Anyone from Verizon/TATA on here? Possible Packet Loss

Blake Dunlap ikiris at gmail.com
Wed Sep 26 17:10:15 UTC 2012


This is not the proper way to interpret traceroute information. Also, 3
pings is not sufficient to determine levels of packet loss statistically.

I suggest searching the archives regarding traceroute, or googling how to
interpret them in regards to packet loss, as what you posted does not
indicate what you think it does.

-Blake

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Derek Ivey <derek at derekivey.com> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> We host a web application for a client and they've been complaining that
> it's been slow since yesterday. It seems fast from the locations I've
> tested and the system looks fine, so I suspected there was packet loss
> going on somewhere between them and our colo facility.
>
> I did a few trace routes from our firewall to the client's IP and most of
> the time they look fine, however I occasionally see some packet loss.
>
> Good trace route:
>
>  1  65.61.0.97 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
>  2  107.1.118.217 0 msec 10 msec 0 msec
>  3  69.139.194.21 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
>  4  68.86.147.129 10 msec 10 msec 20 msec
>  5  68.86.94.169 20 msec 30 msec 20 msec
>  6  68.86.86.26 20 msec 20 msec 10 msec
>  7  216.6.87.97 10 msec 20 msec 20 msec
>  8  216.6.87.34 10 msec 20 msec 10 msec
>  9  152.63.34.22 20 msec 10 msec 20 msec
>  10 130.81.28.255 30 msec 30 msec 20 msec
>
> Traceroutes with packet loss (8th hop):
>
>  1  65.61.0.97 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
>  2  107.1.118.217 0 msec 10 msec 0 msec
>  3  69.139.194.21 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
>  4  68.86.147.129 20 msec 10 msec 10 msec
>  5  68.86.94.169 20 msec 20 msec 30 msec
>  6  68.86.86.26 20 msec 20 msec 10 msec
>  7  216.6.87.97 10 msec 20 msec 30 msec
>  8  216.6.87.34 10 msec *  10 msec
>  9  152.63.34.22 140 msec 110 msec 20 msec
>  10 130.81.28.255 20 msec 30 msec 30 msec
>
>  1  65.61.0.97 10 msec 0 msec 0 msec
>  2  107.1.118.217 0 msec 10 msec 0 msec
>  3  69.139.194.21 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
>  4  68.86.147.129 20 msec 20 msec 10 msec
>  5  68.86.94.169 30 msec 20 msec 20 msec
>  6  68.86.86.26 20 msec 20 msec 20 msec
>  7  216.6.87.97 20 msec 10 msec 20 msec
>  8  216.6.87.34 20 msec 40 msec *
>  9  152.63.34.22 20 msec 10 msec 10 msec
>  10 130.81.28.255 30 msec 30 msec 20 msec
>
> It appears the 8th hop occasionally has packet loss.
>
> Thanks,
> Derek
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list