's on midrand tower.
here's typical stats to my PPP peer.
PING 196.30.31.100 (196.30.31.100) 56(84) bytes of data.
--- 196.30.31.100 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19013ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 65.177/166.835/419.661/108.399 ms
my iburst device leds are REALLY disco-ing tonight. between 3 and 5 and occasionally lower with yellow coming on in very short intervals.
chz,
kk
...my iburst device leds are REALLY disco-ing tonight. between 3 and 5 and occasionally lower with yellow coming on in very short intervals...kk, had any red with that? It isn't a proper disco without the red.
Ping statistics for 196.2.128.100:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 8, Lost = 42 (84% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 361ms, Maximum = 1321ms, Average = 131ms
...................
Ping statistics for 196.2.128.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 7, Lost = 43 (86% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 641ms, Maximum = 1001ms, Average = 112ms
...................
Ping statistics for 196.4.79.6:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 0, Lost = 50 (100% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
bb_matt
13-01-2005, 09:58 PM
PoiZoNouZ. just get ADSL in your new place again for now.
Wireless is not suited for stable latency at all - not yet, anyway. Possibly WiMax will be better ?
Your pings may be stable for 2 minutes, but they are going to b0rk out your FPS game without a shadow of a dought. That much is indisputable.
Daveogg
13-01-2005, 11:47 PM
On Iburst
ping www.google.com -n 50
Pinging www.google.akadns.net [64.233.187.99] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=416ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=459ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=367ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=341ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=339ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=341ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=470ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=349ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=398ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=341ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=570ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=339ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=340ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=334ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=342ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=335ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=339ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=333ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=332ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=340ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=339ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=336ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=352ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=340ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=448ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=332ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=357ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=340ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=409ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=341ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=340ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=338ms TTL=241
Reply from 64.233.187.99: bytes=32 time=337ms TTL=241
Ping statistics for 64.233.187.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 332ms, Maximum = 570ms, Average = 355ms
Not perfect but equally good as anything i got with my isdn line
kuberkoos
14-01-2005, 12:21 AM
Pinging [64.233.187.99] ......
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Minimum = 332ms, Maximum = 570ms, Average = 355ms
mine: (with serious disco-ing (no red tough))
ping -c50 -q 64.233.187.99
PING 64.233.187.99 (64.233.187.99) 56(84) bytes of data.
--- 64.233.187.99 ping statistics ---
50 packets transmitted, 47 received, +3 duplicates, 6% packet loss, time 49048ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 299.922/556.074/1480.474/258.677 ms, pipe 2
chz,
kk
bb_matt
14-01-2005, 08:27 AM
Try pinging www.saix.net, PoiZoNouZ indicates he plays a lot of CS:S and the main servers are of course SGS.
This is home ADSL 384 :-
Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 39ms, Maximum = 41ms, Average = 39ms
I'd be interested to see if iBurst can hold a steady ping to saix - those Google figures look pretty good. What your looking for is not only average ms, but also packet loss.
Here's my Google ping, the ms is higher, but this is 8:30am in the morning.
Note there's no packet loss.
Ping statistics for 216.239.59.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 482ms, Maximum = 517ms, Average = 496ms
bb_matt
14-01-2005, 08:29 AM
I'm keeping my eye on iBurst as an option later in the year - possibly when I move house again. If they can sustain themselves, despite the odd things such as the activation fee and some people having a rotten connection, they may just be worth looking at - time will tell. Once burnt, twice shy.
Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 46, Lost = 4 (8% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 90ms, Maximum = 1292ms, Average = 368ms
...............................
Ping statistics for 216.239.59.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 39, Lost = 11 (22% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 461ms, Maximum = 1392ms, Average = 573ms
...............................
Ping statistics for 64.233.187.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 46, Lost = 4 (8% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 370ms, Maximum = 1392ms, Average = 599ms
bb_matt
14-01-2005, 08:44 AM
IC:-
Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 46, Lost = 4 (8% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 90ms, Maximum = 1292ms, Average = 368ms
Eeek ! - that's bad for Saix !
368ms, 8% loss
But how many other iBurst users would get the same and what's the reliability here, in fact, what's the guarantee that if you do get good latency, that it'll last ?
Hmmm.
Personally, I suspect that TTL need some serious adjusting on the iBurst network, but I'm tired of trying to figure all this out- it is boggling my mind.
sihen
14-01-2005, 09:39 AM
Just a ping result for you guys
--- ftp.is.co.za ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4003ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 52.471/64.444/70.675/6.611 ms
Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 90ms, Maximum = 911ms, Average = 207ms
(TTL=247)
...................
Ping statistics for 216.239.59.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 34, Lost = 16 (32% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 441ms, Maximum = 882ms, Average = 389ms
(TTL=229)
...................
Ping statistics for 64.233.187.99:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 331ms, Maximum = 671ms, Average = 453ms
(TTL=234)
...................
Ping statistics for 196.4.160.12:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 90ms, Maximum = 400ms, Average = 158ms
(TTL=57)
Eeek ! - that's bad for Saix !
368ms, 8% loss
But how many other iBurst users would get the same and what's the reliability here, in fact, what's the guarantee that if you do get good latency, that it'll last ?
Hmmm.
Ping statistics for 196.25.1.200:
Packets: Sent = 96, Received = 96, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 93ms, Maximum = 390ms, Average = 142ms
Mercury
15-01-2005, 09:23 AM
Another contribution:
Without background ping to 196.30.192.82 running
----196.25.1.200 PING Statistics----
50 packets transmitted, 49 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 70/318/1110
----216.239.59.99 PING Statistics----
50 packets transmitted, 49 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 820/1095/1200
With background ping to 196.30.192.82 running
----196.25.1.200 PING Statistics----
50 packets transmitted, 49 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 80/511/1140
----216.239.59.99 PING Statistics----
50 packets transmitted, 49 packets received, 2% packet loss
round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 490/1117/1310
The 2% packet loss seems to be due to ping giving up on the return of the last packet.
...The 2% packet loss seems to be due to ping giving up on the return of the last packet.<i_could_be_talking_junk_here>
Which is why I think overriding/icreasing default-TTL might help, what to set default-TTL to? - what is "acceptable latency" - perhaps just set default-TTL to 350ms or something to reduce packet loss as a result of expired-TTL aka request timed out.</i_could_be_talking_junk_here>
kuberkoos
15-01-2005, 11:53 AM
adjusting TTL won't have any affect. TTL is measured in "hops" not in time units. it is a misnomer that has survived from TCP/IP's early days.
a packets' TTL is a counter. every router that handles your packet looks at the TTL and, IF it's not 0, it passes it on AFTER decreasing the TTL by one. so you can imagine a case where something is screwed up somewhere and your packets run "out of steam" because their TTLs get depleted.
TTLs help the intenet get rid of packets that's "going nowhere slowly" or packets that stay on the wires because of routing errors. TTL is like a "best before counter". different OSs have different default TTL values that they stamp packets with when it leaves the system.
eg:
i can reach Internet Solutions in 7 hops. My packets will get there as long as they have a TTL above 7. and i can reach slashdot.org in 18. i'd say if a TTL of, say, 35 can't get you everywhere on the internet then something is screwed up somewhere along the route that your packet's are travelling.
chz,
kk
Ok, I always thought TTL was measured in ms, if it's hop count then I have to re-evaluate my existence in this universe, bcos I'm seriously confused just thinking about it.
Just one question is TTL one-way or round-trip: On the route from HostA to HostB, TTL==HopCount==iAtoB, if --iAtoB before sending to the next intermediate host/router, when hostB replies with a new packet, what TTL is used, i.e. is it still iAtoB-- or maybe a new jBtoA that gets decremented on the return trip?
Perdition
15-01-2005, 02:51 PM
TTL is one way
kuberkoos
15-01-2005, 04:31 PM
TTL is not one way trip time. TTL = time-to-live (i.e. the "expiry" counter in a IP (ICMP, TCP and UDP) packet header that i described above)
i think you guys are confusing it with RTT. Round Trip Time is the timed from when your ping packet (or other) packet leaves your machine 'till when the reply arrives from the host that you pinged.
below all the ms values are rountrip times. you can see that ping utility set the default TTL to 55. incidentally all the RTTs are bigger (numerically) than the TTL - not that it matters. the most important line is the last line that gives the summary statistics on the measured RTT.
ping -c5 ftp.up.ac.za
PING ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34): icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=224 ms
64 bytes from ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34): icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=254 ms
64 bytes from ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34): icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=204 ms
64 bytes from ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34): icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=214 ms
64 bytes from ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34): icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=255 ms
--- ftp.up.ac.za ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 204.583/230.646/255.031/20.569 ms
below is a traceroute that shows that ftp.up.ac.za is only _10_ hops away. so ttl of 55 is more than adequate to get there.
traceroute ftp.up.ac.za
traceroute to ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 196.30.31.100
2 196.30.31.193
3 fe6-1.gw10.jnb6.alter.net
4 ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net
5 other-side.atm6-0sub1.br1.jnb6.alter.net
6 wblv-ip-er-2-atm-12-0-0-1.telkom-ipnet.co.za
7 tenet-national-gw-telkom-ipnet.co.za
8 nat.up.uni.net.za
9 thermopylae-tenet.up.ac.za
10 ftp.up.ac.za
if i FORCE my ping utility to use a ridiculous TTL, say 4, the packet should only reach the fourth hop, before the router along the way complain the our packets' TTL expired.
lets see:
ping -c5 -t4 ftp.up.ac.za
PING ftp.up.ac.za (137.215.98.34) 56(84) bytes of data.
From ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net (196.30.156.41) icmp_seq=1 Time to live exceeded
From ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net (196.30.156.41) icmp_seq=2 Time to live exceeded
From ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net (196.30.156.41) icmp_seq=3 Time to live exceeded
From ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net (196.30.156.41) icmp_seq=4 Time to live exceeded
From ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net (196.30.156.41) icmp_seq=5 Time to live exceeded
--- ftp.up.ac.za ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 0 received, +5 errors, 100% packet loss, time 4005ms
aah ha! ge0-0.br1.jnb6.alter.net, the router bitching about TTL , is indeed the fourth router in this particular path as reported by the traceroute utility.
chz,
kk
kuberkoos
15-01-2005, 04:53 PM
one way trip time (1WTT) is _MUCH_ more difficult to measure than RTT.
RTT vs. 1WTT would be like timing a 100m race versus a (SIMPLIFIED) 400m race.
for 1WTT the guy with the stopwatch at the finish needs to know EXACLY when the race starts as he is not at the starting line. he can't even see the starting line!
for RTT you only need one guy and he's right there where the race starts AND finishes.
that why you don't encounter 1WTT as a general network metric.
chz,
kk
PoiZoNouZ
16-01-2005, 10:45 AM
Ok, I have done my research a bit, and I am currently using DSL384, with Telkom as my ISP. All in all it works out to R 800p/m, not too bad. The max I have used is 2.6Gb in a month, not really a power user. I play a lot on local CS:S servers, Kazaa a bit and do general browsing and e-mail. D/L speeds are 38-40k/sec my pings average 30-60. What I want to know, because I'm moving and dont want to install a phone line if I dont have to, is:
1. What are D/L and U/L speeds like?
2. What can I expect my pings to be to local servers?
3. How is it for surfing compared to ADSL?
4. Could somebody ping 196.2.128.100 , 196.2.128.99 and 196.4.79.6 for me?
Your help is appreciated, I'll be moving to Sunninghill/Paulshof, whats the signal like there?
Ok, I see my original question seems to have got lost somewhere in this techno mumbo-jambo, which I don't understand. Try and answer my origonal questions please if possible, it would make my decision making a bit easier...
bb_matt
16-01-2005, 11:21 AM
If you read a bit in this forum, you'll find the general info your looking for.
My 2cents - Get ADSL.
The rest of my mumbo-jumbo "ramblings" :- :D
The general consensus is that your online CS:S gaming will suffer badly.
Everything else you can find in this forum section - overall, it seems iBurst so far is a good option for general surfing.
If you want to keep on playing CS:S, stick with ADSL 384.
The facts about iBurst are :-
1. Expense of buying the modem (R2800, unless you signup for 24 months)
2. An activation fee has been introduced
Your initial outlay will be more than getting a line and ADSL installed in your new premises, unless you signup with a 24 month contract, which will then up your monthly cost to R700 - but you STILL need to fork out R495 for activation, more than the cost of installing an ADSL line, unless you have no fixed line in the premises your moving into.
The Activation fee, IMHO, is an own-goal for iBurst.
The total installation fee for my ADSL line including a brand new line installation, was R590.
Considering you already have ADSL, you therefore have a DSL modem/router already.
The drawback is of course ADSL installation time, which can be more than a month. iBurst you'll get within a week.
slimothy
16-01-2005, 11:25 PM
some more facts:
1: No waiting 4 weeks minimum to install (same day baby!)
2: Download speeds at over 100KBps
3: There is no cap right now (yes yes, there will be, but right now there isn't)
4: It's not Telkom
5: It's not Sentech
6: It's not Telkom (so nice i had to list it twice)
So you can put that in your pipe and smoke it :P
I'm playing CS:S and it is fine, playing on the saix servers. That is for me though. I have seen people here not getting the same pings I get.
Don't you get cut of on home adsl package if you reach your cap?
On the 512 package you will start saving R410 a month, after 5.5 months, if you bite the bullet and buy the modem upfront, on iBurst.