is something weird going on with cox, level3, and/or cogent
Miles Fidelman
mfidelman at meetinghouse.net
Mon Feb 13 04:27:02 UTC 2017
Now isn't that interesting.
1. Verizon mobile seems to also route through level3 and cogent.
2. But.. the performance seems to be a lot better.
3. That's really odd.
1 192.168.43.1 (192.168.43.1) 2.063 ms 2.382 ms 1.913 ms
2 7.sub-66-174-33.myvzw.com (66.174.33.7) 50.676 ms 36.720 ms 41.142 ms
3 164.sub-69-83-172.myvzw.com (69.83.172.164) 39.831 ms 40.240 ms
40.190 ms
4 178.sub-69-83-173.myvzw.com (69.83.173.178) 39.851 ms 48.650 ms
30.921 ms
5 194.sub-69-83-173.myvzw.com (69.83.173.194) 49.134 ms 31.131 ms
39.946 ms
6 8.sub-69-83-162.myvzw.com (69.83.162.8) 42.841 ms 39.532 ms 40.024 ms
7 73.sub-66-174-29.myvzw.com (66.174.29.73) 44.074 ms 31.248 ms
42.199 ms
8 5-1-1.bear1.phoenix1.level3.net (4.16.142.89) 38.474 ms 39.555 ms
57.860 ms
9 ae-2-70.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.80) 86.101 ms 78.856 ms
ae-3-80.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.144) 70.001 ms
10 ae-4-90.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.208) 48.840 ms
ae-2-70.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.80) 71.847 ms
ae-3-80.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.144) 81.841 ms
11 be3036.ccr41.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.14.129) 70.538 ms
39.175 ms 45.213 ms
12 be2964.ccr21.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.44.77) 89.463 ms
78.656 ms 72.936 ms
13 be2932.ccr22.phx02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.45.161) 106.896 ms
82.389 ms 87.310 ms
14 be2929.ccr21.elp01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.66) 72.782 ms
76.034 ms 114.967 ms
15 be2928.ccr22.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.161) 87.883 ms
100.641 ms
be2927.ccr41.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.29.221) 117.904 ms
16 be2687.ccr41.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.69) 144.881 ms
be2690.ccr42.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.129) 135.465 ms
110.129 ms
17 be2112.ccr41.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.157) 93.713 ms
be2113.ccr42.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.24.221) 128.171 ms
be2112.ccr41.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.157) 109.207 ms
18 be2806.ccr41.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.105) 136.620 ms
be2807.ccr42.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.109) 113.346 ms
be2806.ccr41.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.105) 118.301 ms
19 be2096.ccr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.42) 148.778 ms
166.763 ms
be2094.ccr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.14) 153.433 ms
20 te0-4-1-7.agr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.47.254) 143.449 ms
te0-4-1-6.agr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.47.230) 242.964 ms
te0-4-1-6.agr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.80.10) 198.678 ms
21 te0-0-2-1.nr11.b000254-0.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.24.9.78)
139.454 ms
te0-0-2-0.nr11.b000254-0.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.24.9.82)
132.726 ms 107.254 ms
22 38.122.127.18 (38.122.127.18) 157.142 ms 158.882 ms 152.458 ms
23 207.154.0.57 (207.154.0.57) 144.913 ms 112.629 ms 112.519 ms
24 server1.ntcorp.com (207.154.13.58) 116.986 ms 120.276 ms 128.333 ms
Miles
On 2/12/17 8:57 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> Miles,
>
> Have you tried trace routing through cellular data connections? The results you're seeing could be explained by congestion at the point of your modem, which I think is with the cox techs are implying.
>
> -mel via cell
>
>> On Feb 12, 2017, at 7:46 PM, Mel Beckman <mel at beckman.org> wrote:
>>
>> It looks like one or more circuits are down, so you're seeing asymmetrical routing over congested paths in one direction.
>>
>> -mel via cell
>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2017, at 7:14 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> I'm visiting AZ, and seeing some really really poor performance accessing some of our servers via Cox broadband. The folks at Cox technical support are useless - all they say is "well you're on a DOCSIS 2 modem." Meanwhile, everything I'm seeing is several hops upstream of the local segment - and all that Cox level2 tech support will say is "if there was a backbone problem, our backbone people would have dealt with it."
>>>
>>> I'm having problems reaching both our own server, and sites like google, facebook, windows update.
>>>
>>> Traceroutes to and from our server are illustrative - note that for most of the past week, the average ping time was 85msec. Now we're seeing this:
>>>
>>> From 98.177.135.186 - the public IP address on Cox's local broadband service.
>>> To 107.154.13.58 (ntcorp.server - one of our servers, sitting in a Tierpoint data center, near Boston)
>>> traceroute to ntcorp.com (207.154.13.58), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
>>> 1 10.128.128.1 (10.128.128.1) 199.893 ms 75.319 ms 27.295 ms
>>> 2 100.127.69.178 (100.127.69.178) 38.710 ms 40.075 ms 43.598 ms
>>> 3 72.215.229.22 (72.215.229.22) 39.674 ms 201.368 ms *
>>> 4 lag-157.bear2.phoenix1.level3.net (4.28.82.53) 686.499 ms 1837.141 ms 16.273 ms
>>> 5 ae-1-60.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.16) 35.498 ms 964.377 ms *
>>> 6 ae-3-80.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.144) 551.760 ms 525.014 ms
>>> ae-1-60.edge1.losangeles6.level3.net (4.69.144.16) 2061.191 ms
>>> 7 be3036.ccr41.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.14.129) 847.778 ms 87.601 ms 71.504 ms
>>> 8 be2965.ccr22.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.45.1) 79.060 ms 225.647 ms
>>> be2964.ccr21.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.44.77) 60.306 ms
>>> 9 * be2931.ccr21.phx02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.44.85) 2264.071 ms 185.180 ms
>>> 10 be2929.ccr21.elp01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.66) 61.208 ms
>>> be2930.ccr21.elp01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.78) 386.149 ms 1278.868 ms
>>> 11 be2928.ccr22.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.161) 384.136 ms
>>> be2927.ccr41.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.29.221) 2339.833 ms 615.415 ms
>>> 12 be2690.ccr42.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.129) 233.061 ms
>>> be2687.ccr41.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.69) 87.902 ms
>>> be2690.ccr42.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.129) 861.159 ms
>>> 13 be2113.ccr42.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.24.221) 998.858 ms
>>> be2112.ccr41.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.157) 249.930 ms *
>>> 14 be2807.ccr42.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.109) 768.461 ms
>>> be2806.ccr41.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.105) 136.772 ms
>>> be2807.ccr42.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.109) 288.225 ms
>>> 15 be2094.ccr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.14) 271.736 ms 166.224 ms
>>> be2096.ccr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.42) 565.015 ms
>>> 16 te0-4-1-7.agr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.80.34) 1944.479 ms
>>> te0-4-1-6.agr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.80.10) 149.803 ms
>>> te0-4-1-6.agr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.47.230) 897.115 ms
>>> 17 te0-0-2-0.nr11.b000254-0.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.24.9.82) 107.207 ms
>>> te0-0-2-1.nr11.b000254-0.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.24.9.78) 295.881 ms 185.453 ms
>>> 18 38.122.127.18 (38.122.127.18) 115.652 ms 461.168 ms 615.526 ms
>>> 19 207.154.0.57 (207.154.0.57) 1871.023 ms 1987.832 ms 2165.248 ms
>>> 20 server1.ntcorp.com (207.154.13.58) 587.560 ms 263.328 ms 333.542 ms
>>>
>>>
>>> Traceroute in the reverse direction:
>>> 1 207.154.13.47 (207.154.13.47) 0.000 ms 0.000 ms 0.000 ms
>>> 2 * * *
>>> 3 h130.207.190.173.static.ip.windstream.net (173.190.207.130) 0.000 ms 0.000 ms 0.000 ms
>>> 4 xe1-2-0-0.cr01.cley01-oh.us.windstream.net (40.128.250.166) 12.000 ms 12.000 ms 12.000 ms
>>> 5 et11-0-0-0.cr01.chcg01-il.us.windstream.net (40.128.248.71) 20.000 ms 20.000 ms 20.000 ms
>>> 6 10gigabitethernet4-1.core1.chi1.he.NET (206.223.119.37) 72.001 ms 20.000 ms 16.000 ms
>>> 7 chgobbrj01pos010100.r2.ch.cox.net (68.105.30.193) 20.000 ms 20.000 ms 20.000 ms
>>> 8 chnddsrj01-ae1.0.rd.ph.cox.net (68.1.5.211) 72.001 ms 72.001 ms 72.001 ms
>>> 9 * * *
>>> 10 * * *
>>> 11 * * *
>>> <snip>
>>> 30 * * *
>>> <looks like a lot of the later hops don't respond to pings>
>>>
>>> Two things jump out at me:
>>> 1. The rather large number of hops from cox to ntcorp - with high delays from several nodes in both the level3 and cogent networks.
>>> 2. That there's a rather more direct path from the datacenter to cox, that shows up in the reverse direction.
>>>
>>> Some kind of routing or peering issue, perhaps? (And I also note the earlier string of messages regarding youtube streaming problems - that also seemed to involve cox and level3.
>>>
>>> Thanks for any insight (and better, for any fixes!).
>>>
>>> Miles Fidelman
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>>> In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
>>>
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
More information about the NANOG
mailing list