High Ping

[ZERO]

Ok so the ones in the afternoon we see that your latency increases a lot before it even hits the networklayer.com addresses. This indicates that there is an issue with your ISP not having enough bandwith at that time of day for all the clients and that results in the increased latency.

We can therefore toss out all tests that occurred at peek times and trace the main source of those problems to the route your ISP is using into quest and then att. We observe this by the increased latency on quest and att during that time of day.

On the off peak time you consistently get a higher ping on hop 12 but usually when 208.43.70.233 is being pinged. The evening ones are still a bit muddy b/c we see hop 8 showing random 50ms swings. If one of those swings occur when testing a hop after hop 8 it would contaminate the results.

Please run the morning and evening ones again and if possible also try to run a second off hour one late at night so we can compare those 3 types.

I will also try to make some changes to the server routing config and see if that helps b/c there does appear to be a consistent issue that 208.43.70.233 is worse than the others.

[Amensia]

will do. ill start them this evening and do one tomorrow morning, thanks for all the help

[ZERO]

I did make some changes so your output will have more at the end than it does now. The changes may resolve the issue and or alter your route path over time. It usually takes about 72 hours for a route change to propagate though so if there is any changes in the hop order due to this it may not show up for a few days/weeks.

[Amensia]

C:\Users\Rob> tracert ns2.ibisgaming.com

Tracing route to ns2.ibisgaming.com [174.37.194.20]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 7 ms 6 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 25 ms 35 ms 6 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 23 ms 23 ms 31 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 78 ms 70 ms 70 ms 63.146.26.218
7 78 ms 78 ms 74 ms cr1.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.133.106]
8 77 ms 69 ms 68 ms gar2.clboh.ip.att.net [12.122.133.197]
9 69 ms 68 ms 66 ms 12.118.39.190
10 73 ms 71 ms 68 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 73 ms 72 ms 73 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 156 ms 155 ms 153 ms ae1.dar02.wdc01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.189]
13 74 ms 75 ms 72 ms po2.fcr01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com [208.43.118.138]
14 70 ms 72 ms 76 ms 14.c2.25ae.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [174.37.194.20]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob> tracert speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com

Tracing route to speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com [208.43.102.250]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 7 ms 5 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 6 ms 5 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 22 ms 22 ms 22 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 64 ms 62 ms 66 ms 63.146.26.218
7 57 ms 58 ms 62 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.158]
8 115 ms 63 ms 65 ms gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.213]
9 63 ms 64 ms 67 ms 12.118.39.190
10 73 ms 67 ms 65 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 72 ms 74 ms 74 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 66 ms 66 ms 69 ms ae1.dar01.wdc01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.193]
13 153 ms 71 ms 108 ms po1.fcr01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com [208.43.118.134]
14 139 ms 140 ms 137 ms speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com [208.43.102.250]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob> tracert speedtest.wdc04.softlayer.com

Tracing route to speedtest.wdc04.softlayer.com [169.55.65.212]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 6 ms 33 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 23 ms 23 ms 23 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 62 ms 62 ms 59 ms 63.146.26.218
7 62 ms 63 ms 62 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.158]
8 58 ms 75 ms 57 ms gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.213]
9 65 ms 57 ms 56 ms 12.118.39.190
10 61 ms 60 ms 59 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 56 ms 56 ms 54 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 57 ms 57 ms 59 ms ae6.dar01.wdc04.networklayer.com [50.97.19.201]
13 133 ms 132 ms 132 ms 87.76.37a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.55.118.135]
14 59 ms 60 ms 61 ms speedtest.wdc04.softlayer.com [169.55.65.212]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob> tracert 208.43.70.233

Tracing route to e9.46.2bd0.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [208.43.70.233]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 22 ms 22 ms 22 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 64 ms 67 ms 65 ms 63.146.26.218
7 57 ms 58 ms 58 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.158]
8 146 ms 74 ms 86 ms gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.213]
9 56 ms 55 ms 56 ms 12.118.39.190
10 57 ms 56 ms 57 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 58 ms 55 ms 54 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 131 ms 133 ms 134 ms ae1.dar02.wdc01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.189]
13 61 ms 61 ms 68 ms po2.fcr01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com [208.43.118.138]
14 132 ms 130 ms 128 ms e9.46.2bd0.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [208.43.70.233]

Trace complete.

[Amensia]

@Zero
sorry it took so long, was on vacation.
C:\Users\Rob> tracert 208.43.70.233

Tracing route to e9.46.2bd0.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [208.43.70.233]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 6 ms 5 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 8 ms 6 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 23 ms 23 ms 23 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 28 ms 26 ms 29 ms 63.146.26.218
7 26 ms 26 ms 26 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.158]
8 25 ms 25 ms 25 ms gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.213]
9 108 ms 54 ms 24 ms 12.118.39.190
10 26 ms 26 ms 26 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 29 ms 29 ms 29 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 31 ms 31 ms 30 ms ae1.dar02.wdc01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.189]
13 30 ms 29 ms 29 ms po2.fcr01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com [208.43.118.138]
14 31 ms 30 ms 30 ms e9.46.2bd0.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [208.43.70.233]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob> tracert ns2.ibisgaming.com

Tracing route to ns2.ibisgaming.com [174.37.194.20]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 24 ms 23 ms 23 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 28 ms 26 ms 26 ms 63.146.26.218
7 27 ms 25 ms 26 ms cr1.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.133.106]
8 172 ms 28 ms 224 ms gar2.clboh.ip.att.net [12.122.133.197]
9 24 ms 23 ms 24 ms 12.118.39.190
10 25 ms 25 ms 25 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 27 ms 27 ms 26 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 29 ms 29 ms 28 ms ae1.dar02.wdc01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.189]
13 27 ms 27 ms 27 ms po2.fcr01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com [208.43.118.138]
14 29 ms 28 ms 28 ms 14.c2.25ae.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [174.37.194.20]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob> tracert speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com

Tracing route to speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com [208.43.102.250]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 5 ms 5 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 22 ms 22 ms 22 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 27 ms 37 ms 34 ms 63.146.26.218
7 25 ms 26 ms 26 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.158]
8 24 ms 23 ms 24 ms gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.213]
9 22 ms 23 ms 22 ms 12.118.39.190
10 25 ms 24 ms 24 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 27 ms 27 ms 49 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 28 ms 28 ms 28 ms ae1.dar01.wdc01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.193]
13 29 ms 28 ms 29 ms po1.fcr01.sr01.wdc01.networklayer.com [208.43.118.134]
14 28 ms 28 ms 28 ms speedtest.wdc01.softlayer.com [208.43.102.250]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob> tracert speedtest.wdc04.softlayer.com

Tracing route to speedtest.wdc04.softlayer.com [169.55.65.212]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
3 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms pa-67-234-64-1.dhcp.embarqhsd.net [67.234.64.1]
4 6 ms 6 ms 5 ms crls-agw1.inet.qwest.net [75.160.220.9]
5 24 ms 23 ms 23 ms chp-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net [67.14.8.190]
6 32 ms 35 ms 26 ms 63.146.26.218
7 28 ms 27 ms 26 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.158]
8 35 ms 119 ms 81 ms gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.132.213]
9 23 ms 23 ms 23 ms 12.118.39.190
10 25 ms 25 ms 25 ms ae7.bbr02.eq01.chi01.networklayer.com [173.192.18.171]
11 29 ms 29 ms 29 ms ae0.bbr02.eq01.wdc02.networklayer.com [173.192.18.154]
12 30 ms 29 ms 29 ms ae6.dar01.wdc04.networklayer.com [50.97.19.201]
13 29 ms 29 ms 29 ms 87.76.37a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.55.118.135]
14 30 ms 30 ms 30 ms speedtest.wdc04.softlayer.com [169.55.65.212]

Trace complete.

[ZERO]

Ok we finally have it narrowed down to latency caused by gar3.cgcil.ip.att.net I did a quick google of that node and it appears it is famous for causing lag.

What ISP are on on BTW?

[I'm a zambi]

Hmm, this is interesting. I used to get a ping of 5-10 but I've recently been getting 60-100 (at best). I'll have to check to see if I'm having a similar issue.

I did move at one point but I'm moving back soon so that could also be the issue.

- - - Updated - - -

For me, this is of course on Zombie Mod, not Gun Game.

[Amensia]

Century Link. only service where i live. get about 12mgps. im lucky to get that. before they came around the best was 2 at 4 times the cost. lol. i live in the middle of nowhere

[ZERO]

Ok that makes sense b/c your going over quest nodes. The issue is that to access the public internet quest connects to AT&T and AT&T is dumping that shit router on them. Very likely it is either that there is not a fat enough interconnect between the quest routers and at&t or at&t is intentionally routing competitor ISP packets poorly.

You should still complain to your ISP though b/c although interconnects are supposed to be free and open quest/century link has always been a at&t reseller. They might even be paying at&t for node connectivity. In this case it is in a customer relation with at&t in which case it will get upset and force at&t to correct problems like this if they found out about them.

The key is to ensure that you open 1 or mutiple trouble tickets about the same issue and do not let them close the tickets until they actually fix the problem. In the industry there is a metric of measuring ticket response times. People get bonuses and shit based off that (well at least they did 20 years ago). So as the ticket sits there it first effects the low line employees and then it effects their supervisor and his supervisor and it keeps getting bumped up b/c there is this open ticket. The hard part is ensuring the ticket stays open b/c they are going to want to just say it is fixed the clear the ticket. So if every time they do this your opening a new ticket with the same issue every day and they keep getting closed it triggers another metric that they are closing tickets just to close them to evade negative compensation effects. The quality review trigger will then start a shit storm up the guys ass that keeps closing the tickets from qr that he is trying to manipulate his pay.

Unfortunately, due to this not being a simple oh my internet is out issue it is going to be really hard to get them to act. You literally got to ensure that there is a trouble ticket open every single day until it is resolved. You got to keep calling back and checking on the ticket status.

I have had this problem outside the US but at least in that case we were also showing up at the peoples houses with a bottle of rum and saying hey there is this ticket you need to look into. Even then it still took about 3 weeks for them to realize the cause of the problem which effected the entire city was that they never actually conditioned their phone lines in the city for data and instead years back the guy who was in charge just said they did it. However, b/c the people there did not know what real internet was they never knew if it was actually working correctly or not b/c they had never known anything different.

You might need to upgrade to a "business" line so that they will be forced to actually take your issue seriously. Sometimes they will just cop out and say oh well this is a residential line all we can do is make sure it connects. If the quality of the connection is worse than a 3rd world nation then that is just though shit, you need a business line for us to give you first world internet.

Also that telco is granted a local monopoly by your local government. You should look up who approves this and then contact your mayor or other person / agency who is in charge about granting telco access in your area. Complain to them that they are ripping off customers and taking advantage of their legally granted monopoly to provide low quality of service that is below the standard of even 3rd world nations. Demand that their monopoly be revoked unless they correct these problems. Also state that because the state has granted them a monopoly you have no alternatives to access the internet in a reasonable manor and this is the fault of the government which is an issue that will appear in the next election if the quality of the service does not improve.

These telco gives your local government millions of $$$ to pay them off for the monopoly. Putting pressure on the gov to pressure them over the legal monopoly and abuses can also help. You may need to even go above the local gov and contact state officials with the same issue and state that your local government is stone walled and there is likely corruption issues preventing people in your local district from being treated fairly.

You may need to after looking over your contract file FTC and FCC violation reports with the fed government. To the FCC you could complain about your packets being latency throttled by that node and your ISP providing low quality service with no intent to improve. The FTC you can basically file that they are abusing their legal monopoly to rip off consumers ect.

You could also try to get local media involved. Imagine a head line, Is your local ISP ripping you off. They can cover abuses of how the ISP is providing low quality of service and has no motivation to fix it due to its monopoly and in action by the government. When people find out they have shitty internet not just because their ISP sucks but because their elected official is getting money from said ISP and says it can suck all day said gov official going to get the issue fixed b/c he wants to be elected again. Also they want to stop any more media reports / investigations which might reveal how much worse things actually are or questions like why the gov does not allow competition and is forcing it's citizens to have low quality services so that it can make money.

Oh also on the note about being in a remote area complaining to the FTC about that will really piss them off. Basically some ISPs are forced by the fed gov to provide services to areas like yours so they then intentionally make it shit quality as a sort of fuck you to the FCC. Basically they are discriminating against you because of your location. The ISP is trying to subvert FCC rules and give you a low quality service they know will create issues using the internet. I bet if you were in the city you would never have these problems and that is against the law. They can not give you shit QOS just because your in the sticks.

[Amensia]

hey thanks zero. i will to get to complaining. I'm a doer. getting stuff done is what i do, complain to random people however is what i love to do lol