Instability and high latency.

Can't connect to any games in Battlefield 3 - when I do, disconnected after a few seconds.
Star Wars: The Old Republic - Ridiculous latency, it just keeps climbing and doesn't stop! Logged in and it was 49m/s then skyrocketed to 270000 m/s - yeah two hundred and seventy thousand!
Only thing I can think it is is the ISP - at my flat in Portsmouth I'm on Virgin Media ( yes I know...) and I'm on a wired connection, everything was fine, bring my stuff back for Christmas, same computer and using my wireless (802.11g) and I get all of this.
Tried changing some settings on the Homehub 3 such as Port Forwarding, Firewall disabled and upnp turned off, no luck.
I would post a Tracert but I have no clue how to do it for games.
Thanks!

Hi willtron, Welcome to the Forums.
Unfortunately as you are not a BT Retail customer (You state you are with Virgin Media), there is only a certain amount we can do for you here.
Can I ask you that when you get the lag spikes, please can you perform a tracert to bbc.co.uk so we can see if any congestion is occuring?
You can do this by opening up Command Prompt, typing in tracert bbc.co.uk and hitting enter, and copying the results into a post.
A tracert isn't different for games than normal web browsing - the only thing which can affect game lag over normal downloads, which usually run over port 80 is if an ISP is throttling certain ports.
I hope this helps
Like this post? Give it a Star . If this post answers your question, please Mark it as the Accepted Solution.

Similar Messages

Extremely slow and high latency all day.

DSL is running extremely slow during peak hours from 12 afternoon to 12 midnight. Lower than 50% of rated speed and high latency
I have been frustrated with this DSL Service for months now. I am considering contacting BBB to file a complaint and I am tired of dealing with customer service giving me the run around. Internet is a monopoly in my area therefore verizon feels it doesn't have to do anything to keep its customers when they provide crappy service. I am on waitlist for another internet service provider and it is going to take almost a year because of how bad the internet options are in the area and demand for better options. I even had to pay over 100 dollars to get a truck roll come to my house to fix any issues within the house and the internet has not gotten better. Atleast I feel I should get a refund or something.
Here is my speedtest result just now. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/2899553407
It has been even slower at other times. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/2893509440
Modem is Westell 6100 or something.
Transceiver Statistics
Transceiver Revision:
7.2.3.0
Vendor ID Code:
4
Line Mode:
G.DMT Mode
Data Path:
Interleaved
Transceiver Information
Downstream Path
Upstream Path
DSL Speed (Kbits/Sec)
3360
864
Margin (dB)
15.5
13.0
Line Attenuation (dB)
21.5
13.0
Transmit Power (dBm)
7.6
11.9
Giganews line info
news.giganews.com
traceroute to {edited for privacy}, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 gw1-g-vlan201.dca.giganews.com (216.196.98.4) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
2 ash-bb1-link.telia.net (213.248.70.241) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
3 TenGigE0-2-0-0.GW1.IAD8.ALTER.NET (63.125.125.41) 3 ms GigabitEthernet2-0-0.GW8.IAD8.ALTER.NET (63.65.76.189) 3 ms TenGigE0-2-0-0.GW1.IAD8.ALTER.NET (63.125.125.41) 3 ms
4 P1-8-0-0.LSANCA-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (130.81.151.237) 72 ms 72 ms 72 ms
5 P9-3.LSANCA-LCR-01.verizon-gni.net (130.81.193.123) 75 ms P8-0.LSANCA-DSL-44.verizon-gni.net (130.81.35.133) 75 ms 76 ms
6 * * *
7 * * *
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * Max number of unresponsive hops reached (firewall or filter?)
news-europe.giganews.com
traceroute to {edited for privacy}, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 vl201.gw1.ams.giganews.com (216.196.110.3) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
2 te7-8.ccr01.ams05.atlas.cogentco.com (149.11.104.17) 0 ms te7-7.ccr01.ams05.atlas.cogentco.com (149.11.104.9) 0 ms te7-8.ccr01.ams05.atlas.cogentco.com (149.11.104.17) 0 ms
3 te0-7-0-16.ccr21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.72.42) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
4 te0-3-0-0.ccr21.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.48.141) 8 ms 8 ms te0-2-0-0.ccr21.lon13.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.158) 8 ms
5 te0-7-0-4.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.84.125) 90 ms te0-0-0-4.ccr21.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.84.129) 90 ms *
6 te0-3-0-6.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.41.5) 96 ms te0-0-0-2.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.25.238) 96 ms te0-2-0-7.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.41.1) 96 ms
7 be2042.ccr21.iad02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.126) 97 ms 97 ms 97 ms
8 uunet.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.13.138) 99 ms verizon.iad01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.226) 105 ms 105 ms
9 P0-8-0-0.LSANCA-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net (130.81.29.127) 177 ms 178 ms P1-0-0-0.LSANCA-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net (130.81.199.39) 174 ms
10 P8-0.LSANCA-DSL-44.verizon-gni.net (130.81.35.133) 175 ms P9-3.LSANCA-LCR-02.verizon-gni.net (130.81.193.109) 187 ms 182 ms
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * Max number of unresponsive hops reached (firewall or filter?)
Here is what ICSI Netalyzer Results have stated.
Network Access Link Properties + –
Network performance (?): Latency: 580 ms, Loss: 15.5% –
The round-trip time (RTT) between your computer and our server is 580 ms, which is somewhat high. This may be due to a variety of factors, including distance between your computer and our server, a slow network link, or other network traffic.
We recorded a packet loss of 16%. This loss is very significant and will lead to serious performance problems. It could be due either to very high load on our servers due to a large number of visitors, or problems in your network. Of the packet loss, at least 14.0% of the packets appear to have been lost on the path from your computer to our servers.
TCP connection setup latency (?): 720ms –
The time it takes for your computer to set up a TCP connection with our server is 720 ms, which is quite high. This may be due to a variety of factors, including a significant distance between your computer and our server, a particularly slow or poor network link, or problems in your network.
Background measurement of network health (?): 3 transient outages, longest: 0.8 seconds –
During most of Netalyzr's execution, the client continuously measures the state of the network in the background, looking for short outages. During testing, the client observed 3 such outages. The longest outage lasted for 0.8 seconds. This suggests a general problem with the network where connectivity is intermittent. This loss might also cause some of Netalyzr's other tests to produce incorrect results.
Network bandwidth (?): Upload 700 Kbit/s, Download 2.3 Mbit/s +
Network buffer measurements (?): Uplink 5400 ms, Downlink 1200 ms –
We estimate your uplink as having 5400 ms of buffering. This is quite high, and you may experience substantial disruption to your network performance when performing interactive tasks such as web-surfing while simultaneously conducting large uploads. With such a buffer, real-time applications such as games or audio chat can work quite poorly when conducting large uploads at the same time.
We estimate your downlink as having 1200 ms of buffering. This is quite high, and you may experience substantial disruption to your network performance when performing interactive tasks such as web-surfing while simultaneously conducting large downloads. With such a buffer, real-time applications such as games or audio chat can work quite poorly when conducting large downloads at the same time.
HTTP Tests + –
Address-based HTTP proxy detection (?): OK +
Content-based HTTP proxy detection (?): OK +
HTTP proxy detection via malformed requests (?): OK +
Filetype-based filtering (?): OK +
HTTP caching behavior (?): OK +
JavaScript-based tests (?): OK +
DNS Tests + –
Restricted domain DNS lookup (?): OK +
Unrestricted domain DNS lookup (?): OK +
DNS resolver address (?): OK +
DNS resolver properties (?): Lookup latency 520 ms +
Direct probing of DNS resolvers (?): +
DNS glue policy (?): OK +
DNS resolver port randomization (?): OK +
DNS lookups of popular domains (?): OK +
DNS external proxy (?): OK +
DNS results wildcarding (?): Warning –
Your ISP's DNS server returns IP addresses even for domain names which should not resolve. Instead of an error, the DNS server returns an address of 199.101.28.20, which resolves to search.dnsassist.verizon.net. You can inspect the resulting HTML content here.
There are several possible explanations for this behavior. The most likely cause is that the ISP is attempting to profit from customer's typos by presenting advertisements in response to bad requests, but it could also be due to an error or misconfiguration in the DNS server.
The big problem with this behavior is that it can potentially break any network application which relies on DNS properly returning an error when a name does not exist.
The following lists your DNS server's behavior in more detail.
Please help. I am so frustrated I literally have fights with my family over internet problems. I am right now looking for other options and even starting to think about paying over 100 a month for dedicated line or T1 if they can service my area.

Not a single response from Verizon on this? And after you posted the tests & information they will need? I think I may have to make a service choice soon. Its bad enough Verizon can't post a simple email address for our support, they have removed Usenet access, removed access to our websites (I use HTML so their sitebuilder is useless)... Sheeshe...

Lots of lag in games and high latency

Ive still got a problem with my line and its got worse,
online games are unplayable and with bt sport app launching aug 1st i havent much hope for streaming the football
ADSL Line Status
Connection Information
Line state:
Connectedppp0_0
Connection time:
0 days, 03:06:23
Downstream:
7.555 Mbps
Upstream:
960 Kbps
ADSL Settings
VPI/VCI:
0/38
Type:
PPPoA
Modulation:
G.992.5 Annex A
Latency type:
Fast
Noise margin (Down/Up):
6.0 dB / 6.0 dB
Line attenuation (Down/Up):
41.2 dB / 24.1 dB
Output power (Down/Up):
20.3 dBm / 12.8 dBm
FEC Events (Down/Up):
0 / 17
CRC Events (Down/Up):
252 / 7573
Loss of Framing (Local/Remote):
0 / 0
Loss of Signal (Local/Remote):
0 / 0
Loss of Power (Local/Remote):
0 / 0
HEC Events (Down/Up):
932 / 40820
Error Seconds (Local/Remote):
182 / 2031

even with a slightly higher noise margin than previous posts your crc/hec errors and error seconds are high for such a short time conencted. if you hadn't tried interleaving then that would have been the obvious but it didn't help last time
If you like a post, or want to say thanks for a helpful answer, please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side of the post.
If someone answers your question correctly please let other members know by clicking on ’Mark as Accepted Solution’.

Super Slow speeds and extremely high latency

This is my last attempt with Verizon high speed DSL (the only service they offer here). I have been dealing with them for months about my slow connection speeds and high latency. Finally, after a new modem, supposed line monitoring and a two tech visits the last tech found noise in the line and fixed some of my issue. Now my speed and pings are good EXCEPT during peak hours (M-F 12 pm -1 pm, 3 pm - 7 pm and Friday and Saturday 7-11 pm). During these times m Internet becomes completely unusable with download speeds of 0.25 MBps and pings over 400 ms and today I had a pint of 1713 ms!!! Clearly there is an issue here.

Hi schichler,
Your issue has been escalated to a Verizon agent. Before the agent can begin assisting you, they will need to collect further information from you. Please go to your profile page for the forum and look at the top of the middle column where you will find an area titled "My Support Cases". You can reach your profile page by clicking on your name beside your post, or at the top left of this page underneath the title of the board.
Under "My Support Cases" you will find a link to the private board where you and the agent may exchange information. The title of your post is the link. This should be checked on a frequent basis, as the agent may be waiting for information from you before they can proceed with any actions. To ensure you know when they have responded to you, at the top of your support case there is a drop down menu for support case options. Open that and choose "subscribe". Please keep all correspondence regarding your issue in the private support portal.

Why does my 10GB iSCSI setup seem see such high latency and how can I fix it?

I have a iscsi server setup with the following configuration
Dell R510
Perc H700 Raid controller
Windows Server 2012 R2
Intel Ethernet X520 10Gb
12 near line SAS drives
I have tried both Starwind and the built in Server 2012 iscsi software but see similar results. I am currently running the latest version of starwinds free
iscsi server.
I have connected it to a HP 8212 10Gb port which is also connected via 10Gb to our vmware servers. I have a dedicated vlan just for iscsi and have enabled
jumbo frames on the vlan.
I frequently see very high latency on my iscsi storage. So much so that it can timeout or hang vmware. I am not sure why. I can run IOmeter and
get some pretty decent results.
I am trying to determine why I see such high latency 100'ms. It doesn't seem to always happen, but several times throughout the day, vmware is complaining
about the latency of the datastore. I have a 10Gb iscsi connection between the servers. I wouldn't expect the disks to be able to max that out. The highest I could see when running IO meter was around 5Gb. I also don't see much load
at all on the iscsi server when I see the high latency. It seems network related, but I am not sure what settings I could check. The 10Gb connect should be plenty as I said and it is no where near maxing that out.
Any thoughts about any configuration changes I could make to my vmware enviroment, network card settings or any ideas on where I can troubleshoot this. I
am not able to find what is causing it. I reference this document and for changes to my iscsi settings
http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/extras/m/white_papers/20403565.aspx
Thank you for your time.

I have a iscsi server setup with the following configuration
Dell R510
Perc H700 Raid controller
Windows Server 2012 R2
Intel Ethernet X520 10Gb
12 near line SAS drives
I have tried both Starwind and the built in Server 2012 iscsi software but see similar results. I am currently running the latest version of starwinds free
iscsi server.
I have connected it to a HP 8212 10Gb port which is also connected via 10Gb to our vmware servers. I have a dedicated vlan just for iscsi and have enabled
jumbo frames on the vlan.
I frequently see very high latency on my iscsi storage. So much so that it can timeout or hang vmware. I am not sure why. I can run IOmeter and
get some pretty decent results.
I am trying to determine why I see such high latency 100'ms. It doesn't seem to always happen, but several times throughout the day, vmware is complaining
about the latency of the datastore. I have a 10Gb iscsi connection between the servers. I wouldn't expect the disks to be able to max that out. The highest I could see when running IO meter was around 5Gb. I also don't see much load
at all on the iscsi server when I see the high latency. It seems network related, but I am not sure what settings I could check. The 10Gb connect should be plenty as I said and it is no where near maxing that out.
Any thoughts about any configuration changes I could make to my vmware enviroment, network card settings or any ideas on where I can troubleshoot this. I
am not able to find what is causing it. I reference this document and for changes to my iscsi settings
http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/extras/m/white_papers/20403565.aspx
Thank you for your time.
If both StarWind and MSFT target show the same numbers I can guess it's network configuration issue. Anything higher then 30 ms is a nightmare :( Did you properly tune your network stacks? What numbers (x-put and latency) you get for raw TCP numbers (NTtcp
and Iperf are handy to show)?
StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

Windows 7 and Networks with High Latency

We are currently trying to rollout Windows 7 on our network to replace XP but have encountered an issue whereby we have remote clients that access the network over high-latency satallite links (BGAN and Vocality/Satellite). The latency of the links (based
on ping results) can be 600ms for Vocality and 1-3s for BGANs.
The particular services that don't work are a full motion video solution using TVI Viewer 7.9.1 and Outlook 2003 or 2007. These work fine on Windows XP. Shares can be accessed but are significantly slower than XP and ping does respond fine.
Windows 7 is running on Panasonic Toughbook CF52 and CF74 and I've tested in with a vanilla install with no updates and not on the Domain (2008R2 native) to eliminate GPO interference and tried it with all MS updates as of about 2 months ago.
I've tried removing the extra services on the network card (Topology Discovery, ipv6 and QoS), updated to the latest NIC drivers from Panasonic and drivers from Intel themselves. Reduced the MTU to as low as 500 and increased the Frame size (I forget what
to but was following a guide for slow links).
I've successfully replicated the issue on out development system using a satallite simulator.
Windows 7 with Outlook and TVI work fine on our network when connected via the LAN, ADSL, 3G and WiFi.
I'm currently analysing Wireshark captures but they don't seem any different to the XP ones.
Any help would be much appreciated.

Hi,
I noticed that your issue just happened when you use satellite transmission connection.
The fact is that this kind of connection in Windows 7 use TCP protocol. Transmission Control Protocol ( TCP ) under ideal conditions can provide reliable data delivery, but it is inherent in the existence of a throughput bottleneck, with the emergence on
the long-distance WAN packet loss and latency increases, the bottleneck is becoming more prominent and serious. In satellite networks with high loss, effective throughput may be as low as 0.1% - 10% of available bandwidth.
However, FASP can be the solution.
FASP
http://asperasoft.com/technology/transport/fasp/#overview-464
This response contains a reference to a third party World Wide Web site. Microsoft is providing this information as a convenience to you. Microsoft does not control these sites and has not tested any software or information found on these sites; therefore,
Microsoft cannot make any representations regarding the quality, safety, or suitability of any software or information found there. There are inherent dangers in the use of any software found on the Internet, and Microsoft cautions you to make sure that you
completely understand the risk before retrieving any software from the Internet.
Thanks for your understanding.

High latency causing problems... and frustration w...

I have a femtocell that requires the latency on any single hop on the internet to be less than 240ms, any longer than this and it drops my phone call. On contacting the supplier of the femtocell, they asked me to use Traceroute to see how long the path to a server was (I used Google.com) and many of the hops were over 240ms, some as long as 4922ms.
On scanning this forum, there are other users out there (mostly gamers) who are suffering from latency problems. Has anyone had any success resolving the problem? I can send copies of the Traceroute outputs that clearly show high latency between routers with addresses such as interconnect2-gig1-0.manchester.fixed.bt.net, core2-pos0-6-1-0.ealing.ukcore.bt.net and core4te-0-7-0-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net, to anyone that may be able to help.
The best I've so far had from BT is that:
- It's a problem with the femtocell supplier: no, the supplier requested from ISPs their longest expected latency prior to releasing the femtocell and set the timeout to be equal to this
- It's a problem with my Mac mail: the fact that I use a Mac has absolutely nothing to do with network latency
- There's interference between my mobile phone and my wireless: this isn't the case (I'm a wireless communications engineer by background) and, if it was, almost no-one would be able to use mobile phones given the number of wireless access points in homes and offices.
Every time I get a call from the call centre it's someone different, who doesn't understand the problem, doesn't know what a femtocell is and hasn't read the notes which clearly state that I want to be called on my mobile, not on my home phone. It's looking like my best option may be to try to find another ISP who doesn't have this problem.

I think you have the result of what is maybe a 2 fold issue.
Femtocell technology is still a relatively new technology as you;ll know from your job.
If you think about the security issues of running a femtocell, that;s to say what it actually has to fulfil,
Security for femtocell networks spans several distinct requirements. The service provider must authenticate users as they arrive on the network. The RF link between the handset and the femtocell must be secured for both user and control plane traffic. And lastly, the mobile network traffic must be placed into a virtual private network as it traverses the wired ISP network to ensure that the traffic is protected while transiting this public network and only authorized users can forward traffic to the mobile operator's network.
There is however one very important element of femtocell security which makes the implementation significantly more complex. This relates to latency as you say, which must be carefully managed especially for applications such as VoIP/SIP. Compounding this challenge is the unknown nature of the latency across the ISP network, which has resulted in service providers requiring latency in the femtocell to be minimized, as you say.
If you add to that the fact that the BT broadband system is based on an algorithm packet handled system to ensure data quality across maybe noisy telephone lines, it all compounds to add to the problems of the running of the femtocell.
In other words if you have a highly error corrected and interleaved broadband line, it's not going to help the femtocell out by adding additional latency to what is already a fairly complicated situation where data handling is concerned....

Alert: Logical disk transfer (reads and writes) latency is too high Resolution state

Hi
We are getting following errors for my 2 virtual servers. We are getting this alert continuously. My setup Windows 2008 R2 SP1 2 node Hyper V cluster. Which is hosted 7 guest OS out of am facing this problem with to guest os. Once this alert started
my backup running slow.
Alert: Logical disk transfer (reads and writes) latency is too high
Source: E:
Path: Servername.domain.com
Last modified by: System
Last modified time: 4/23/2013 4:15:47 PM Alert description: The threshold for the Logical Disk\Avg. Disk sec/Transfer performance counter has been exceeded.
Alert view link: "http://server/OperationsManager?DisplayMode=Pivot&AlertID=%7bca891ba3-e9f2-421f-9994-7b4d6e867b33%7d"
Notification subscription ID generating this message: {F71E01AF-0BE6-8377-7BE5-5CB6F5C037A1}
Reagrds
Mahesh

Hi,
Please see if following helps
Disk transfer (reads and writes) latency is too high
The
threshold for the Logical Disk\Avg. Disk sec/Transfer performance counter has been exceeded
If they are of no help, try asking this question in Operations Manager - General forum since alerts are generated by SCOM.
Regards, Santosh
I do not represent the organisation I work for, all the opinions expressed here are my own.
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties or guarantees and confers no rights.

High latency and some PL, culprit seems to be a router within comcast

Hi: I reported this issue to Comcast support but I think I'll post it here too. I'm seeing high latency routing through the Comcast network to a variety of locations. In all endpoints I try, I see high latency except when I hit Comcast endpoints (which makes sense). Here's some output for you: WinMTR outputTraceroute output Note that in all cases, there is a significant slowdown somewhere between hop 9 and 11, always at a comcast router. This issue has been going on for a few hours. Anyone else seeing it?

Hi: (Not sure of the correct forum for this type of request so I'm reposting here after first posting over here) I posted a couple days ago with some issues that seem to have returned. Seeing high latency and occasional PL trying to get from my home to a variety of well-known endpoints. WinMTR output. Anyone else seeing the same? Comcast? This is starting to become a thing. Really annoying for those of us who rely on low latency connectivity when working from home!

High Latency and Patket drop towards Access Switches.

Hi,
My network Infrastructure consists of 2 core switches(cisco 3950, 24 port) and 3 access switches (cisco 2960G, 48port). No distribution layer.Both Core switches are connected to the BVI of a VPN router.PVST is running in all switches. The STP results are all good. We have 3 VLAN's in the LAN an IP routing is enables in the core switch. The network diagram is attached.
The issue we are facing is that , we get intermittent packet drops while pinging towords the access switches, and there is always a higher latency towords these assess switches.These issues are present even with no other users using the LAN. But these issues are not present while pinging towards the GW.
I guess, it is because of this, we have issues the accessing file server in the LAN. How do we go ahead with the troubleshooting. Will upgrading the IOS help resolve this.The present version details is..
WS-C2960G-48TC-L 12.2(44)SE6 C2960-LANBASEK9-M
Thanks in advance for the help.

Hi,
Do you still have this problem of is it solved?
i have the same kind of issue, so any help or information is welcome!
Tom

High latency and poor speed tests lately

For the past 4-5 days, I've been working with various Verizon techs to resolve a high latency/slow Internet problem. Their ultimate solution was that they have no idea why it's doing this, and since I can reach a few websites at full speed and their line tests show I'm operating at full provisioning, it's not their problem. "We can't control traffic outside of our networks." Well, my results are also showing problems with the Verizon servers, so I would think they should be more concerned. Most websites, however, exhibit the problem. So I'm stuck, looking for a better answer than "go away." Maybe some of you are experiencing a similar problem with latency or sporadic speeds?
My provisioning is 20M/5M. I'm in the L.A. area. (In the traceroutes below, I masked Hop 2 for privacy.)
I've experienced this problem with 2 computers (1 desktop, 1 laptop), both using Ethernet ports; one test using wireless on the laptop. I've plugged the router directly into the ONT coax to eliminate my house wiring as the culprit. Westell 9100EM router.
A few websites seem okay, and speedtest.net results always show provisioning at full speed to the L.A. server, but the problem persists when using the non-L.A. server. With speakeasy.net, even the L.A. server exhibits the problem. The latency gets worse as the night goes on, sometimes over 1000ms for some traceroute hops. In the morning, it seems to be back to normal.
Thanks for any help....
Jeff
Some examples...
In the past 2 mornings, I've had good results:
Speed Test (speakeasy.net, Los Angeles): ~ 19798K/4581K
Speed Test (speedtest.net, Los Angeles): always shows full provisioning ~19.74M, 4.56M, 19ms ping
Speed Test (speedtest.net, Dallas): ~ 19.81M/4.37M, 49ms ping
Tracing route to www.l.google.com [74.125.19.104]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms myrouter.home [192.168.1.1]
2     8 ms     7 ms     7 ms xxxx.xxxxx-xxxxx-xxxxx.verizon-gni.net [173.55.xxx.xxx]
3     8 ms    10 ms     9 ms G4-0-6-1142.LSANCA-LCR-11.verizon-gni.net [130.81.140.122]
4    11 ms    53 ms    11 ms so-4-3-0-0.LAX01-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.29.244]
5    13 ms    12 ms    12 ms 0.so-1-2-0.XL3.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.133]
6    12 ms    11 ms    13 ms 0.ge-7-0-0.BR2.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.116.157]
7     9 ms    12 ms    42 ms xe-11-0-0.edge1.SanJose3.level3.net [4.68.111.249]
8    14 ms    12 ms    17 ms ae-63-60.ebr3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.144.52]
9    21 ms    34 ms    35 ms ae-2.ebr3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.132.9]
10    26 ms    19 ms    19 ms ae-83-83.csw3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.134.234]
11    21 ms    22 ms    22 ms ae-3-89.edge1.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.142]
12    23 ms    22 ms    23 ms GOOGLE-INC.edge1.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.79.43.146]
13    29 ms    34 ms    22 ms 209.85.251.98
14    20 ms    23 ms    19 ms nuq04s01-in-f104.1e100.net [74.125.19.104]
In the past 4-5 evenings, I've had poor results:
Speed Test (speakeasy.net, Los Angeles): ~ 2441K/194K
Speed Test (speedtest.net, Los Angeles): always shows full provisioning ~19.74M, 4.56M, 19ms ping
Speed Test (speedtest.net, Dallas): ~ 8.28M/1.22M, 49ms ping
Tracing route to www.l.google.com [74.125.19.105]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms myrouter.home [192.168.1.1]
2     7 ms     7 ms     7 ms xxxx.xxxxx-xxxxx-xxx.verizon-gni.net [173.55.xxx.xxx]
3   531 ms   502 ms   514 ms G4-0-6-1242.LSANCA-LCR-12.verizon-gni.net [130.81.140.162]
4   519 ms   506 ms   530 ms so-4-3-0-0.LAX01-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.29.246]
5   563 ms   564 ms   553 ms 0.so-1-2-0.XL4.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.125]
6   577 ms   544 ms   524 ms 0.ge-6-1-0.BR2.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.116.153]
7   477 ms   469 ms   459 ms xe-10-1-0.edge1.LosAngeles9.Level3.net [4.68.63.129]
8    11 ms    17 ms    19 ms ae-93-90.ebr3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.144.244]
9   515 ms   559 ms   536 ms ae-2.ebr3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.132.9]
10    20 ms    19 ms    19 ms ae-83-83.csw3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.134.234]
11   524 ms   499 ms   544 ms ae-3-89.edge1.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.142]
12   490 ms   479 ms   464 ms GOOGLE-INC.edge1.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.79.43.146]
13    24 ms    22 ms    32 ms 209.85.251.98
14    23 ms    22 ms   489 ms nuq04s01-in-f105.1e100.net [74.125.19.105]
Solved!
Go to Solution.

MisterJefferson, your problem looks to be with hop #3. That is a Verizon router just after the gateway router for you. This will need to be addressed by a Verizon Network technician. Your hops to your router and your hop to the gateway look fine. Verizon will need to reboot that second router or re-route your hops.
Chernabog, yours is more difficult, you dont have any obvious big issue. However you do have a moderate jump at hop number 8. this is off the verizon network and is out on the internet. on one of the ATT routers. Unlikely you are going to be able to do anything about this. And as it is off the Verizon network, there would be nothing verizon could do about it either. Usually though, if it is a router needing rebooting, it will generally self correct after a few days. Or you could be unlucky enough to be going through a system that is overloaded or just plain old. This can be frustraiting. I myself play a lot of online games and if the server is in Washington DC (I'm in California) one of the hops I have to go through is in kentucky with sprintlink and their routers constantly give me a 500ms ping and I havent been able to get it corrected in over 4 years. Something we sometimes have to live with when it is out of our control.
====================================================================================
Error exists between keyboard and chair.

High Latency to midwest and east coast servers

Hello,
Over the last week I have been experiencing excessively high latency to several online gaming and web sites. The problem appears to be a peering issue between verizon.net and att.net or possibly alter.net (not sure who owns them?). Here are several trace routes that illustrate the problem. Calling verizon support has got me no where so far as well as contacting the gaming sites since this looks to them like an ISP issue.
This is blizzard (dallas data center):
Tracing route to 63.241.255.16 over a maximum of 30 hops
1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
2     8 ms     7 ms     6 ms L100.LSANCA-VFTTP-142.verizon-gni.net [173.55.53
.1]
3    13 ms    11 ms    12 ms G4-0-6-1142.LSANCA-LCR-11.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.140.122]
4    12 ms    11 ms    12 ms so-4-3-0-0.LAX01-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81
.29.244]
5    12 ms    14 ms    11 ms 0.so-1-2-0.XL3.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.133]
6    13 ms    11 ms    12 ms 0.ge-7-0-0.BR2.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.116.157]
7    12 ms    12 ms    10 ms 192.205.35.161
8    48 ms    47 ms    47 ms cr2.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.134]
9   473 ms   501 ms   514 ms cr2.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.28.177]
10    54 ms    52 ms    52 ms gar23.dlstx.ip.att.net [12.122.138.157]
11    47 ms    52 ms    47 ms 12-122-254-154.attens.net [12.122.254.154]
12   504 ms   482 ms   477 ms mdf001c7613r0003-gig-12-1.dal1.attens.net [63.24
1.193.22]
13     *        *        *     Request timed out. <== last hop blocks ICMP by blizzard
This is lotro.com (boston area data center)
Tracing route to gls.lotro.com [206.16.13.82]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
2     6 ms     7 ms     8 ms L100.LSANCA-VFTTP-142.verizon-gni.net [173.55.53
.1]
3    10 ms    12 ms     9 ms G4-0-6-1142.LSANCA-LCR-11.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.140.122]
4    12 ms    12 ms    12 ms so-4-3-0-0.LAX01-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81
.29.244]
5    43 ms    12 ms    12 ms 0.so-1-2-0.XL3.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.133]
6    12 ms    12 ms    12 ms 0.ge-7-0-0.BR2.LAX15.ALTER.NET [152.63.116.157]
7    12 ms    12 ms    12 ms 192.205.35.161
8   445 ms   432 ms   424 ms cr2.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.123.30.134]
9   451 ms   445 ms   446 ms cr1.slkut.ip.att.net [12.122.30.29]
10   438 ms   442 ms   447 ms cr2.dvmco.ip.att.net [12.122.30.26]
11   438 ms   412 ms   430 ms cr1.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.31.86]
12   454 ms   434 ms   394 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.2.54]
13   428 ms   427 ms   442 ms cr1.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.1.1]
14   410 ms   416 ms   437 ms cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.2.14]
15   395 ms   411 ms   417 ms cr1.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.31.126]
16   455 ms   450 ms   426 ms gar5.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.145.29]
17   429 ms   424 ms   435 ms 12-122-254-14.attens.net [12.122.254.14]
18   420 ms   434 ms   430 ms mdf001c7613r0004-gig-12-1.bos1.attens.net [12.13
0.0.174]
19   469 ms   471 ms   442 ms 12.130.10.69
20   515 ms   507 ms   507 ms 206.16.13.82
Trace complete.
The trace route below is using a completely different ISP (Intelenet). They see a similar but much less severe problem.
Tracing route to gls.lotro.com [206.16.13.82]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  xxxx [x.x.x.x]
2     2 ms     2 ms     2 ms  x.x.x.x
3     3 ms     2 ms     2 ms  x.x.x.x
4     3 ms     2 ms     2 ms p6c3.irv.intelenet.net [206.82.223.85]
5     2 ms     2 ms     2 ms p2b2.irv.intelenet.net [206.82.223.70]
6     4 ms     4 ms     4 ms ip65-47-228-17.z228-47-65.customer.algx.net [65.
47.228.17]
7     4 ms     3 ms     3 ms 71.5.170.17.ptr.us.xo.net [71.5.170.17]
8     4 ms     4 ms     4 ms 192.205.35.157
9    79 ms    78 ms    78 ms cr2.la2ca.ip.att.net [12.122.129.102]
10    78 ms    78 ms    79 ms cr1.slkut.ip.att.net [12.122.30.29]
11    77 ms    78 ms    77 ms cr2.dvmco.ip.att.net [12.122.30.26]
12    79 ms    79 ms    79 ms cr1.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.31.86]
13    78 ms    78 ms    77 ms cr2.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.2.54]
14    79 ms    78 ms    78 ms cr1.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.1.1]
15    79 ms    78 ms    78 ms cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.2.14]
16    78 ms    78 ms    79 ms cr1.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.31.126]
17    78 ms    78 ms    78 ms gar5.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.145.29]
18    79 ms    79 ms    79 ms 12-122-254-14.attens.net [12.122.254.14]
19    78 ms    78 ms    78 ms mdf001c7613r0004-gig-12-1.bos1.attens.net [12.13
0.0.174]
20    79 ms    79 ms    79 ms 12.130.10.69
21    78 ms    78 ms    78 ms 206.16.13.82
Trace complete.
This is having a very big impact on my internet service performance. I really need this resolve or I may have to consider changing to another ISP who is not see this problem.

I would like to also post on this - as Riot Games is suggesting it may be a FIOS issue as well.
Please look into this, as its been 3-4 days that your connection issues are disrupting us:
http://pastebin.com/FXLAJ3CW

Very high Latency and inconsistent download speeds

Hi all,
This is my first time on these forums and hopefully i can find some help for my horrible problem.
For the last 2-3 weeks my latency has consistently been 200+, i like to play online games alot and i cant with this latency. I have gone threw the whole drill of ringing BT and following there advice and i even had a BT engineer come out and he couldnt' find any problems. BT said they checked my line and couldn't find anything wrong, and the engineer didn't find any problems with the router (black).
I also have changed all of the wiring from the socket in the wall, which leads to the router, which leaders to a modem (i think its called that) that then connects me to the internet (Cable).
I am running out of patience as i spend alot of time on games such as Call of Duty and seeing my mates play it as i have 300+ ping is really annoying.
I Have noticed that the other computer my parents use also have the same high latency issue and they have tried it on cable and wireless with the same bad results. I have a program called xfire which shows my ping for all the servers on my list and there all 200+ but sometimes when i test my speeds on speedtest.net it shows me with 50 ping i believe this is due to the large spikes that i get, when im on call of duty it constantly jumps around 100, 150, 200 and sometimes even 50.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Josh.
Also im not very good with computers so if anyone would like any figures or whatever just point me to the website and ill try and get them for you.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/1133172089.png
This looks ok but on xfire all the servers are at 300+ and when i go ingame there just as high.

Test1 comprises of Best Effort Test: -provides background information.
Download Speed
2550 Kbps
0 Kbps
7150 Kbps
Max Achievable Speed
Download speedachieved during the test was - 2550 Kbps
For your connection, the acceptable range of speeds is 600-7150 Kbps.
Additional Information:
Your DSL Connection Rate :3680 Kbps(DOWN-STREAM), 448 Kbps(UP-STREAM)
IP Profile for your line is - 3000 Kbps

Conflict between EMU 1212M PCI-e and Gigabyte 970A-D3 High Latency!!!

I recently built a new DAW around my EMU 1212m PCI-e card using a Gigabyte 970A-D3 , Phenom2-X6 T1055 Chip. The reason I built this new DAW was because all of a sudden my old DAW started having unusually high latency and uneven core distribution (core 1 was amped out) this started after I flashed the BIOS to my old board and I updated Sonar to X1c. I tried various setting with the old DAW but could no longer get the performance prior to these changes. My original plan was to change the motherboard and memory and put into DDR3 and keep the original chip but that made things worse. So I then decided to go to the 6 core it was cheap enough so what the heck, but the same thing now luck. I then tried to use a USB based audio interface for the test I just purchased a Behringer UCA202 and I found a much improved response. My final test was to try yet another board my choice for the board was the MSI 870S-G54 and I got much better results but not as near as good as I was getting originally.
Please note that with each of these test I was exchanging cards to different slots, trying various BIOS setting and all driver are current and updated and baI sically doing what ever it take to troubleshooting a DAW but I have seen absolulty no changes. All power saving setting on the BIOS was turned off (C-1 halt, AMD Cool & Quiet, TurboBoost, etc)With the change to the MSI board I was able to get about 30 tracks of VST's running at about 6ms however with the Gigabyte board I was getting at 50ms with he same project it was crapping out.
Reaper has far less power usage as is expected from Reaper yet it was halting and glitching. Comparing the Behringer to the EMU showed about 25% less CPU useage.
My questions are as follows:
Anybody out there had a problem with the C1 update?
Anybody having trouble using a Gigabyte board?
Anybody having problems with the EMU card over any other Audio Interface?
Each time I updated a component I did a clean install of Win7-64bit. I should also let you know that I am using the 32bit versions of Reaper in Sonar only because the project that I am finishing now started in 32bit.
Does anyone have any clues? Please help.....

JJ,
Have you tried [url=http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml">http://www.thesycon.de/deu/latency_check.shtml[/url]
This app may give you a better idea of what is going on in your system.
Also what resources are being used ? Is the card sharing IRQ's
With multicore systems sometimes you may want to try assigning CPU affinity to just one Process like the emaudsv.exe
Casey

I feel 8.02 is less responsive and has higher latency!

After installing 8.02 and 10.5.3, Logic feels less snappy, has higher latency and has graphical glicthes when a big project is loaded.
Also, when recording in loop mode and when the playback cursor goes back to the beginning of the loop, the recorded notes are all messed up (like Ableton Live)
Also, when dragging a selection in the arranger, the (dragged) selection jumps all the way up or down? (bug?)
8.02 has various other tiny glitches.
Also, the Sculpture synth uses way more CPU since the update!
Good thing: projects load up extremely fast
I have no problems with the Overload Message but then again, I never saw them, ever in 8.0 or 8.01
I did a repair permission before and after each update (update OSX, Logic and Apogee Duet) and flashed the PRAM after all the updates.
I do not use third party plugins.
What am I doing wrong? Because I read all good things about the new Apple updates. However, I am not experiencing them, except for the faster loading times

I have the same latency problem since updating, and only in Logic (not Cubase). I reduced the midi latency when I uncheck, "Universal Track Mode," which is supposed to remain checked, in Audio pref., and turning off any sends on that track while recording.
Now there's a whole new problem of rerouting outputs to high number Double busses (bus 29-30) that never existed before when I reopen a project or start a new one from a template.

Instability and high latency.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for