Latency on saturation, fios tier1 / tier2, abysmal

In Tier4 on [full] link saturation connections retain low latency
In Tier1, Tier2, and some areas Tier3 [full] saturation results in abysmal latency (+300ms).   This is likely a design issue (think ISDN design).
If new service is installed as Tier4 and one downgrades a tier or two the latency issue appears   
* all things being equal *
This is not a CPE issue.  This exists for data from ONT over moca or ethernet. wired ethernet, zero wifi, tcp.  I have seen this on multiple dry loop installs (Tier4 install, downgrade to Tier4)

This is probably a result of Software limiting how fast your speed can go. I see it all the time in setting up QoS for networks. Since the ONTs are receiving a whole 622Mbps downstream if on BPON or a whole 2.4Gbps on GPON, in order to make lines work at a specific speed, Traffic Shaping is required. In this case, that would be the ONT/OLT's job, meaning it is done on a software basis. If it were a hardware basis such as the physical link speed of a connection, your latency should not jump any more than 10ms. If it jumps even more than that, it means that due to the physical link it cannot go any faster and data is either queued or stalled, or there is a huge problem that needs to get fixed. Try it out on an Ethernet connection just for fun. Max out a 100Mbps port in either or both directions, it will go from <1ms latency to 4-9ms latency. Now, take the same connection and limit it using software. You'll see it hold <1ms latency just until you get to the point where the traffic starts to be queued; that is when your latency shoots into the hundreds as a result of shaping.
The same happens on Cable and DSL networks. You can see what I'm talking about on a PowerBoosted cable modem believe it or not. PowerBoost kicks in, your connection goes up 10ms while you're maxing out the channel your modem is on. PowerBoost shuts off, you're at 200+ms latency.
As far as ISDN is concerned, you're going to see latency like that even on such a line, despite it being digital. The technology isn't as mature to handle data as newer methods of data transfers are, especially when it comes down to speed which is what would be choking an ISDN line on latency, not Traffic Shaping (but it does cause the Traffic Shaping effect as a result, just like dial-up suffers from due to speed). It's a physica link issue because of how little bandwidth there is when you're sending or receiving data; 20 byte packets will get queued.
========
The first to bring me 1Gbps Fiber for $30/m wins!

Similar Messages

  • Urgent_Vendor segmentation in Oracle R12 supplier hub

    Hi,
    Client has a requirement that system should automatically define the vendor segmentation based on their own criteria.
    For example, custom program identifies all the suppliers who met the crietria and update the field value (field values are tier1, tier2, tier3, tier4) accordingly in the supplier profile in R12 supplier hub
    Question- Please let me know the options to implement this in Oracle.
    Thanks

    Hi Vidhu,
    Every supplier will have a site meant for different purposes ... at the backend they are stored in AP_SUPPLIER_SITES_ALL table ...
    If you query this table, you can find the list of supplier sites that are enabled for Purchase Site assignment and Payment Sites assignment ....
    i.e.
    Select VENDOR_ID, VENDOR_SITE_ID, ORG_ID, PURCHASING_SITE_FLAG, PAY_SITE_FLAG from AP_SUPPLIER_SITES_ALL
    From Vendor ID you can find the supplier name and number from AP_SUPPLIERS table
    From Vendor Site ID you can find the supplier site name from AP_SUPPLIER_SITES_ALL table
    From ORG_ID you can find the operating unit name from HR_OPERATING_UNITS
    I would recommend enabling the Pay_site_flag for the supplier sites that are enabled for Purchase site flag and assigned to operating unit already .....
    Since you cannot create Invoice for a supplier site, if the site is not enabled for Pay_Site_flag, and you cannot create purchase order for a supplier site, if the site is not enabled for Purchasing_site_flag... hence from business perspective they need a site in every operating unit which is enabled for Pay_site_flag and Purchasing_site_flag ...
    Regards,
    Ivruksha

  • Facebook Extremely Slow from Tampa, FL from 6pm-11pm EST

    I believe this is a problem with the route because when I use a different connection i get to facebook just fine.. It's super fast on other ISPs and even faster over 3G, than it is on my fios connection.. Here is my trace out to FB during a slow period. The first ping spike is on the 8th hop. ATL1.gblx.net
    Tracing route to www.facebook.com [69.171.224.11]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
      1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  10.24.10.1
      2    10 ms     9 ms     9 ms  L100.TAMPFL-VFTTP-118.verizon-gni.net [96.254.61.1]
      3     9 ms     9 ms    10 ms  G0-5-3-4.TAMPFL-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net [130.81.131.210]
      4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
      5    23 ms    19 ms    20 ms  ge-5-2-0-0.ATL01-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.17.115]
      6    23 ms    24 ms    24 ms  0.xe-7-1-0.BR3.ATL4.ALTER.NET [152.63.80.73]
      7    25 ms    24 ms    24 ms  208.178.58.21
      8   125 ms    30 ms    29 ms  ae1-40G.scr1.ATL1.gblx.net [67.16.131.197]
      9   120 ms    87 ms    83 ms  xe9-2-0-10G.scr3.SNV2.gblx.net [67.16.163.206]
     10     *       84 ms    95 ms  e8-1-20G.ar5.SJC2.gblx.net [67.16.145.118]
     11    81 ms    82 ms    84 ms  64.208.158.30
     12    85 ms    83 ms    85 ms  ae0.bb01.sjc1.tfbnw.net [74.119.76.21]
     13     *       86 ms    87 ms  ae2.bb01.pao1.tfbnw.net [74.119.76.136]
     14   123 ms   122 ms   122 ms  ae9.bb01.prn1.tfbnw.net [204.15.20.51]
     15     *      126 ms     *     ae0.dr02.prn1.tfbnw.net [74.119.79.103]
     16   127 ms   128 ms   126 ms  po1015.csw01b.prn1.tfbnw.net [74.119.76.7]
     17   125 ms     *        *     www-10-01-prn1.facebook.com [69.171.224.11]
     18     *      127 ms     *     www-10-01-prn1.facebook.com [69.171.224.11]
     19     *        *      123 ms  www-10-01-prn1.facebook.com [69.171.224.11]
    OH and oddly enough, when Facebook is slow, if I go to speedtest.verizon.net and choose Georgia as the test region, my download speed is 456kb/s... Very slow.  Here is a speed test that I performed during a slow period: Look how low the inbound speed is compared to outbound.
    Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done
    SendBufferSize set to [261360]
    running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 13.53Mb/s
    running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 467.23kb/s
    and here is a speed test run choosing the Florida region during the same time. Showing that I have a healthy connection to my house:
    Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done
    SendBufferSize set to [261360]
    running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 22.26Mb/s
    running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 29.84Mb/s

    Big thread too here: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r25813544-Northeast-Facebook-Latency~start=50 Fios is have huge problems with facebook in the evenings. No problem when connecting from other ISPs. Verizon needs to get on this and fix it.

  • National Measure Calculation

    Hello Experts,
    I have a report with year, product, State columns and 2 measures payment 1 and the formual is IFNULL(x,0)+IFNULL(y,0)+IFNULL(z,0) and payment 2 formula is IFNULL(x1,0)+IFNULL(y1,0)+IFNULL(z1,0) here i am trying to get national values for payment 1 and payment 2. So basically i want to compare state to national value of both the measures for each year for a product. currently i was trying out duplicating payment 1 measure and adding a filter in that measure by using sql expression option (IFNULL(x,0)+IFNULL(y,0)+IFNULL(z,0)) by year and i am getting an error. Please advise how can i accomplish my task.
    Thanks,
    RC
    Edited by: user1146711 on Dec 20, 2011 11:04 AM

    Thanks for looking into the question. I am trying to re frame the question again. I have Year, State, Product category(Auto,Baby & Children's product, Electronics,Home appliances, Misc) Revenue measure =IFNULL(tier1payment,0)+IFNULL(tier2payment,0)+IFNULL(tier3payment,0) here as you see the revenue measure is a custom measure which is a addition of tier1+tier2+tier3 payments. I am trying to have an additional measure for graphing purposes to compare state with national value for the product category for that year in order to do that i need to create a custom measure for national and how can i accomplish that. Please let me know if i am not clear.
    Thanks,
    RC

  • Creating Hierarchical Dimensions - OEID 3.0

    Does anyone have an example of a graph that can be used to create hierarchical dimensions? For example, if I want to create an organizational structure like this:
    Organizational Unit 1..N
    Organizational Division 1..N
    Organizational Department 1..N
    Organizational Section 1..N
    Employee A
    Employee B
    Where each layer is it's own attribute field in the data set:
    Tier1,Tier2,Tier3,Tier4,Tier5
    Organizational Unit 1,Organizational Division 1,Organizational Department 1,Organizational Section 1,Employee A
    Is this possible?
    Thanks

    Hi Patrick,
    Thanks for your response. I did try and follow the Load Managed Values graph as shown in the Integrator User's Guide, however it seemed to create a multi-valued Component attribute instead of a tiered structure as shown above. That's why I wanted to know if there were any other examples around that creates the tiered structure as I've seen it mentioned theoretically in the guides but never implemented.
    Thanks!
    Rachel

  • New emails for existing incidents changing the support group value

    We are seeing some issues in SM 2012 R2.
    Our SM installation has tier1, tier2,tier3 support groups. Any new email to an existing open/closed incident in Tier2 queue is reassigning such incidents back to Tier1 from Tier-2 queue. Is this an expected behavior in 2012 or can this be
    fixed?

    It was the email received template used in "Routing and Schedule" in Exchange Connector that had the issue with default group set to Tier1. Removing the value resolved it for us.

  • Configuring QoS for FIOS Router MI-424WR: Traffic Priority and Shaping

    Please only read on if you are an experienced internet user familiar with setting the advanced QoS and Firewall settings for the MI-424WR and make use of wireless adaptors from a PC to provide connectivity.
    This is my first post and my first week since I moved from Time Warner Cable over to FIOS for iNet (plus HDTV and phone).     While all my services work, the router as delivered and setup is not optimum for internet quality of service.  Instead it was probably out of the box optimized for HDTV and telephone to satisfy most customers and reduce support overhead.   The average FIOS consumer is multimedia sensitive, but that is not so in my genre of internet consumer.   Here in lies the core of my reason for seeking help from like minded and experienced users in this community.
    One of the main driving forces in my switching to FIOS was to improve my multiplayer gaming experience where ultra low ping latency and high upload data rates dramatically affect the quality of connection and thus gameplay.    The cable internet service from TimeWarner was providing solid 2MB/1MB down/up data rates with no issues like what Im having now with FIOS.   Again the reason for the switch was both financial and in hope of gaining better data rates and quality of service.   Now with FIOS Im getting about 24/15 down/up data rate on the Extreme FIOS 25/25 plan when measured from my house to Los Angeles server (50 miles away) via Speedtest.net or DslReports.com/tests.     Latency wise, the ping has gone down from 150 to 50ms when measured to my friends who I connect to online that are on the East coast.   The data rate and latency has greatly improved in going from Cable to FIOS.   So far, so good.
    Where the problem shows up now, is that now I get an internet "hiccup" every 5-10 minutes that lasts about 1/2 to 2 seconds.   For the average internet user that just streams multimedia or cruises on the net; this is probably undetectable or noticed.   I never had this problem over the same PCs connected wirelessly to my DLINK DGL-4500 Gaming Router when my ISP was TimeWarner's cable service.    Now, using the FIOS and MI-424WR router with everythings being the same; Im experiencing this degregation in quality of service.    Even putting the PC's IP into the DMZ doesnt make any difference, so it is not related to port forwarding.    The issue is squarely in the lap of FIOS and this router as delivered and configured.    This is where the "game" is a foot, and where I need expertise in an area Im new to. 
    I am not new to being hands on with inet trouble shooting asI have been setting up my own home network (I work from home over VPN to work) for decades;  I would like to leverage the skills of those who are experts in the area that I think can address this issue.   That being QoS and the other device class mechanisms of this router.   Its my guess that this periodic hiccup can be minimized and even eliminated using these advanced features of this all-in-one TV/iNet/Tele router.   
    With that context being laid down, this hiccup doesnt show up if:
    a.  I connect two PCs connected to the same ethernet hub of the MI-424WR (traffic just over the LAN and not WAN)
    b.  When I was on Cable with my own gaming router wirelessly DHCP connected to my PC and using port forwarding or using the DMZ.  
    The hiccup does exist when:
    a.  Going from internet through the MI-424WR to the wireless DHCP connected PC with port forwarding
    b.  Even putting the wireless DHCP connected PC into the MI-424WR's DMZ has no effect
    I did read the manual and tried some QoS pritority and shaping and managed to reduce how often the hiccup occured, but I was just making guesses at the settings.   I put in the IP for the PCs I use for my gaming applications (which are very ping and jitter sensitive) into the QoS priority (value 7) and shaping GUI.    Im hoping someone with experience can tell me exactly how to use it and what settings to input.   Im not clear on the device and connection types offered in the QoS menus. 
    Another thing, is I couldnt find settings for the turning on/off the ICMP echo.   But I assume this is on because it can be pinged by folks on the net to my WAN IP.
    Here is the manual for the Verizon provided M424WR router (Current Version of firmware: 20.10.7)
    download link
    Here are the QoS traffic priority and shaping values Ive been experimenting with:
    Click to view QoS Traffic Priority
    Click to view QoS Traffic Shaping
    And why it matters to have a solid and stable inet connection for internet gaming?  The hiccup causes slewing or jitter which equates to positional errors in the 3D world that ruins the smooth gameplay that is needed for high end gaming.
    Heres a snapshot of me flying the wing of another flight simmer who is on the East coast and me on the West coast.
    Click to view
    Thank you in advance.
    Thomas "AV8R"
    MSEE

    TMAS wrote:
    the router as delivered and setup is not optimum for internet quality of service.  Instead it was probably out of the box optimized for HDTV and telephone to satisfy most customers and reduce support overhead.  
    That's not accurate.  VZ telephone service does not go through the Actiontec.  Also, there are no default settings for QOS in the Actiontec since QOS is rarely needed with FIOS upload speeds.
    TMAS wrote:I get an internet "hiccup" every 5-10 minutes that lasts about 1/2 to 2 seconds.  
       You should not be experiencing periodic "hiccups".  Something is clearly amiss.
    TMAS wrote:
    With that context being laid down, this hiccup doesnt show up if:a.  I connect two PCs connected to the same ethernet hub of the MI-424WR (traffic just over the LAN and not WAN)
    The hiccup does exist when:
    a.  Going from internet through the MI-424WR to the wireless DHCP connected PC with port forwarding
    b.  Even putting the wireless DHCP connected PC into the MI-424WR's DMZ has no effect
    Lets see.  The issue shows up on a wireless connection, but not a wired connection.  You think this is a QOS issue and not a wireless issue why?  Have you tried changing the wireless channel?  It very possible you have neighbors on the same channel.  Is the DGL-4500 wireless still on?  Could that be interfering?TMAS wrote:
    Another thing, is I couldnt find settings for the turning on/off the ICMP echo.  
    The settting to enable/disable ICMP echo is on the Firewall/Remote Administration page.
    TMAS wrote:
    Here are the QoS traffic priority and shaping values Ive been experimenting with:Click to view QoS Traffic Priority
    Click to view QoS Traffic Shaping 
    The traffic proirity settings you linked are applied only to your wireless connections.  QOS between the router and your wireless PC will only serve to prioritize traffic between the router and that PC and have no affect on your internet traffic.  Assuming you are not running browsers, VOIP and other traffic from that PC while you're gaming, then that will not accomplish anything.  i.e.  You're giving your only traffic highest priority, but that traffic is not competing with anything (except other nearby wireless connections on the same channel).
    On the traffic shaping screenshot, you have broadband ethernet checked, but according to your other thread, your WAN connection is Broadband Coax, not Broadband ethernet.

  • Intermiten​t FIOS Internet performanc​e problems

    Over the last couple of weeks, I've been getting fair to poor internet performance with periods of limited to no internet access. 
    The ping latency to the first network node has been varying widely for me.   I've tonight is is the longest period of poor performance.  Below i've copied a tracert to (what i guess is) the edge of the verizon network.
    Tracing route to so-1-1-0-0.RES-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.199.2]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
      1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
      2  1929 ms  1864 ms  1729 ms  L100.BLTMMD-VFTTP-37.verizon-gni.net [173.64.68.
    1]
      3  1668 ms  2014 ms  1722 ms  G0-3-4-3.BLTMMD-LCR-22.verizon-gni.net [130.81.4
    8.167]
      4  1871 ms  1681 ms  1499 ms  so-6-1-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
    199.4]
      5  1736 ms  1896 ms  1654 ms  ge-5-3-0-0.PHIL-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.
    17.92]
      6  1709 ms  1411 ms  1694 ms  so-1-1-0-0.RES-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81.1
    99.2]
    When it's working  the speed test come back good but with a rather high ping time but when it's not is like dialup rates.
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/1928896085.png
    verizon.net/speedtest
    Your download
    speed is
    0.187 Mbps.
    Your upload
    speed is
    0.196 Mbps.
    Let us check your
    current Verizon Internet
    speed package.
    I have contacted support for this issue but it has been frustrating since it is intermettant. Tomorrow I'll contact the technician that was out today but i was wondering if anyone has suggestions on what might be wrong and how explan the problem.
    Thanks
    RW

    Thanks for the reply Smith6612.
    Yesterday the my router and ONT were replaced by the tech.  He switched me from ethernet to MOCA.  My feelings are the dirty fiber or bad/failing PONS card.   I don't get any indications my link is getting saturated by anything I'm doing on the network.  

  • FIOS not good ISP for gaming in North East, bad routing to canada and west coast.

    http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-Internet/Keep-ge​tting-kicked-out-of-game-MechWarrior-Online/m-p/66​...
    Yes the same thing has been happening to me. It also appears it was a problem back in january according to this thread....
    http://forums.verizon.com/t5/FiOS-Internet/Routing​-Latency-issues/m-p/525091/highlight/true#M34574
    Here is a past MWO thread started at the same time by a verizon customer.   I believe almost all of thise users have quit fios or quit MWO.  
      http://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/91680-higher-ping​-times-after-patch/page__st__80
    Many people in the game believe its due to MWO patches,  but I think thats just a placebo.  I believe it is to do with the cold winter months and verizon not being able to handle the load.    Speedtests to any west coast, specifically vancouver server,  have the same results.
    I have called verizon, gone to live chat, spoken to many different supervisors and technicians and have gotten no help with this issue.  They basically tell me its not their problem.
    After doing many traceroutes and speedtests.   It appears I am  getting routed through europe to get to canada from NY, which just doesn't make any common sense. First verizon claims the link router sending us to europe is not owned by them. Then we have to prove to them that it in fact is with public business records and WHOIS reports. Which also seemed to be the case for others in that thread back in january.
    IT seems the issue in january might of been that particular router was geting overloaded  they might have fixed the circuit on that verizon link/border router in question. But now it seems the issue has been passed up the line to the next link router and now that next circuit up the line  is getting congested.
    Below you can see some traceroutes when I am receiving the bad ping:
    Tracing route to relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
    1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
    2 9 ms 10 ms 5 ms L100.NYCMNY-VFTTP-175.verizon-gni.net [71.167.34.1]
    3 11 ms 12 ms 7 ms G0-1-3-7.NYCMNY-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net [130.81.185.220]
    4 94 ms 12 ms 10 ms ae0-0.NY325-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.110]
    5 9 ms 15 ms 12 ms 0.so-4-0-1.XT2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.29]
    6 9 ms 16 ms 11 ms TenGigE0-5-0-0.GW8.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.21.65]
    7 28 ms 25 ms 44 ms tinet-gw.customer.alter.net [152.179.72.122]   (previous congested router routing to europe)
    8 38 ms 39 ms 39 ms xe-8-2-0.tor10.ip4.tinet.net [141.136.107.98]
    9 100 ms 104 ms 103 ms internap-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.70.94]
    10 97 ms 99 ms 98 ms border1.te7-1-bbnet1.tor001.pnap.net [70.42.24.132]
    11 103 ms 103 ms 96 ms relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    Trace complete.
    1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
    2 8 ms 10 ms 10 ms L100.NYCMNY-VFTTP-175.verizon-gni.net [71.167.34.1]
    3 15 ms 15 ms 12 ms 130.81.185.220
    4 25 ms 84 ms 12 ms ae0-0.NY325-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.110]
    5 22 ms 21 ms 10 ms 0.so-4-0-1.XT2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.29]
    6 18 ms 16 ms 19 ms TenGigE0-7-4-0.GW8.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.21.133
    7 35 ms 33 ms 34 ms tinet-gw.customer.alter.net [152.179.72.122]
    8 56 ms 54 ms 55 ms xe-8-2-0.tor10.ip4.tinet.net [141.136.107.98]
    9 118 ms 119 ms 112 ms internap-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.70.94]
    10 111 ms 111 ms 109 ms border1.te7-1-bbnet1.tor001.pnap.net [70.42.24.132]
    11 116 ms 111 ms 109 ms relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    Here are some traceroutes when I am getting the good ping:
    Tracing route to relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
    1 <1 ms <1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
    2 10 ms 5 ms 8 ms L100.NYCMNY-VFTTP-175.verizon-gni.net [71.167.34
    .1]
    3 11 ms 13 ms 10 ms G0-1-3-7.NYCMNY-LCR-21.verizon-gni.net [130.81.185.220]
    4 48 ms 11 ms 10 ms ae0-0.NY325-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.110]
    5 83 ms 30 ms 33 ms 0.so-4-0-1.XT2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.29]
    6 19 ms 12 ms 23 ms TenGigE0-7-1-0.GW8.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.21.125]
    7 14 ms 12 ms 15 ms tinet-gw.customer.alter.net [152.179.72.122]
    8 29 ms 26 ms 28 ms xe-8-2-0.tor10.ip4.tinet.net [141.136.107.98]
    9 33 ms 34 ms 34 ms internap-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.70.94]
    10 36 ms 40 ms 44 ms border1.te7-1-bbnet1.tor001.pnap.net [70.42.24.132]
    11 38 ms 40 ms 39 ms relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    Trace complete.
    1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
    2 6 ms 11 ms 6 ms L100.NYCMNY-VFTTP-175.verizon-gni.net [71.167.34.1]
    3 10 ms 11 ms 12 ms 130.81.185.220
    4 88 ms 9 ms 11 ms ae0-0.NY325-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.110]
    5 8 ms 11 ms 11 ms 0.so-4-0-1.XT2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.29]
    6 14 ms 21 ms 11 ms TenGigE0-7-0-4.GW8.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.25.226]
    7 14 ms 10 ms 10 ms tinet-gw.customer.alter.net [152.179.72.122]
    8 26 ms 29 ms 28 ms xe-8-2-0.tor10.ip4.tinet.net [141.136.107.98]
    9 23 ms 22 ms 22 ms internap-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.70.94]
    10 39 ms 39 ms 40 ms border1.te7-1-bbnet1.tor001.pnap.net [70.42.24.1
    32]
    11 38 ms 39 ms 39 ms relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    Going from 20 ping to 100 depending on time of day,  which seems to 24 hours a day now!   is a real tease and frustrating, and when there is packet loss or excessive spikes, thats when we lose the connection,  session lost messages,  black screen issue...etc...
    When reading that past thread,  The problem server back in january was tinet-gw.customer.alter.net [152.179.72.122]  (the one that routes us through europ)   but now it seems the burden has been passed up the chain to the next link/border router and circuit   internap-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.70.94].
    Maybe the guys back in january were able to pressure verizon to increase bandwidth on the tinet circuit on tha verizon router in NY because they actually owned that server,  even though they originally tried to lie and claim they didn't.  Even if not part of FIOS,  and after the 6th hop.    Its obvious it was theirs cause it ends with alter.net,  was right here in NYC,    WHOIS reports gave verizons email,  and business records show they bought it in 2006.
    Fios doesn't contact DSL,  residential doesn't contact business...etc..  Its like this company doesn't remember how 9/11 happened!!!
    BUt Now the burden is on the the next link router  which routes to internap.  And that is a german server and part of tinet.net and is a different company that verizon does not have direct access to.    Verizon would not even email  the admin for me,  which many feel is unprofessional.  
    You can try emailing that admin yourself or doing some trace routes your self and calling and pressuring verizon to address the issue themselves.    
    It seems verizon fios can't handle routing people to canada,  especially in the cold months of the year.  They must not be able to handle their load.   It seems verizon fios is really a scam,  and fiber optics is just a pretty name,  but in reality is no different then any other network,  except locally.    The only difference we need to look at when buying bandwidth,  is pricing period.  The fact it is fiber optics means diddly squat!  And the more people that get fios,  i predict the worse their network is going to get.
       I have sent an email to the admin of that german server  {edited for privacy}  but I would be shocked if I got any reply.  Ridiculous for verizon to suggest I do that in the first place.
    People with timer warner in the same area  are getting constant 20-40 ping to MWO,  while verizon fios customers are getting terrible connections right now.

    What you are seeing here has nothing at all to do with what your speed is. Latency has nothing to do with speed, it has to do with distance and network congestion. Your local ISP, no matter who it is, can not directly affect how another company (in your case Internap Network Services Corporation) routes data. Now if there was a problem in a link directly connected to your local ISP, for example:
    4 94 ms 12 ms 10 ms ae0-0.NY325-BB-RTR2.verizon-gni.net [130.81.209.110]
    5 9 ms 15 ms 12 ms 0.so-4-0-1.XT2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.10.29]
    *from your tracert
    The above link is leaving Verizon local control and entering Alter.Net control, if there was latency on a regular basis there then this should be reported to Verizon as your local ISP and that will filter up to their NOC group who will contact Alter.net and figure out the issue with that link. If the issue is a faulty link it will get fixed, if the issue is a link undergoing to much traffic its ability to handle the traffic will either be increased where possible or routed around where possible. The whole issue of peer-to-peer networking is very complex (which is what the Supreme Court was reviewing by the way) and a number of issues come into play. If the connection point only experiences high traffic sometimes on a very limited basis then generally routing some traffic to different connections is what is done.
    Now in your later postes you show the following:
    8 38 ms 39 ms 39 ms xe-8-2-0.tor10.ip4.tinet.net [141.136.107.98]
    9 100 ms 104 ms 103 ms internap-gw.ip4.tinet.net [77.67.70.94]
    10 97 ms 99 ms 98 ms border1.te7-1-bbnet1.tor001.pnap.net [70.42.24.132]
    11 103 ms 103 ms 96 ms relay-1.mwtactics.com [70.42.29.65]
    That clearly shows the problem is inside the tinet.net (Internap Network Services Corporation) network. This network is also the network providing the link into this game server. What does this tell us? From what you are seeing it tells us that either Internap does not have enough bandwidth to server the amount of traffic down to this server or the game company has not purchased a high enough link. The latter is unlikely. Most likely the issue is that Verizon's Fios product is growing with more and more people are trying to reach that game from the Fios network. This causes issues at the link point, which Verizon apparently has taken steps to fix as well as those internal links going down to the game servers. Now your local ISP (Verizon) cannot help the latter half of that. One can hope the end user ISP (in your case Internap Network Services Corporation) will increase their internal bandwidth or router traffic around problem areas.

  • Slow & erratic speeds - very disappointed in switch to FiOS so far

    I finally decided to try out FiOS and switched from Optimum 2 days ago.  I have been running some speed tests to see if everything is working as it should and came back with poor results.
    I am paying for 50/25 and am typically getting between 20-40 Mbps download (with 1 exception which I will get to later).  I have run speed tests on speedtest.net and other sites, always choosing nearby servers.  My results have been very erratic.  On Optimum I consistently got high 50's d/l all the time on all servers.  On FiOS, I often get as low as 6-8 Mbps download.  A lot of times my d/l speed is MUCH less than my upload speed (for example: 8 down and 26 up). 
    However, if I choose to test to the optimum online server, I consistently get high 50's download and high 20's upload, which is what I expect.  Not sure what's going on here - it's almost as though Optimum is begging me to come back - which I will do unless this gets solved.
    Just spent an hour with tech support.  Did all the usual resetting/rebooting stuff, ran the optimizer, checked RWIN (although I'm on Win 7 which makes this moot), etc.  Now they want to send a tech out at the end of the week b/c they think it could be something with the house wiring.  I'm not sure I agree, since I AM getting full speed when I test to the optimum.com server.
    Oh - and ping is a lot higher.  Seeing 30-60ms vs 10ms on Optimum.
    Any ieas on what the problems could be?  Came in with high hopes and getting disappointed quickly.  28 days before I have to decide to keep or toss...

    You say  "of course,"  but you didn't mention wired or wifi in either of your earlier posts and similar problems are often related to wifi vagaries.  Anyway....
    It sounds like we may be in the same area.  I also had Optimum once-upon-a-time and, for whatever it's worth, since switching to FiOS I've found my speeds to be much more consistent than they were with OOL.
    Yes...there is some variation from speed test server to server but I would suggest that is the nature of the Internet, and specific servers, and not a Verizon problem. 
    I usually test with speedtest.net and let it pick the server with the lowest ping.  That is indeed Optimum's New York server at times. Other times it chooses other servers in the NY area.  In every case, though, I always get at least the 75/35 speeds I'm paying for.
    It sounds to me like what you're seeing could be saturation at certain speed tests servers in the evening.  What I would suggest you do, for a real world test, is find a file server that will saturate your bandwidth and try it in the evening.  Something like a file server from Microsoft, or Corel, etc. etc. If I do that, and measure my speed with DU Meter, I always get the same download speed, regardless of the time of day.  Here's one example:
    I can also run the same test uploading to a couple of servers I have available, and I get the same real world results.
    If you're still not satisfied that you're getting what you're paying for from Verizon, I'm sure OOL will be happy to have you back.  That's the beauty of competition.

  • GET_FILE Error: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException when moving content from tier1 to tier 2 storage

    Purpose: to migrate all the ACTIVE records from tier1 storage to tier 2 storage.
    A have applied MLR 11 patch i.e Patch 20624268: WEBCENTER CONTENT BUNDLE PATCH 11.1.1.8.11
    My Configurations
    Tier 1 intradoc.cfg configuration
    VaultDir=/u01/app/oracle/oracle/product/11.1.8/fmw/user_projects/domains/wcc_domain/ucm/cs/vault/
    WeblayoutDir=/u01/app/oracle/oracle/product/11.1.8/fmw/user_projects/domains/wcc_domain/ucm/cs/weblayout/
    I then changed the above parameters from TIer 1 to Tier2 as follows
    VaultDir=/u01/tier1_storage/vault
    WeblayoutDir=/u01/tier1_storage/weblayout
    Then rebooted the machine. Now when i try to search for all the older records which were stored on Tier 1 above using GET_FILE
    <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
    <soap:Body xmlns:ns1="http://www.oracle.com/UCM">
    <ns1:GenericRequest webKey="cs">
    <ns1:Service IdcService="GET_FILE">
    <ns1:Document>
    <ns1:Field name="dDocName">OWCDEV_004521</ns1:Field>
    <ns1:Field name="RevisionSelectionMethod">Latest</ns1:Field>
    </ns1:Document>
    </ns1:Service>
    </ns1:GenericRequest>
    </soap:Body>
    </soap:Envelope>
    I Get following error
    <env:Envelope xmlns:env="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
    <env:Header/>
    <env:Body>
    <ns2:GenericResponse webKey="cs" xmlns:ns2="http://www.oracle.com/UCM">
    <ns2:Service IdcService="GET_FILE">
    <ns2:Document>
    <ns2:Field name="error">Error: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException</ns2:Field>
    </ns2:Document>
    </ns2:Service>
    </ns2:GenericResponse>
    </env:Body>
    </env:Envelope>
    Problem
    The biggest problem is that i am not able to search older records which are stored in tier1 storage using GET_FILE, But if i check in new records to Tier2 i am able to use GET_FILE to search them. I must be able to search both Tier1 and Tier 2 Storage content files using GET_FILE. To reproduce the error, change the vault and weblayout path from intradoc.cfg,reboot then try to use GET_FILE to search for records on the previous path, then the you will get the above  error. I tried to create partition and storage rules but i am not successfull. I am not so sure exactly what to change here. Please advice

    Hi 2611729
    For searching content items service is GET_SEARCH_RESULTS and for downloading the file its GET_FILE
    I dont think changing the configuration value will serve the prupose over here. You need to move the contents from one location to other and going by the explanation you have provided that movement has not happened. Every content item has a metadata called xStorageRule which mentions the location where file is stored. In your case, though you've changed the configuration setting the metadata value is still of tier1 for older content items.
    You have changed the default value and thats the reason contents are getting stored in tier2 storage now and you are able to access them via search. Since for older items xStorageRule holds older value which is different that current one you are not able to search.
    However, i belive you're trying to move the contents from tier1 to tier2 storage since contents in tier1 storage have crossed X days and might not be accessed frequently by users.
    Below mentioned option might work.
    Retain your configuration setting for valut and weblayout as earlier.
    1. Create a new storage rule Tier2Rule pointing to tier2
    2. Archive your contents using Archiver applet.
    3. Import the contents from created archive using applet and during import change the metadata xStorageRule to new storage rule Tier2Rule. This moves all your content onto tier2.
    4. Checkin new documents and it gets stored in tier1 location. I assume default storage rule will point to tier1.
    5. While searching using seach forms use the metadata StorageRule and it will provide dropdown of list (like tier1rule, tier2rule and so on). Select and perform the search.
    For download using GET_FILE, i'm not sure whether by passing xStorageRule it will work or not. You'll  have to try it out by small POC or customize the GET_FILE as required.
    I've not tried this approach earlier but by system-wise understanding it should work.
    Also, please refer UCM Backup strategy this discussion thread and others in the forum. Take a look at SAM-QFS which does this job transparently or any other solution in-line to that.

  • IP SLA stats - one-way latency / MOS score 4.34 not updating

    I'm trying to use Cisco IP SLA to bench mark voice traffic peformance before and after I apply QoS to the network. 
    *  I've setup IP SLA in both directions over a DSL connection between a 7600, and an 1801
    *  I've setup IP SLA in both directions over an Ethernet WAN link between a 7200 and another 7200
    ip sla 1
    udp-jitter 10.101.1.1 32770 source-ip 10.101.2.1 source-port 32770 codec g711alaw
    frequency 30
    ip sla schedule 1 life forever start-time now
    ip sla responder
    I have a problem in that I'm not getting any meaningful data from the IP SLA statistics for Voice Score Values:, or any data for Latency one-way time: for any of my tests(x 4).
    After a day of testing it seems the MOS score never changes from 4.34, and the ICPIF never changes from 1
    Is there something wrong with my config?  Is this working properly or could this be a bug?
    ADSL-R1#show ip sla statistics 1 details
    Round Trip Time (RTT) for       Index 1
            Latest RTT: 48 milliseconds
    Latest operation start time: *09:27:48.435 UTC Thu Jul 5 2012
    Latest operation return code: OK
    Over thresholds occurred: FALSE
    RTT Values:
            Number Of RTT: 999              RTT Min/Avg/Max: 45/48/89 milliseconds
    Latency one-way time:
            Number of Latency one-way Samples: 0
            Source to Destination Latency one way Min/Avg/Max: 0/0/0 milliseconds
            Destination to Source Latency one way Min/Avg/Max: 0/0/0 milliseconds
            Source to Destination Latency one way Sum/Sum2: 0/0
            Destination to Source Latency one way Sum/Sum2: 0/0
    Jitter Time:
            Number of Jitter Samples: 997
            Source to Destination Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/26 milliseconds
            Destination to Source Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/1/18 milliseconds
            Source to destination positive jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/26 milliseconds
            Source to destination positive jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 348/793/4295
            Source to destination negative jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/16 milliseconds
            Source to destination negative jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 346/802/3742
            Destination to Source positive jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/1/18 milliseconds
            Destination to Source positive jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 330/611/2051
            Destination to Source negative jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/1/18 milliseconds
            Destination to Source negative jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 318/606/1992
            Interarrival jitterout: 0       Interarrival jitterin: 0
    Packet Loss Values:
            Loss Source to Destination: 0           Loss Destination to Source: 1
            Out Of Sequence: 0      Tail Drop: 0    Packet Late Arrival: 0
    Voice Score Values:
            Calculated Planning Impairment Factor (ICPIF): 1
    MOS score: 4.34
    Number of successes: 72
    Number of failures: 0
    Operation time to live: Forever
    Operational state of entry: Active
    Last time this entry was reset: Never
    7200-R2#show ip sla statistics details
    Round Trip Time (RTT) for       Index 1
    Type of operation: jitter
            Latest RTT: 6 ms
    Latest operation start time: 08:08:31.349 UTC Thu Jul 5 2012
    Latest operation return code: OK
    RTT Values
            Number Of RTT: 1000
            RTT Min/Avg/Max: 2/6/199 ms
    Latency one-way time milliseconds
            Number of Latency one-way Samples: 0
            Source to Destination Latency one way Min/Avg/Max: 0/0/0 ms
            Destination to Source Latency one way Min/Avg/Max: 0/0/0 ms
            Source to Destination Latency one way Sum/Sum2: 0/0
            Destination to Source Latency one way Sum/Sum2: 0/0
    Jitter time milliseconds
            Number of SD Jitter Samples: 999
            Number of DS Jitter Samples: 999
            Source to Destination Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 0/2/13 ms
            Destination to Source Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 0/1/195 ms
            Source to destination positive jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/1/13 ms
            Source to destination positive jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 342/638/2142
            Source to destination negative jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/1/11 ms
            Source to destination negative jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 335/638/1886
            Destination to Source positive jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/195 ms
            Destination to Source positive jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 198/408/38510
            Destination to Source negative jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/128 ms
            Destination to Source negative jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 203/408/20720
            Interarrival jitterout: 0       Interarrival jitterin: 0
            Over thresholds occurred: FALSE
    Packet Loss Values
            Loss Source to Destination: 0           Loss Destination to Source: 0
            Out Of Sequence: 0      Tail Drop: 0    Packet Late Arrival: 0
            Packet Skipped: 0
    Voice Score Values
            Calculated Planning Impairment Factor (ICPIF): 1
    MOS score: 4.34
    Number of successes: 19
    Number of failures: 0
    Operation time to live: Forever
    Operational state of entry: Active
    Last time this entry was reset: 15:59:31.345 UTC Wed Jul 4 2012

    Update (RESOVLED)
    The MOS and ICPIF scores do change.  I saturated the WAN link with FTP down/upload traffic inducing packet loss,increased jitter and delay.  The scores degraded accordingling show ip sla statistics 10 details
    R#show ip sla statistics 10
    Round Trip Time (RTT) for       Index 10
    Type of operation: jitter
            Latest RTT: 292 ms
    Latest operation start time: 19:07:12.358 UTC Tue Jul 17 2012
    Latest operation return code: OK
    RTT Values
            Number Of RTT: 979
            RTT Min/Avg/Max: 58/292/487 ms
    Latency one-way time milliseconds
            Number of Latency one-way Samples: 1
            Source to Destination Latency one way Min/Avg/Max: 1/1/1 ms
            Destination to Source Latency one way Min/Avg/Max: 112/112/112 ms
    Jitter time milliseconds
            Number of SD Jitter Samples: 958
            Number of DS Jitter Samples: 958
            Source to Destination Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 0/1/6 ms
            Destination to Source Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 0/11/151 ms
    Packet Loss Values
            Loss Source to Destination: 0           Loss Destination to Source: 21
            Out Of Sequence: 0      Tail Drop: 0
            Packet Late Arrival: 0  Packet Skipped: 0
    Voice Score Values
            Calculated Planning Impairment Factor (ICPIF): 10
    MOS score: 4.09
    Number of successes: 32
    Number of failures: 0
    Operation time to live: Forever
            Source to Destination Latency one way Sum/Sum2: 9591/94681
            Destination to Source Latency one way Sum/Sum2: 346227/125286895
    Jitter time milliseconds
            Number of SD Jitter Samples: 999
            Number of DS Jitter Samples: 999
            Source to Destination Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 0/2/11 ms
            Destination to Source Jitter Min/Avg/Max: 0/10/48 ms
            Source to destination positive jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/11 ms
            Source to destination positive jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 231/513/2789
            Source to destination negative jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/2/10 ms
            Source to destination negative jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 232/512/2724
            Destination to Source positive jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/15/48 ms
            Destination to Source positive jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 305/4762/93106
            Destination to Source negative jitter Min/Avg/Max: 1/6/42 ms
            Destination to Source negative jitter Number/Sum/Sum2: 682/4717/43395
            Interarrival jitterout: 0       Interarrival jitterin: 0
            Over thresholds occurred: FALSE
    Packet Loss Values
            Loss Source to Destination: 0           Loss Destination to Source: 0
            Out Of Sequence: 0      Tail Drop: 0    Packet Late Arrival: 0
            Packet Skipped: 0
    Voice Score Values
            Calculated Planning Impairment Factor (ICPIF): 5
    MOS score: 4.24
    Number of successes: 43
    Number of failures: 0
    Operation time to live: Forever
    Operational state of entry: Active
    Last time this entry was reset: 17:51:41.945 BST Fri Jul 20 2012

  • Southern California FIOS excessive hopping (BAD LAG)

    Ive called fios about this issue multiple times and they have still yet to fix anything. Is 25 hops to google normal? Is routing me across the country( sometimes multiple times back and fourth) efficient? This issue is killing my online gaming. Verizon advertises that fios is the best for online gaming but with all these inefficient routers i don't see how it can be.  115ms ping times to google is bad on its own so you can imagine how bad it is on xbox live. Its basically unplayable. Here is a video of someone else having the same issue so i KNOW i am not the only one. I feel like because most people probably dont game a whole lot this issue isn't at the top of verizons to-do list but its getting annoying. Could a mod or someone please put me in touch with a person who will fix this issue. I have about 40 traceroute logs that are over 20 hops!! to sites like google, espn, yahoo.  Almost everytime the route is different depending on the time of day. If you are reading this and are having lag issues i suggest you download a traceroute program and post your results to this thread because calling their tech support and talking to some guy in India for an hour will get you nowhere. PLEASE HELP!!
    DARN

    That video has got to be one of the worst "analysis" of a problem I think I've ever seen.   No ... I take that back ... some of the other posts which come up as "related" are far worse and in some cases even laughable.  But, let's try to take a look at what he's showing on his screen and complaining about.  
    First, router hops does not necessarily equal latency.   While the first 7 or 8 hops in his diagram are Verizon local and Alter.net (also Verizon) hops, look at the latency thru all those hops ... less than 20ms.   That's pretty darn good and not atypical in today's networking.   Many of today's layer 3 switch routers do the packet handling at the port/card level and can very quickly move traffic without introducing much if any noticable latency. 
    What happens next?  Well, it dumps into Level3 -- which is a different provider and from there the routing traffic takes  to the final destination is NOT within Verizon's control.    A full 2/3's of the transit of this session happens on Non-Verizon networks.   Now, perhaps Verizon could add some more peering points in their network, but at the end of the day, internet routing is a funny thing where you're dependent on the route information coming into your network when calculating least cost (network speedwise) paths.   This could be a condemnation of the overall infrastructure of backbone internet providers in California -- but it's hardly one based solely on the video posted  which points at Verizon.
    The guy goes on to complain about 100ms+ latency and the screen shot clearly shows 70ms or less all of it picked up from other carriers networks.  A little truth in advertising if you're going to make a rant is probably appropriate.  With that said, I hit 12 hops to the same site and I get low 20ms RTT's, so that is substantially different (the server in question being Google's public DNS -- which is probably AnyCast, so there is no certainty that I ended up on the same server this individual did).  A 60-70ms RTT for coast to coast traffic, for instance, is a physics-based reality (that silly little "speed of light" thing).  Interestingly enough, I've seen poor performance to Xbox live and when I ran some analysis, the latency was all coming from the last two to three hops -- capacity issues close to the Xbox-live could, not the local or intermediate networks.
    Now, I don't know your professional background as it relates to carrier class wide-area networking, so maybe you have some other pertinent information which you can add to what you provided so far, but at a minimum, why don't you post some of the traceroutes you made and let folks here take a look? Worst case you'll not resolve the issue, but you'll get some confirmation of your speculation that you're indeed barking up the right tree.

  • BT Home Problem - High Latency

    I have been having some problems ever since i switched to BT really.
    I was previously with VirginMedia but left due to their abysmal services... The broadband, however, was faultless.
    But now, with BT i'm having a problem playing online games.
    I start off with a latency of roughly 200ms (previously with old connection i'd never go above 70ms). This will gradually rise up to 300ms before spiking at 700-800ms, then disconnecting me and losing my broadband signal for 3-4mins.
    I can counteract this error by rebooting my router (HomeHub) in which case the latency will drop down to around 100ms - but i surely shouldn't have to be doing this every day. Sometimes twice a day.
    The PC is high spec and as mentioned, was previously fine.
    The same thing happens whether the connection is wireless OR wired.
    Any help, much appreciated!!

    Dependant on which type of BT Service you are on ADSL ADSL2+ etc. 
    The BT Homehub does not like to many fragmented packets so this link to a previous thread might help.
    http://community.bt.com/t5/BB-in-Home/Ping-spikes-​every-10-15-seconds/m-p/20214;jsessionid=D8733DD05​...
    "I have this awful feeling someone is watching every move I make (one of my pet hates is router location tagging)." Marvin (A paranoid Android)

  • VoIP Phones - Testing Latency, Jitter, and Packet Loss

    I am having big problems with my VoIP phone connection and I'll try to lay it out clearly here.
    The main telephone system resides at Location A (static IP address - see below - xxx.xxx.206.19), which has a network connection of 50MB down/20MB up (i.e., very fast).  The VoIP phone configured for that system resides at Location B, which has a network connection of 10MB down/1MB up (i.e., also fast, or at least fast enough "on paper" for a quality VoIP connection).  The LAN at Location A uses an Airport Extreme router, which does not have QOS or EF capability. The LAN at Location B uses a D-Link DIR-655 router which does have QOS that is configured properly to direct all traffic to the VoIP phone's IP address.
    The VoIP phone at Location B is having intermittent call quality problems with skipping of words, hollowing out noises, jittery conversations, etc.  All the inquiries I've made to the ISPs and phone system manufacturer (ESI) suggest that my base Internet speeds are not the problem.
    I'm told, instead, that the problem might be latency, jitter, or packet loss between Location A and Location B.  This leads to several questions:
    (1)     Is there any Mac software that can test latency, jitter, and packet loss? I've looked at Network Utility and it seems to only measure a few things. 
    (2)     Does anyone see anything in the following Traceroute and Ping results (done twice from Location B to Location A) that looks problematic to VoIP quality?:
    Traceroute:
    First run: Traceroute has started…
    traceroute to xxx.xxx.206.19 (xxx.xxx.206.19), 64 hops max, 72 byte packets
    1  alfirving (192.168.0.1)  0.569 ms  0.363 ms  0.302 ms
    2  10.72.28.1 (10.72.28.1)  27.567 ms 18.161 ms  22.288 ms
    3  70.125.216.150 (70.125.216.150)  9.841 ms  10.346 ms  9.497 ms
    4  24.164.209.116 (24.164.209.116)  11.042 ms 8.298 ms  9.433 ms
    5  70.125.216.108 (70.125.216.108)  21.068 ms  20.657 ms  12.045 ms
    6  te0-8-0-2.dllatxl3-cr01.texas.rr.com (72.179.205.48)  11.154 ms  11.540 ms  24.495 ms
    7  107.14.17.136 (107.14.17.136)  11.994 ms  14.217 ms  15.816 ms
    8  ae-3-0.pr0.dfw10.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.209) 14.566 ms  32.670 ms  15.947 ms
    9  ix-0-3-2-0.tcore2.dt8-dallas.as6453.net (209.58.47.105)  11.647 ms  12.260 ms  12.386 ms
    10  if-2-2.tcore1.dt8-dallas.as6453.net (66.110.56.5) 10.023 ms  12.285 ms  12.338 ms
    11  209.58.47.74 (209.58.47.74)  17.641 ms 16.741 ms  16.372 ms
    12  0.ae2.xl3.dfw7.alter.net (152.63.97.57)  11.584 ms  12.315 ms  12.890 ms
    13  0.so-6-1-0.dfw01-bb-rtr1.verizon-gni.net (152.63.1.90)  13.812 ms
        0.ge-3-0-0.dfw01-bb-rtr1.verizon-gni.net (152.63.1.17)  18.831 ms
        130.81.23.164 (130.81.23.164)  14.189 ms
    14  p14-0-0.dllstx-lcr-05.verizon-gni.net (130.81.27.40) 14.561 ms  13.621 ms  15.544 ms
    15  * * *
    16  static-xxx.xxx.206.19.dllstx.fios.verizon.net (xxx.xxx.206.19)  23.125 ms  24.136 ms  22.411 ms
    Second run: Traceroute has started…
    traceroute to xxx.xxx.206.19 (xxx.xxx.206.19), 64 hops max, 72 byte packets
    1  alfirving (192.168.0.1)  0.603 ms  0.420 ms  0.324 ms
    2  10.72.28.1 (10.72.28.1)  40.494 ms 26.625 ms  14.152 ms
    3  70.125.216.150 (70.125.216.150)  9.431 ms  9.660 ms  9.018 ms
    4  24.164.209.116 (24.164.209.116)  16.293 ms  12.339 ms  19.252 ms
    5  70.125.216.108 (70.125.216.108)  15.801 ms  11.438 ms  12.068 ms
    6  te0-8-0-2.dllatxl3-cr01.texas.rr.com (72.179.205.48)  23.221 ms  30.459 ms  17.519 ms
    7  107.14.17.136 (107.14.17.136)  14.611 ms  15.696 ms  15.775 ms
    8  ae-3-0.pr0.dfw10.tbone.rr.com (66.109.6.209) 17.643 ms  14.812 ms  16.294 ms
    9  ix-0-3-2-0.tcore2.dt8-dallas.as6453.net (209.58.47.105)  11.169 ms  12.374 ms  9.849 ms
    10  if-2-2.tcore1.dt8-dallas.as6453.net (66.110.56.5) 16.453 ms  12.168 ms  12.384 ms
    11  209.58.47.74 (209.58.47.74)  18.015 ms 14.867 ms  16.432 ms
    12  0.ae2.xl3.dfw7.alter.net (152.63.97.57)  11.471 ms  11.993 ms  12.395 ms
    13  0.ge-6-3-0.dfw01-bb-rtr1.verizon-gni.net (152.63.96.42)  14.077 ms  29.153 ms
        0.ge-3-0-0.dfw01-bb-rtr1.verizon-gni.net (152.63.1.17) 17.962 ms
    14  p14-0-0.dllstx-lcr-05.verizon-gni.net (130.81.27.40)  14.629 ms  12.297 ms  12.839 ms
    15  * * *
    16  static-xxx.xxx.206.19.dllstx.fios.verizon.net (xxx.xxx.206.19)  24.976 ms  22.170 ms  22.376 ms
    Ping:
    First Run: Ping has started…
    PING xxx.xxx.206.19 (xxx.xxx.206.19): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=0 ttl=242 time=22.814 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=242 time=24.621 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=2 ttl=242 time=24.711 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=3 ttl=242 time=24.109 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=4 ttl=242 time=23.336 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=5 ttl=242 time=25.644 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=6 ttl=242 time=27.755 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=7 ttl=242 time=25.135 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=8 ttl=242 time=22.443 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=9 ttl=242 time=24.635 ms
    --- xxx.xxx.206.19 ping statistics ---
    10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 22.443/24.520/27.755/1.448 ms
    Second Run: Ping has started…
    PING xxx.xxx.206.19 (xxx.xxx.206.19): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=0 ttl=242 time=27.183 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=1 ttl=242 time=24.629 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=2 ttl=242 time=22.511 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=3 ttl=242 time=39.620 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=4 ttl=242 time=26.722 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=5 ttl=242 time=23.183 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=6 ttl=242 time=25.171 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=7 ttl=242 time=24.412 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=8 ttl=242 time=23.837 ms
    64 bytes from xxx.xxx.206.19: icmp_seq=9 ttl=242 time=23.785 ms
    --- xxx.xxx.206.19 ping statistics ---
    10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 22.511/26.105/39.620/4.713 ms
    (3) Any other ideas on what my call quality problem might be, or how I can tweak it?  For example, would putting a DIR-655 router at Location A and enabling QOS really make a difference?
    Thanks to everyone, and I hope this is not too long or difficult to understand.

    Hey thanks for your reply  Yeah im only getting 1 ro sometimes 2 bars reception so hopefully the antenna will beef things up but I think it is what it is perhaps.  

Maybe you are looking for