Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Downtime Undersea sub-cables have just broken..., Is the internet going down?
|
chan01
|
 Jan 8 2009, 09:57 PM
|
Getting Started
|
CODE Pinging yahoo.com [68.180.206.184] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=309ms TTL=55
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=304ms TTL=55
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=309ms TTL=55
Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=309ms TTL=55
Ping statistics for 68.180.206.184:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 304ms, Maximum = 309ms, Average = 307ms anyone know what TTL is? If my TTL is more than 52 in yahoo mean im lagging.. i need TTL to get to 52 or below ..Cant play any game on us server too.. and the connection still not fix yet..Still dam slow loading international site... |
|
|
|
|
|
chan01
|
Jan 8 2009, 10:41 PM
|
Getting Started
|
QUOTE(rajulkabir @ Jan 8 2009, 10:18 PM) The TTL in the response doesn't really tell you very much unless you know more about the configuration of the system on the far end. It might have used the TTL of your packet, or it might have set its own, which could really be anything. Then that number will be reduced by the number of hops before it is displayed on your screen. In the case of yahoo.com it happens to start with 64. If you don't understand this then I recommend not worrying about it, it's probably not relevant to your concerns. This ping is a lot better than yours and the TTL on the return packet is only lower by two: CODE % ping -c 3 68.180.206.184
PING 68.180.206.184 (68.180.206.184) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 68.180.206.184: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=4.74 ms
64 bytes from 68.180.206.184: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=4.80 ms
64 bytes from 68.180.206.184: icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=4.76 ms
oh ok. ty for ur reply  |
|
|
|
|
|
chan01
|
Jan 9 2009, 03:57 PM
|
Getting Started
|
CODE Pinging yahoo.co.uk [217.12.6.29] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=616ms TTL=238
Request timed out.
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=631ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=622ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=619ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=622ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=626ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=651ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=641ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=654ms TTL=238
Request timed out.
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=623ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=625ms TTL=238
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=623ms TTL=238
Request timed out.
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=622ms TTL=238
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 217.12.6.29: bytes=32 time=626ms TTL=238
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 217.12.6.29:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 14, Lost = 6 (30% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 616ms, Maximum = 654ms, Average = 628ms 600 + ms to uk .... hope they will fix this stupid connection problem fast... |
|
|
|
|
|
chan01
|
Jan 9 2009, 06:46 PM
|
Getting Started
|
yea it does seem better now.and the site in us load fast for me now oo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
chan01
|
Jan 11 2009, 05:56 PM
|
Getting Started
|
now even local website also ping 100 + ms... and us/uk back to last time.. 500 + ms....
|
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0234sec
0.86
7 queries
GZIP Disabled