Keep in mind that these high pings are caused by the fact that I'm pinging over a VPN (From Ireland to South Africa IS DSL). In reality the hops are about 3ms each, and there are 4 wireless hops in this.
traceroute to 172.16.250.100 (172.16.250.100), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 172.16.0.193 (172.16.0.193) 0.578 ms 0.856 ms 1.152 ms
2 192.168.253.1 (192.168.253.1) 283.985 ms 286.710 ms 289.956 ms
3 172.16.15.30 (172.16.15.30) 292.680 ms 296.753 ms 300.196 ms
4 172.16.254.145 (172.16.254.145) 308.296 ms 311.633 ms 315.349 ms
5 172.16.255.138 (172.16.255.138) 540.625 ms 544.050 ms 547.939 ms
6 172.16.250.100 (172.16.250.100) 551.004 ms 537.022 ms 540.408 ms
Hop 2 is my VPN.
3-6 are over the Wug.
Its also peak period on the Wug, so the link between 4 and 5 is heavily saturated, hence the slighty elevated ping.
Keep in mind that the hop between 4 and 5 is possibly the busiest link on the Wug, and the one with the worst performance due bad to noise at both endpoints (its a popular route with the WISPs, from one end of JHB to the other)
And after all of that.
60 packets transmitted, 60 received, 0% packet loss, time 59216ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 277.242/324.163/678.003/59.947 ms
No packetloss!
If we can do it, with 0 budget or funding, so can a WISP.
But they don't... <Insert reasons here>