TIME DNS Issue again?
|
|
 May 9 2024, 01:07 AM
|
 
Elite
8,409 posts Joined: Jul 2008  
|
QUOTE(zerorating @ May 9 2024, 12:55 AM) looks like ntt issue to me, hop 5 is fine, hop 6 is packet loss galore. NTT is always congested, last reported in Jan and never got fixed https://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...ost&p=109048968 https://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...ost&p=109071408 |
|
|
|
|
|
May 9 2024, 01:15 AM
|
 
Senior Member
975 posts Joined: Aug 2007 From: Lokap Polis 
|
QUOTE(blacktubi @ May 9 2024, 01:07 AM) NTT is always congested, last reported in Jan and never got fixed depending at ntt alone is kinda dangerous, they are datacenter provider not a full fledge isp here. whats the point of globaltransit if time cant have their own gateway on the target country or direct route to the isp of the target countryhttps://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...ost&p=109048968 https://forum.lowyat.net/index.php?showtopi...ost&p=109071408 This post has been edited by zerorating: May 9 2024, 01:26 AM |
|
|
May 9 2024, 08:43 AM
Show posts by this member only | IPv6 | Post
#23
|
Senior Member
3,580 posts Joined: Oct 2007 From: everywhere in sabah
|
QUOTE(blacktubi @ May 9 2024, 12:26 AM) While I agree that all ISPs are kinda affected by the SMW5 cable cut to EU, my TIME fibre is worst with much higher latency and comes with packet loss. the problem on TIME maybe temporaryTM Unifi CODE ping ionos.de PING ionos.de (217.160.86.49): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=0 ttl=53 time=300.086 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=278.544 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=281.629 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=285.517 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=4 ttl=53 time=331.620 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=5 ttl=53 time=277.634 ms ^C --- ionos.de ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 277.634/292.505/331.620/19.020 ms TIME Fibre CODE ping ionos.de PING ionos.de (217.160.86.49): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=0 ttl=58 time=445.806 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=459.067 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 2 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=491.900 ms 64 bytes from 217.160.86.49: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=409.083 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 5 ^C --- ionos.de ping statistics --- 7 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 42.9% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 409.083/451.464/491.900/29.669 ms Feel free to try and share your results. but the unifi routing problem has been like that for years and never resolved i'm not sure they even plan to resolve it it has always been bad at night, just that it's especially bad these few weeks |
|
|
May 9 2024, 10:46 AM
|
|
Senior Member
975 posts Joined: Aug 2007 From: Lokap Polis
|
blacktubi
NTT arcnet route traffic to australia instead. x.com load just fine. i guess NTT aware on the high utilization and only help moving corporate user from the mess. CODE Tracing route to x.com [104.244.42.65] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 10.x.x.x 2 3 ms 2 ms 2 ms 10.x.x.x 3 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 10.x.x.x 4 3 ms 3 ms 10 ms x.x.x.x 5 4 ms 3 ms 3 ms cbj-br1.arc.net.my [203.115.232.53] 6 4 ms 2 ms 4 ms 203.115.224.110 7 223 ms 210 ms 210 ms 116.51.36.11 8 130 ms 131 ms 129 ms 103.13.83.171 9 220 ms 220 ms 220 ms as13414.sydney.megaport.com [103.26.68.119] 10 232 ms 232 ms 231 ms 104.244.42.65 This post has been edited by zerorating: May 9 2024, 10:47 AM |
| Change to: |  0.0141sec
 0.43
 5 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 7th December 2025 - 08:59 AM |
Quote