LATENCY!!!

Joker said:
This is what I have so far, pretty much the norm:

5AqN4.jpg
Click to expand...

my graph looks identical, emailed to Will this morning - we are on the same exchange anyway afaik...
 
peTerp00n said:
http://i.imgur.com/9RKm7.png

heres the graph of the last 12 hours for me... as you can see its creeping back up. im not going to email this one to [email protected] ill rather wait till i have a 24hour graph showing the full extent of the problem.

notice the EXTREME packet loss! is it this bad for anyone else?
Click to expand...

The higher up the chain you go (more hops), the higher the packet loss, although that does seem quite bad.
I suggested to Will that we only focus on the 2nd/3rd hop, since this is where the critical congestion seems to be.

P.S. I assume another Rondebosch exhange (41.133.112.1)...

My latency just reached a 'steady' 120ms at 9.45am. CINX traffic at 350mbps:
http://stats.cinx.net.za/

Update: I checked the PingPlotter latency graph against the CINX traffic graph, and found an almost perfect correlation!
 
Last edited:
I'm on Clarinche DSLAM 5 - was moved to DSLAM 6 for a bit when I first complained (which made no difference at all).

@ Gordon - is it possible that my second hop was different because I'm on a different DSLAM at Clarinche. Or do DSLAMs not have IP addresses as such?
 
I've just noticed I don't have anything from anyone on the Rondebosch exchange yet. Pinging Rondebosch please...? :)
 
I am on Clareinche 9, (at least I was when I last argued with Telkom) Mine has been steadily increasing over the past hour or so. I am on a 4mb Openweb Vodacom account.

telkom_ping.jpg
 
teRRRier said:
I'm on Clarinche DSLAM 5 - was moved to DSLAM 6 for a bit when I first complained (which made no difference at all).

@ Gordon - is it possible that my second hop was different because I'm on a different DSLAM at Clarinche. Or do DSLAMs not have IP addresses as such?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, I wasn't sure if Newlands fell under Clareinch or Rondebosch. I don't know if DSLAMs have IPs, but I'm pretty sure they must have!

Not quite a perfect correlation, but I'm finding a very strong link between latency and CINX traffic.

http://www.imagehost.co.za/image-3DC9_4CC14831.gif
 
Last edited:
Lots of people that live in rondebosch are connected to Clareinch as Rondebosch is mighty big. I am on the one end of rondebosch and I am connected to Crawfords exchange, a Friend of mine lives 200 metres from me and he is on Rondebosch 2. Another friend who lives basically opposite the rondebosch common next to rustenburg girls who is also very close to me, is on clareinch. I also know someone in little mowbray that is on clareinch.

Telkom just connect people to whatever they can find, i dont think it was setup with a proper method in place. They obviously dont have proper documentation to hand over to the other engineers and hence why there is always confusion between them.

So if users from Rondebosch are connecting to Clareinch, I think it is highly possible that the newlands lot are also on it, but also it could be the other way around:(
 
Last edited:
JP: That's very interesting. I can understand Rondebosch East (Milner Rd) being connected to Crawford, and Newlands and Rondebosch South (Palmyra Rd) on Clareinch. Some of the others do seem weird...

I have never needed to know which DSLAM I'm on, but Joker just PMd me to say he lives very close by, and his 2nd hop is the same as mine (41.132.48.1).

Will: Is it possible that this whole issue is centered around Clareinch? That would sort-of make sense, since it was really 'fubared' when they did the 10Mbps upgrade...
 
Gordon_R said:
JP: That's very interesting. I can understand Rondebosch East (Milner Rd) being connected to Crawford, and Newlands and Rondebosch South (Palmyra Rd) on Clareinch. Some of the others do seem weird...

I have never needed to know which DSLAM I'm on, but Joker just PMd me to say he lives very close by, and his 2nd hop is the same as mine (41.132.48.1).

Will: Is it possible that this whole issue is centered around Clareinch? That would sort-of make sense, since it was really 'fubared' when they did the 10Mbps upgrade...
Click to expand...

Telkom uses VRF for IPConnect and Metro Ethernet and MPLS, you cannot really determine the physical layout based on your traceroutes. If the problem is on a MPLS switch you will never see it - you will only see the effects between two IP routers. Oh - and as far as I know DSLAMs do not operate on the IP layer, you will only see the first IP router after the DSLAM in your traceroute.
 
rsd said:
Will do once I'm home, hopefully I can get ping plotter running 3 or 4pm, maybe sooner :D
Click to expand...

rsd: In one of your previous posts on this thread, your 2nd hop was 41-133-112-1, which is the same as teRRRier and others, so it is most likely that you are also on the Clareinch exchange.

Will: The fact that some forum members are in 'Rondebosch' may have been misleading, if they are in fact connected to Clareinch as jpmonster suggests. Telkom may be 'right' in that narrow sense, although the problem is definitely not at the 2nd hop (DSLAM) stage.

There might be congestion where the Clareinch DSLAMs get onto the Metro-Ethernet, but surely this step should be capable of 1Gbps traffic??

Johand said:
Telkom uses VRF for IPConnect and Metro Ethernet and MPLS, you cannot really determine the physical layout based on your traceroutes. If the problem is on a MPLS switch you will never see it - you will only see the effects between two IP routers. Oh - and as far as I know DSLAMs do not operate on the IP layer, you will only see the first IP router after the DSLAM in your traceroute.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that is perfectly correct, but somebody still needs to fix this problem!

It is bizarre that end-users are resorting to tracert and ping plots to convince the service provider that there is a problem...
 
Last edited:
Just got told now a buddy of mine who is in rondebosch east, but on the other side of the M5, and the kromboom bridge, in the area by the shell garage is connected to Rondebosch 2, his num is 021696 , mine is 021697. So good luck making sense of how it all works.hehehe.

I also believe all the problems come from the Clareinch exchange. Initially my friends connected to them had super high latencies, which is when is suspected traffic was routed to rondebosch which caused all the congestion for the rest of us.

If Clareinch has rondebosch/newlands users on it then they probably have wynberg/ottery and Bishops court users as well coz its a central location.

I am not entirely sure where Clareinch is, but could it be the last stop before the Newlands Data center? or could that be rondebosch?

Edit: Since September, I have been living on this thread hoping for some break through:( sigh, what a headache

Wish there was a website with layouts etc which we the common users could look at.
 
I am not entirely sure where Clareinch is...
Click to expand...

Clareinch is behind the Claremont police station on Lansdowne Road (I stand to be corrected but I don't know what else this Telkom building could be).
 
I am on the Rondebosch exchange (021 686 xxxx) and do experience the same problems. As far as I know the exchange is on Belmont Rd next to the train station.
 
zolly said:
Clareinch is behind the Claremont police station on Lansdowne Road (I stand to be corrected but I don't know what else this Telkom building could be).
Click to expand...

All the way there. Thats more like Kenilworth. Thats FAR from the rondebosch common, WTF is my friend connected to it. thats way more than 3KM in a straight line
 
Can someone map this out on Visio:) Post it on MyBB News and say WTF Telkom
 
I think it is wrong to try and make to many assumptions of what the underlying problem is. What we can do is give Mweb/WebAfrica as much verified information as we can which they can pass on to Telkom. The fact of the matter is there is a million possible problems (malfunctioning physical links, incorrectly configured routers, malfunctioning routers - both IP and MPLS, interfering devices which can have both software and/or hardware problems etc. ). To narrow down they need data - and they do have access to data on the routers on their network to augment data we give them. We just need to give them data and apply pressure.
 
Gordon_R said:
I've thought about this statement a lot, and come to the conclusion that it is fundamentally wrong from two points of view:
I can't prove it mathematically, but if the congestion were at the DSLAM level, the latency would be spiking all over the place, instead of an almost straight line, for a very extended period...
Click to expand...

Exactly Gordon as in the micro environment of a single DSLAM it would be far more prone to the variables in individual user behavior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X