Just ping on the T1 from your east coast location to a PNW location. Pinging pdx.edu should work.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
I'm Interested in a T1 Line
- Thread starter NExUS1g
- Start date
- Status
Just ping on the T1 from your east coast location to a PNW location. Pinging pdx.edu should work.
The backbone is the principal fiber (for the most part) connection for the Internet that serves as the central connection point for all other networks connected to the Internet. In regards to the Internet, connecting directly to it is the fastest way to get from point A to point B. Connecting directly to it is like living right off the Interstate instead of a suburb of winding roads that you have to travel to get to the interstate.
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
This test was done on a laptop that was the ONLY device connected to the T1.
Pinging pdx.edu [131.252.115.23] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=237
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=237
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=237
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=237
Ping statistics for 131.252.115.23:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 93ms, Maximum = 95ms, Average = 93ms
The next test was done on our office FIOS (35/35) connection which is actively used.
Pinging pdx.edu [131.252.115.23] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=94ms TTL=239
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=239
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=239
Reply from 131.252.115.23: bytes=32 time=93ms TTL=239
Ping statistics for 131.252.115.23:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 93ms, Maximum = 94ms, Average = 93ms
Last edited:
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
There is no central or one connection point for the internet. Rather traffic is routed from one ISP or backbone to another through peering agreements.
I know that. I said it is the principal connection, not the only connection. Even the Wiki article you linked uses the same verbiage.
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
No it doesn't. The wiki states "The Internet backbone refers to the principal data routes between large, strategically interconnected networks and core routers in the Internet." which has a completely different meaning that your statement of "The backbone is the principal fiber (for the most part) connection for the Internet that serves as the central connection point for all other networks connected to the Internet."
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
Pinging 68.232.182.53 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 68.232.182.53: bytes=32 time=35ms TTL=56
Reply from 68.232.182.53: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=56
Reply from 68.232.182.53: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=56
Reply from 68.232.182.53: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=56
Ping statistics for 68.232.182.53:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 34ms, Maximum = 35ms, Average = 34ms
Tracing route to 68.232.182.53 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms RV082.SME [192.168.1.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms static-216-214-1-105.isp.broadviewnet.net [216.2
14.1.105]
3 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms edge08-phla0.broadviewnet.net [146.145.0.148]
4 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms ge-1-22-sw1-phla0.broadviewnet.net [146.145.78.1
78]
5 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms ge-5-2-core01-phla0.broadviewnet.net [146.145.78
.131]
6 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms static-64-115-213-74.isp.broadviewnet.net [64.11
5.213.74]
7 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms xe-0-0-0-man-core-m120-01.broadviewnet.net [64.1
15.108.157]
8 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms xe-0-0-0-paix-core-m120-02.broadviewnet.net [64.
61.112.182]
9 220 ms 224 ms 238 ms Gi6-32.ar4.NYC1.gblx.net [207.138.92.245]
10 36 ms 36 ms 36 ms 69.31.105.21
11 72 ms 199 ms 204 ms as20473.xe-1-0-5-1615.ar2.ord1.us.nlayer.net [69
.31.111.178]
12 35 ms 35 ms 35 ms 68.232.182.53
Trace complete.
Tawnos
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2001
- Messages
- 3,808
Is this trolling? I can never tell with topics like this.
You're able to ping at about half that I can over the about the same number of hops (I have 13 hops, one more than you). I'm getting 72-76ms. Your latency on the tracert is at 5ms on the 8th hop. By then my Comcast connection is already at 30ms.
Last edited:
Sounds like semantics.
It's probably a safe bet, regardless.
I'm starting to think we are.
@OP - Also you can't compare your tracert to his. He's going from NJ to NY, you're going from OR to NY; who's going to get there quickest?
No, the comparison I gave is me to Chicago and him to Chicago. Bad comparison now that I think about it. A Dallas, TX server would have been better.
SJ, would you mind running a tr to 68.232.161.42? Also, what kind of T1 are you on?
Last edited:
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
A T1 is a T1... 1.54Mbps. Comparing our tracerts isn't going to help you in fixing your latency problem.
Here is the results:
Tracing route to 68.232.161.42 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms RV082.SME [192.168.1.1]
2 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms static-216-214-1-105.isp.broadviewnet.net [216.2
14.1.105]
3 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms edge08-phla0.broadviewnet.net [146.145.0.148]
4 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms ge-1-23-sw1-phla0.broadviewnet.net [146.145.78.1
80]
5 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms ge-5-2-core01-phla0.broadviewnet.net [146.145.78
.131]
6 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms static-64-115-213-74.isp.broadviewnet.net [64.11
5.213.74]
7 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms xe-0-0-0-man-core-m120-01.broadviewnet.net [64.1
15.108.157]
8 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms xe-0-0-0-paix-core-m120-02.broadviewnet.net [64.
61.112.182]
9 5 ms 5 ms 5 ms Gi6-32.ar4.NYC1.gblx.net [207.138.92.245]
10 103 ms 103 ms 104 ms xe-6-0-2.ar1.dfw1.us.nlayer.net [69.31.63.194]
11 100 ms 101 ms 101 ms as20473.vlan-106.ar1.dfw1.us.nlayer.net [69.31.6
3.38]
12 101 ms 102 ms 102 ms 68.232.161.42
Trace complete.
Tawnos
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2001
- Messages
- 3,808
I'm guessing he's on the kind that is composed of 24 bonded DS0 connetions.
The gist of what everyone has been saying is this: unless your lag is coming in that final hop from your ISP to your doorstep, chances are that you're not going to affect the overall ping. Even if it made up 20% of your overall ping, you would have a hard time making a huge impact on your ping - even a 50% reduction would only produce a 10% gain, and it's always diminishing returns to improve that last bit.
Are you on a fractional or full T1? Integrated or no? Burstable?
And Chicago was a more accurate comparison after all.
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
Through just coax, it only takes a signal 20ms to get from one side of America to the other. It's the routing and quality of network that I'm looking to improve as that's where all the extra latency (from overhead) comes from.
I'm curious as to what happened between your 9th and 10th hops from NY to Dallas.
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
The packets left my ISPs network and traveled to another network outside of my ISPs control. ISPs can only control latency from within their own networks.
Not really an answer. 100ms is pretty unacceptable. Hardware problem along the way I'd think but curious where you were having the problem. That's definitely not functioning properly.
SJConsultant
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,599
The "problem" lies beyond my ISPs network and out of their reach. Since the packet loss does not affect me or anything I do, it isn't something I am concerned about or inclined to "troubleshoot".
Questioning the results of your tracert, so it's pertinent. Not that I expect you to do anything.
itsGEE!
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 214
Dude, really?
really what?
itsGEE!
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 214
How could you say that's not really an answer? It's his answer. Take it. Move on.
His answer goes to a different question.
I think the point is that regardless of your connection, you don't have 100% control of your latency. His tracert is pretty exemplary of that.
MacLeod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 8,281
---
Last edited:
Red Squirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 9,211
The nice thing with T1 is you get more than 512k upload and it is considered a reliable medium. It's kinda why landlines are still around. The equipment running it may be 30 years old and using mechanical relays, but it's solid as a rock and never goes down. It's proven.
Most providers, even though they may give you 10mb or more down, the upload is usually crap, and that will hurt when gaming, especially if you are the one hosting.
A T1 is like 1k here, so at that price it's actually a good deal. But unless you are actually experiencing serious issues with regular residential internet, it's probably not worth going T1. What would be nice is if ISPs would offer Ethernet. It's simple, fast, reliable. They could have a standard ethernet switch in pedestals across the neighborhood, run fiber to them, and run actual ethernet to houses.
Most providers, even though they may give you 10mb or more down, the upload is usually crap, and that will hurt when gaming, especially if you are the one hosting.
A T1 is like 1k here, so at that price it's actually a good deal. But unless you are actually experiencing serious issues with regular residential internet, it's probably not worth going T1. What would be nice is if ISPs would offer Ethernet. It's simple, fast, reliable. They could have a standard ethernet switch in pedestals across the neighborhood, run fiber to them, and run actual ethernet to houses.
100% control? No. General control? Yes. For instance, I choose cable internet right now over DSL because the pings are about 20-30% lower on cable than DSL.
I'm glad I didn't get sucked into this thread. Third trollish thread in the past few months that stands out. All have a theme of the forum giving a different opinion of what OP wanted, and OP not wavering one iota on position in the face of no one agreeing with him.
That's because everyone was providing speculation, and the one person who provided me with the information I asked for showed a 50% reduction in latency. Clearly it seems, at least on the preliminary, that people are wrong. Simply put, if I wanted to be BS'd to death, I would have just called the ISP's sales department. I just wanted raw data to work with -- not "most likely" this or "probably" that and especially not "why waste your money." People are just putting in their 2 cents when it wasn't opinion I asked for.
100ms is very bad for gaming.
Who's to say that the DSL doesn't get routed the same as my cable eventually? It probably does considering all traffic connects to a backbone that goes to Seattle and back to Portland when I'm connecting to a local machine, but even then cable provides a consistently and significantly lower latency.
The troll is strong in this one... but I'll bite. I'm a network admin, handling a fully multihomed network. So, I've got access to connections faster, and with lower latency than a T1.
Let's see from my Seattle test location, on a 100Mb port. Datacenter has 2x10Gb uplink. I get 76ms to our datacenter in NJ. Our NJ facility has multiple gigabit fiber connections.
If you want excellent latency, I suggest moving to a mid-west or central US. Then you can get 50ms coast-to-coast no problem. Now, if you want the lowest possible latency from the Portland area, you'll want to be multihomed. I recommend connections to Level3, Verizon Business, ATT, and Savvis. That would get you decent routing to most datacenters throughout the US.
So, you're looking at a $250/mo T1. Most likely it's Megapath, so routing is probably crap. Could be Cogent, so routing will be crap. Possibly XO, their routing can be crap, depends on location. If you up your budget, say $500+ you could get a T1 to say Level3, which would be a decent option, but seriously not worth it.
Let's see from my Seattle test location, on a 100Mb port. Datacenter has 2x10Gb uplink. I get 76ms to our datacenter in NJ. Our NJ facility has multiple gigabit fiber connections.
If you want excellent latency, I suggest moving to a mid-west or central US. Then you can get 50ms coast-to-coast no problem. Now, if you want the lowest possible latency from the Portland area, you'll want to be multihomed. I recommend connections to Level3, Verizon Business, ATT, and Savvis. That would get you decent routing to most datacenters throughout the US.
So, you're looking at a $250/mo T1. Most likely it's Megapath, so routing is probably crap. Could be Cogent, so routing will be crap. Possibly XO, their routing can be crap, depends on location. If you up your budget, say $500+ you could get a T1 to say Level3, which would be a decent option, but seriously not worth it.
Uberbob102000
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,243
Well if you want to get a T1 go right ahead, as people have said before, as soon as it's outside the ISPs network it's out of their control. You are NOT going to significantly reduce your latency that way. When I get back to work on Wednesday from visiting family I can ping from Redmond, WA to whatever city you'd like on T1, FiOS and Comcast and I'll be willing to bet they'll easily be within 10% of each other, which is easily within a margin of error for that test.
You seem to have already made up your mind, even with multiple people telling you otherwise.
As for 100ms being bad for gaming; I've managed to come out top of my server on 70% of the multiplayer games I've played this weekend. On a 4G tethered connection that's unreliable and shitty as hell.
You seem to have already made up your mind, even with multiple people telling you otherwise.
As for 100ms being bad for gaming; I've managed to come out top of my server on 70% of the multiplayer games I've played this weekend. On a 4G tethered connection that's unreliable and shitty as hell.
- Status