PeterPan420
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 9, 2017
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 401
Why do other networks get lower ping than Afrihost 
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Will you be subscribing to the new Disney+ R49 streaming package?
Afrihost - Pure Fibre Feedback Thread
- Thread starter Fjorko
- Start date
-
- Tags
- afrihost feedback pure fibre
- Status
Why do other networks get lower ping than Afrihost
Because Telkom thinks that KZN to Marseille is a better route to EU Central but it's not. JHB > CPT to London is a better lower latency route.
Yeah, during off peak, ping to the UK is normal for me too:
Code:
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| 192.168.1.1 - 0 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 165-73-101-65.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 21 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 169-1-21-1.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 21 | 21 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 196.25.26.65 - 0 | 21 | 21 | 1 | 3 | 9 | 2 |
| 10.189.30.2 - 0 | 21 | 21 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 142 |
|ge-0-1-0-68.peering1.the.lon1.coreix.net - 0 | 21 | 21 | 141 | 141 | 143 | 142 |
| xe-5-1.edge4.enf.lon5.coreix.net - 0 | 21 | 21 | 142 | 142 | 143 | 143 |
| 85.13.221.178.reverse.coreix.net - 0 | 21 | 21 | 142 | 142 | 142 | 142 |
|________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
WinMTR v0.92 GPL V2 by Appnor MSP - Fully Managed Hosting & Cloud ProviderIt's the somewhat recent development of rising latencies during peak hours that's the problem. Having latency fluctuating between 160ms and 200ms on a bad night is not acceptable in my books. And then as you mentioned, the UK to rest of EU bizarre routing choices only compound this problem, since they seem to immediately add 10 - 40ms to any other country, and AH haven't been able to do anything about it.
The two problems together are too much, and they can't seem to solve / do anything about either.
wingnut771
Honorary Master
it happened again after midnight lastnight causing buffering, had to switch to vpn for 1 episode, checked again after episode and was fine again.
Yeah, I subscribed to a VPN in the first place to sort out the UK -> EU latency. When this happens, my latency to the UK goes down the hole too, so even that avenue is useless.
wingnut771
Honorary Master
i set my vpn to south africa.
3HH
Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2019
- Messages
- 10
- Reaction score
- 6
Hope you all had a good festive season.
I'm curious, I understand this is a bit of a basic question, and I also, for the most part, understand why this is the case, but perhaps some of the guys who know more about this stuff can explain if there's something Im missing.
Below is a trace to the same Coreix servers in London that other uses from Cape Town have posted, but done from George, which is at worst 429KM from Cape Town.
It looks to take the exact same route, however, it ends up being about 25ms slower, my understanding is that this is latency added by the hardware along the way, so routers in the exchange, the light bouncing around in the fiber cable itself making the route longer etc, and is unavoidable, I was told this by my previous ISP.
So the only way to get a lower ping to Europe would be to move to Cape Town.
That said if light travels in an optic cable at like 270,000 km/s and can make it to London from CT in 140 odd ms, which is 13,000 or so kilometers away, why does it take nearly a fifth of that time to travel a 30th of the distance between George and Cape Town? (Disregarding of course that the Seacom cable is mostly "straight" and has no interruptions along the way.)
I am genuinely curious about this, so if anyone could answer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|--------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| Router - 0 | 31 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 165-73-14-113.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 37 | 33 |
| 169-1-21-2.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 26 | 27 | 29 | 26 |
| 169-1-21-3.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 21 | 21 | 23 | 23 |
| 196.25.26.65 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 61 | 29 |
| 10.189.30.2 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 161 | 162 | 164 | 162 |
| ge-0-1-0-68.peering1.the.lon1.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 171 | 167 |
| xe-5-1.edge4.enf.lon5.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 162 | 164 | 174 | 163 |
| 85.13.221.178.reverse.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 170 | 170 |
|___________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
I'm curious, I understand this is a bit of a basic question, and I also, for the most part, understand why this is the case, but perhaps some of the guys who know more about this stuff can explain if there's something Im missing.
Below is a trace to the same Coreix servers in London that other uses from Cape Town have posted, but done from George, which is at worst 429KM from Cape Town.
It looks to take the exact same route, however, it ends up being about 25ms slower, my understanding is that this is latency added by the hardware along the way, so routers in the exchange, the light bouncing around in the fiber cable itself making the route longer etc, and is unavoidable, I was told this by my previous ISP.
So the only way to get a lower ping to Europe would be to move to Cape Town.
That said if light travels in an optic cable at like 270,000 km/s and can make it to London from CT in 140 odd ms, which is 13,000 or so kilometers away, why does it take nearly a fifth of that time to travel a 30th of the distance between George and Cape Town? (Disregarding of course that the Seacom cable is mostly "straight" and has no interruptions along the way.)
I am genuinely curious about this, so if anyone could answer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|--------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| Router - 0 | 31 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 165-73-14-113.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 37 | 33 |
| 169-1-21-2.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 26 | 27 | 29 | 26 |
| 169-1-21-3.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 21 | 21 | 23 | 23 |
| 196.25.26.65 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 61 | 29 |
| 10.189.30.2 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 161 | 162 | 164 | 162 |
| ge-0-1-0-68.peering1.the.lon1.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 171 | 167 |
| xe-5-1.edge4.enf.lon5.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 162 | 164 | 174 | 163 |
| 85.13.221.178.reverse.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 170 | 170 |
|___________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
wingnut771
Honorary Master
interesting question, as it takes 30ms from dbn to cape town for me, maybe you're going to jhb then cape town?Hope you all had a good festive season.
I'm curious, I understand this is a bit of a basic question, and I also, for the most part, understand why this is the case, but perhaps some of the guys who know more about this stuff can explain if there's something Im missing.
Below is a trace to the same Coreix servers in London that other uses from Cape Town have posted, but done from George, which is at worst 429KM from Cape Town.
It looks to take the exact same route, however, it ends up being about 25ms slower, my understanding is that this is latency added by the hardware along the way, so routers in the exchange, the light bouncing around in the fiber cable itself making the route longer etc, and is unavoidable, I was told this by my previous ISP.
So the only way to get a lower ping to Europe would be to move to Cape Town.
That said if light travels in an optic cable at like 270,000 km/s and can make it to London from CT in 140 odd ms, which is 13,000 or so kilometers away, why does it take nearly a fifth of that time to travel a 30th of the distance between George and Cape Town? (Disregarding of course that the Seacom cable is mostly "straight" and has no interruptions along the way.)
I am genuinely curious about this, so if anyone could answer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|--------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| Router - 0 | 31 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 165-73-14-113.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 37 | 33 |
| 169-1-21-2.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 26 | 27 | 29 | 26 |
| 169-1-21-3.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 21 | 21 | 23 | 23 |
| 196.25.26.65 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 61 | 29 |
| 10.189.30.2 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 161 | 162 | 164 | 162 |
| ge-0-1-0-68.peering1.the.lon1.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 171 | 167 |
| xe-5-1.edge4.enf.lon5.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 162 | 164 | 174 | 163 |
| 85.13.221.178.reverse.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 170 | 170 |
|___________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
Unfortunately, every VPN provider in the world seems to use a data center in JHB, and not CPT, so doing that adds a flat 20ms across the board for me, which defeats the purpose of trying to shave that latency off to the rest of Europe in the first place.
wingnut771
Honorary Master
yeah, all in jhb unfortunately, adds 10ms for me from dbn, but at least it's consistent flat line, not the roller coaster ping i was getting.
Hope you all had a good festive season.
I'm curious, I understand this is a bit of a basic question, and I also, for the most part, understand why this is the case, but perhaps some of the guys who know more about this stuff can explain if there's something Im missing.
Below is a trace to the same Coreix servers in London that other uses from Cape Town have posted, but done from George, which is at worst 429KM from Cape Town.
It looks to take the exact same route, however, it ends up being about 25ms slower, my understanding is that this is latency added by the hardware along the way, so routers in the exchange, the light bouncing around in the fiber cable itself making the route longer etc, and is unavoidable, I was told this by my previous ISP.
So the only way to get a lower ping to Europe would be to move to Cape Town.
That said if light travels in an optic cable at like 270,000 km/s and can make it to London from CT in 140 odd ms, which is 13,000 or so kilometers away, why does it take nearly a fifth of that time to travel a 30th of the distance between George and Cape Town? (Disregarding of course that the Seacom cable is mostly "straight" and has no interruptions along the way.)
I am genuinely curious about this, so if anyone could answer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|--------------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| Router - 0 | 31 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 165-73-14-113.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 37 | 33 |
| 169-1-21-2.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 26 | 27 | 29 | 26 |
| 169-1-21-3.ip.afrihost.co.za - 0 | 31 | 31 | 21 | 21 | 23 | 23 |
| 196.25.26.65 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 27 | 29 | 61 | 29 |
| 10.189.30.2 - 0 | 31 | 31 | 161 | 162 | 164 | 162 |
| ge-0-1-0-68.peering1.the.lon1.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 171 | 167 |
| xe-5-1.edge4.enf.lon5.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 162 | 164 | 174 | 163 |
| 85.13.221.178.reverse.coreix.net - 0 | 31 | 31 | 167 | 168 | 170 | 170 |
|___________________________________________________|______|______|______|______|______|______|
Your very first hop to AH is almost 30ms - and that IP is in JHB. Almost like it's going George > CPT > JHB. Would explain the latency. Seems bizarre though.
Not just that - all web hosts seem to be based in Joburg too. And something about the datacentres in this country makes them rubbish.
The latency from SA to Europe (120-180ms) is less than half the typical server response time to 99% of local servers. So with high-performance hosting like Vultr based somewhere like London, you get faster load times than if the site was hosted in SA. Crazy.
Speaking of hosting, why all these years later does Afrihost still list nothing but hard drive specs in their hosting pages @AfriMan? Top hosts are upgrading from SSD to NVMe at this point, yet Afrihost has HARD DRIVES? That's insane.
Hey Bryn
I'm answering under correction, but my understanding of NVMe is that it is SSD, but deals with how drives are accessed for faster performance. However, this requires customisation of motherboards, and it works out substantially more expensive at this stage.
However, when it comes to physical dedicated hosting, we can build and customise a server to any spec required by the client, but we will advise on the cost and best practice. Sometimes the additional cost is not justified by the performance required. But ultimately, if you want it, we can build it for you.
Yeah, NVMe is solid state storage of course. But way faster than a regular SSD. It's a significant improvement because noisy neighbours more often than not come from bottlenecks around the storage I/O, and NVMe setups have extraordinary storage throughout. This can already be had without the cost of dedicated rack hosting. Vultr high frequency compute servers only use NVMe storage for example.
Regular SSD is the minimum standard for web hosting storage, since many years ago. Is Afrihost going to at least replace their hard drives with some sort of SSD?
PeterPan420
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 9, 2017
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 401
If I upgrade package, do I get charged immediately or next month?
It really depends on the client's requirements and the budget they are willing to commit. Whenever I have compared, SSD vs NVMe is a big price difference, but there is no question that it's faster. To deploy that across the board would significantly increase costs (and prices), so we have to be pragmatic.
But in terms of a dedicated server, we're happy to spec up the latest tech and quote on any setup.
You will be charged pro-rata immediately for the rest of the month, and then the full fee on the first of the new month.
Was just asking about SSD though, in any shape or form. Instead of hard drives.
So my fiber line was installed this morning and although I ordered a 40meg Openserve line, I only get 10 meg speeds. Any ideas as the support people tell me the line speed will improve within 2-3 hours which is long passed?
- Status