Re: Anyone noticing general performance degradation lately
From: LEE Tet Yoon <leety_at_ihug.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:07:36 +1200 Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050410194827.0cb228f8@pop.ihug.co.nz>
At 12:12 p.m. 10/04/2005, you wrote:
I'm not sure but it's possible SJ = San Jose in which case this is a pretty good ping. Please bear in mind that anything going to the US is always going to have at least 100-150 ms on top of any 'domestic' latency. This is a physical limitation* and there is no real way around it. If my assumption is correct and SJ is indeed San Jose the above traceroute doesn't real show much of a problem. However if you're getting significant latency later on, this would suggest a problem with the US side of things which Telecom may not have that much control over.
BTW, if the above was to a domestic destination then you can probably blame depeering and TelstraClear in particular but also Telecom I believe for this stupidity.
*I worked it out before but can't remember now but I believe it's something around the realms of 50-75 ms even if you had a direct link travelling at the speed of light in vacuum over the surface to California. Of course, the true link is not completely direct and goes through a few hubs if I'm not mistaken all of which adds latency. Also, although I'm not an expert on fibre optics, from what I do know I believe the distance travelled per metre of 'cable' is usually going to be greater then a metre and I'm guessing all the amplification steps necessary along the route are not latency free.
-- This message is part of the NZ ADSL mailing list. see http://unixathome.org/adsl/ for archives, FAQ, and various documents. To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@lists.unixathome.org with "unsubscribe adsl" in the body of the messageReceived on Sun Apr 10 20:07:47 2005 |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Nov 30 11:48:34 2006 EST