[175815] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Learning about the internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (joel jaeggli)
Mon Nov 3 16:57:41 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 13:57:22 -0800
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: Paige Thompson <paigeadele@gmail.com>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <5457F063.8040704@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--JMFXIb3SKnmF5W07Cldr9qDNXwcqMhtWI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
looks about right in the neighborhood of 9k miles...
from lax or therebouts.
Upstream Intf Nexthop Sent Loss Min Avg
Max Dev
cogent x x 10 0.0% 194.814 210.255 240.989
16.518
comcast x x 10 0.0% 201.723 213.942 239.47
13.205
l3 x x 10 0.0% 195.51 208.189 226.971 10.455
telia x x 10 0.0% 194.552 207.392 225.792 10.=
321
On 11/3/14 1:15 PM, Paige Thompson wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> I was just reading about transatlantic cabling in some hopes that I
> would be able to find an answer as to why the latency between here in
> greece and Los Angeles is roughly ~250ms. This seems to be a really
> common thing, although I'd like to understand why and the articles on
> transatlantic cabling as near as I can tell indicate that I am getting
> screwed if anything (not enough information?)
>=20
> (from Los Angeles to my house)
> Konsole output
>=20
> Konsole output
> gw~ #mtr --report-wide xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.access.hol.gr
> Start: Mon Nov 3 13:04:02 2014
> HOST: gw Loss% Snt Last Avg
> Best Wrst StDev
> 1.|-- 208.79.92.65 10.0% 10 1.5 3.6
> 1.2 15.5 4.6
> 2.|-- s7.lax.arpnetworks.com 0.0% 10 0.8 10.9
> 0.8 54.2 20.7
> 3.|-- vlan953.car2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 30.0% 10 10.5 10.3
> 10.1 10.8 0.0
> 4.|-- ae-27-27.edge6.LosAngeles1.Level3.net 30.0% 10 21.8 16.2
> 8.6 47.6 14.7
> 5.|-- ae-4-90.edge1.LosAngeles6.Level3.net 80.0% 10 9.0 8.9
> 8.7 9.0 0.0
> 6.|-- be3036.ccr21.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com 10.0% 10 1.7 2.1
> 1.4 4.3 0.7
> 7.|-- be2076.mpd22.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com 10.0% 10 1.6 1.9
> 1.6 3.2 0.0
> 8.|-- be2068.ccr22.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 37.7 37.7
> 37.3 39.0 0.3
> 9.|-- be2173.ccr42.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 51.6 52.4
> 51.5 57.5 1.7
> 10.|-- be2171.mpd22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 62.6 62.7
> 62.4 63.3 0.0
> 11.|-- be2112.ccr41.iad02.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 155.5 155.8
> 155.5 156.1 0.0
> 12.|-- be2268.ccr42.par01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 152.6 152.7
> 152.5 153.5 0.0
> 13.|-- be2278.ccr42.fra03.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 155.3 155.4
> 155.1 155.5 0.0
> 14.|-- be2229.ccr22.muc01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 161.2 161.1
> 160.9 161.3 0.0
> 15.|-- be2223.ccr21.vie01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 164.9 165.1
> 164.9 165.2 0.0
> 16.|-- be2046.ccr21.sof02.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 189.5 189.4
> 189.3 189.9 0.0
> 17.|-- be2118.rcr11.ath01.atlas.cogentco.com 0.0% 10 197.5 197.6
> 197.4 197.7 0.0
> 18.|-- 149.11.120.38 0.0% 10 202.7 202.2
> 200.3 204.2 1.4
> 19.|-- 62.38.97.113 80.0% 10 208.5 209.8
> 208.5 211.1 1.7
> 20.|-- gigaeth04-13.krs00.ar.hol.gr 60.0% 10 211.3 213.0
> 211.2 218.2 3.4
> 21.|-- ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0
> 0.0 0.0 0.0
> 22.|-- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.access.hol.gr 40.0% 10 231.3 231.4
> 231.2 231.7 0.0
> gw~ #
>=20
>=20
>=20
> And to be more clear: I am hoping to learn about the complex trials tha=
t
> these packets are going through and how time is being lost if the
> latency across the transatlantic cable is really capable of less the
> 60ms of latency? Sure over capacity (3.2Tbits/s wow jeez) is one answer=
,
> but what are some other possibilities for loss of time?
>=20
> Also it seems with my VPN (OpenVPN) tunnel I get the most reliable
> connection (fewest drops) with:
>=20
> Konsole output
> mssfix 576
> fragment 576
>=20
> Although this could be a false positive as it only *seems* to help with=
> reliability since I changed it. Even then but less often than before I
> still experience drops but I want to believe that's possibly due to my
> ISP at that point.. but assuming my ISP was absolutely perfect and neve=
r
> a problem what else there to consider?
>=20
> Any and all insight is appreciated.
>=20
> -Paige
>=20
>=20
--JMFXIb3SKnmF5W07Cldr9qDNXwcqMhtWI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAlRX+kMACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrJgfgCfdDeysQJ5VTrNMZGr4lQsnjep
x/oAnjgXB0EunTfFgkpcC2tULySO4ZqA
=FiAv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--JMFXIb3SKnmF5W07Cldr9qDNXwcqMhtWI--
