Ping Issues

By Swannnson · 13 replies
Jul 3, 2018
Post New Reply
  1. Hey guys,

    I'm having some issues with my internet. Let me go into deeper detail for you all. My internet was slow on a game on the playstation, so I decided to do a speedtest. The speedtest was showing much lower than what we are paying for, so I decided to call our ISP. Long story short, they said it was the router. (We just bought a new router around 10 days ago, it's the Nighthawk R700P). The guy pretty much hung up and told me to call him back if the situation didn't get any better. About 20 minutes later I did another speed test and got 15 down and 5 up. I was pretty excited, this is what we were paying for and I figured he had fixed it. Not believing it, I did another one and the results were less than 1 down and around 1 up. So I did around 5 more in about 2 minutes, and they were all extremely low except for 1 of them, in which I got around 15 and 5 again. Once I got this I went upstairs to where my playstation is and I logged into the game I was playing. I turned on net debug stats and looked at my ping. There I found that the ping will go from around 85 ms to 100 to 130 to 150 then 230+ all in the matter of 5 seconds, and then it will go back down to 80 and repeat. I did a tracert to 8.8.8.8 and got these results.

    Ping has started…



    PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=53 time=83.639 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=101.492 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=146.236 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=102.719 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=53 time=119.800 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=53 time=95.606 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=53 time=81.078 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=53 time=93.975 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=53 time=86.510 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=53 time=77.531 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=10 ttl=53 time=90.353 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=11 ttl=53 time=157.707 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=12 ttl=53 time=154.907 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=13 ttl=53 time=91.709 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=14 ttl=53 time=98.343 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=15 ttl=53 time=141.806 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=16 ttl=53 time=367.093 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=17 ttl=53 time=737.232 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=18 ttl=53 time=360.123 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=19 ttl=53 time=553.482 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=20 ttl=53 time=522.927 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=21 ttl=53 time=580.109 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=22 ttl=53 time=599.816 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=23 ttl=53 time=864.604 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=24 ttl=53 time=635.630 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=25 ttl=53 time=558.712 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=26 ttl=53 time=734.212 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=27 ttl=53 time=573.718 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=28 ttl=53 time=567.519 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=29 ttl=53 time=116.616 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=30 ttl=53 time=104.370 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=31 ttl=53 time=122.559 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=32 ttl=53 time=104.056 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=33 ttl=53 time=118.352 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=34 ttl=53 time=461.466 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=35 ttl=53 time=277.546 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=36 ttl=53 time=149.511 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=37 ttl=53 time=151.136 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=38 ttl=53 time=116.110 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=39 ttl=53 time=117.555 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=40 ttl=53 time=95.960 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=41 ttl=53 time=133.669 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=42 ttl=53 time=119.590 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=43 ttl=53 time=105.131 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=44 ttl=53 time=98.709 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=45 ttl=53 time=122.232 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=46 ttl=53 time=139.535 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=47 ttl=53 time=76.448 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=48 ttl=53 time=97.500 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=49 ttl=53 time=119.888 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=50 ttl=53 time=397.165 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=51 ttl=53 time=125.408 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=52 ttl=53 time=107.126 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=53 ttl=53 time=115.706 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=54 ttl=53 time=317.522 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=55 ttl=53 time=108.509 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=56 ttl=53 time=92.727 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=57 ttl=53 time=125.861 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=58 ttl=53 time=148.930 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=59 ttl=53 time=82.566 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=60 ttl=53 time=101.387 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=61 ttl=53 time=80.901 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=62 ttl=53 time=105.275 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=63 ttl=53 time=119.601 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=64 ttl=53 time=87.118 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=65 ttl=53 time=81.073 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=66 ttl=53 time=78.710 ms

    Request timeout for icmp_seq 67

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=67 ttl=53 time=1007.766 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=68 ttl=53 time=88.177 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=69 ttl=53 time=118.841 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=70 ttl=53 time=112.045 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=71 ttl=53 time=185.890 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=72 ttl=53 time=116.452 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=73 ttl=53 time=128.204 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=74 ttl=53 time=148.701 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=75 ttl=53 time=150.985 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=76 ttl=53 time=114.325 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=77 ttl=53 time=86.905 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=78 ttl=53 time=112.725 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=79 ttl=53 time=135.347 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=80 ttl=53 time=176.762 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=81 ttl=53 time=118.610 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=82 ttl=53 time=91.973 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=83 ttl=53 time=103.174 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=84 ttl=53 time=85.885 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=85 ttl=53 time=120.010 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=86 ttl=53 time=106.391 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=87 ttl=53 time=119.005 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=88 ttl=53 time=142.236 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=89 ttl=53 time=112.179 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=90 ttl=53 time=531.253 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=91 ttl=53 time=104.752 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=92 ttl=53 time=272.372 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=93 ttl=53 time=84.040 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=94 ttl=53 time=99.032 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=95 ttl=53 time=103.325 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=97 ttl=53 time=78.902 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=98 ttl=53 time=92.924 ms

    64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=99 ttl=53 time=265.875 ms



    --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics ---

    100 packets transmitted, 99 packets received, 1.0% packet loss

    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 76.448/201.184/1007.766/194.472 ms

    Any help would be greatly appreciated!!!
     
  2. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    Try this instead - - it will locate where in the path the lag is occurring:
    • pathping -4 -n 8.8.8.8
    It will take ~2minutes to complete. The path being tested is reported before the analysis and the LAST LINE should be 8.8.8.8,
    otherwise you're not getting the full result.
     
  3. Swannnson

    Swannnson TS Rookie Topic Starter

    I am sorry, I have a mac and this command does not seem to work. Is there a command equivalent on mac or am I screwed?

    EDIT: I think this may be what you are looking for.

    1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.757 ms 0.895 ms 0.856 ms

    2 192.168.7.1 (192.168.7.1) 1.803 ms 1.617 ms 1.298 ms

    3 192.168.254.251 (192.168.254.251) 8.170 ms 7.362 ms 5.066 ms

    4 192.168.251.254 (192.168.251.254) 197.104 ms 79.369 ms *

    5 * 10.0.3.97 (10.0.3.97) 155.259 ms 159.519 ms

    6 96-3-200-185-static.midco.net (96.3.200.185) 52.241 ms 31.469 ms 77.737 ms

    7 24-220-182-130-static.midco.net (24.220.182.130) 536.790 ms 432.178 ms

    96-2-129-177-static.midco.net (96.2.129.177) 48.619 ms

    8 24-220-255-51-static.midco.net (24.220.255.51) 61.802 ms

    24-220-182-74-static.midco.net (24.220.182.74) 50.732 ms

    24-220-255-51-static.midco.net (24.220.255.51) 48.732 ms

    9 24-220-255-5-static.midco.net (24.220.255.5) 97.895 ms 100.769 ms

    24-220-255-2-static.midco.net (24.220.255.2) 111.701 ms

    10 24-220-19-102-static.midco.net (24.220.19.102) 44.715 ms

    24-220-14-90-static.midco.net (24.220.14.90) 105.725 ms

    96-2-129-130-static.midco.net (96.2.129.130) 104.597 ms

    11 eqixva-google-gige.google.com (206.126.236.21) 99.536 ms 98.731 ms 126.805 ms

    12 108.170.240.97 (108.170.240.97) 91.879 ms 130.324 ms

    108.170.246.65 (108.170.246.65) 181.576 ms

    13 209.85.255.227 (209.85.255.227) 87.625 ms

    209.85.254.125 (209.85.254.125) 113.411 ms

    209.85.255.227 (209.85.255.227) 107.927 ms

    14 google-public-dns-a.google.com (8.8.8.8) 108.429 ms 100.722 ms 91.672 ms
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2018
  4. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    That's correct; PATHPING is not Mac :sigh:

    Your result is a TRACERT and not what I was hoping for.

    The top is interesting however:

    1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.757 ms 0.895 ms 0.856 ms
    2 192.168.7.1 (192.168.7.1) 1.803 ms 1.617 ms 1.298 ms
    3 192.168.254.251 (192.168.254.251) 8.170 ms 7.362 ms 5.066 ms
    4 192.168.251.254 (192.168.251.254) 197.104 ms 79.369 ms *
    5 * 10.0.3.97 (10.0.3.97) 155.259 ms 159.519 ms
    All of these are LOCAL to your infrastructure - - this looks like a company structure. Line five is terrible for local system.
    The original PING times are not great either. Is this a dial-up?
     
  5. Swannnson

    Swannnson TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Sadly, no. We are paying $60/month for 10 mbps down and 5 mbps up. I can get onto my old gaming pc and get a pathping for you if you feel it would help. Interesting enough, I decided to go on wifi for s&g's, and found that the ping was noticeably lower, in the 200's sometimes getting to as low as 90. This had me thinking, could it be a failed wire?? Either way... I will get you your pathping. Made me laugh when you said dial up, as it could be. Our internet has been a straight mess for the last 3 months.
     
  6. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    Here's my cable ISP results:
    Code:
    Tracing route to google-public-dns-b.google.com [8.8.4.4]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:
      0  jeffpc7 [192.168.0.5]
      1  localrouter [192.168.0.1]
      2  142.254.237.97
      3  agg60.wlvgcabn02h.socal.rr.com [24.30.172.109]
      4  agg22.vnnycajz02r.socal.rr.com [72.129.14.168]
      5  agg29.tustcaft01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.13.2]
      6  bu-ether16.tustca4200w-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.64]
      7  bu-ether14.lsancarc0yw-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.4]
      8  0.ae1.pr1.lax00.tbone.rr.com [107.14.17.250]
      9  ix-ae-24-0.tcore1.lvw-los-angeles.as6453.net [66.110.59.81]
     10  72.14.219.150
     11  108.170.247.225
     12  209.85.250.1
     13  google-public-dns-b.google.com [8.8.4.4]
    
    Computing statistics for 325 seconds...
                Source to Here   This Node/Link
    Hop  RTT    Lost/Sent = Pct  Lost/Sent = Pct  Address
      0                                           jeffpc7 [192.168.0.5]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      1    0ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  localrouter [192.168.0.1]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      2   22ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  142.254.237.97
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      3   25ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  agg60.wlvgcabn02h.socal.rr.com [24.30.172.109]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      4   28ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  agg22.vnnycajz02r.socal.rr.com [72.129.14.168]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      5   27ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  agg29.tustcaft01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.13.2]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      6   26ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  bu-ether16.tustca4200w-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.64]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      7   28ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  bu-ether14.lsancarc0yw-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.4]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      8   30ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  0.ae1.pr1.lax00.tbone.rr.com [107.14.17.250]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
      9   25ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  ix-ae-24-0.tcore1.lvw-los-angeles.as6453.net [66.110.59.81]
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     10   25ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  72.14.219.150
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     11   25ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  108.170.247.225
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     12  ---     100/ 100 =100%   100/ 100 =100%  209.85.250.1
                                    0/ 100 =  0%   |
     13   25ms     0/ 100 =  0%     0/ 100 =  0%  google-public-dns-b.google.com [8.8.4.4]
    
    Node 12 is 100% loss AT THAT NODE, not the interconnections above or below - - that means the system is config'd to NOT respond to ping.

    All times are below 100ms​
     
  7. Swannnson

    Swannnson TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Tracing route to 8.8.8.8 over a maximum of 30 hops

    0 192.168.1.10
    1 192.168.1.1
    2 192.168.7.1
    3 192.168.254.251
    4 192.168.251.254
    5 10.0.3.97
    6 96.3.200.185
    7 96.2.129.177
    8 24.220.255.57
    9 * 24.220.7.6
    10 24.220.19.33
    11 206.126.236.21
    12 108.170.246.65
    13 216.239.41.13
    14 8.8.8.8

    Computing statistics for 350 seconds...
    Source to Here This Node/Link
    Hop RTT Lost/Sent = Pct Lost/Sent = Pct Address
    0 192.168.1.10
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    1 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.1.1
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    2 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.7.1
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    3 3ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.254.251
    2/ 100 = 2% |
    4 721ms 8/ 100 = 8% 6/ 100 = 6% 192.168.251.254
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    5 734ms 9/ 100 = 9% 7/ 100 = 7% 10.0.3.97
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    6 768ms 10/ 100 = 10% 8/ 100 = 8% 96.3.200.185
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    7 727ms 2/ 100 = 2% 0/ 100 = 0% 96.2.129.177
    2/ 100 = 2% |
    8 740ms 9/ 100 = 9% 5/ 100 = 5% 24.220.255.57
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    9 737ms 4/ 100 = 4% 0/ 100 = 0% 24.220.7.6
    1/ 100 = 1% |
    10 736ms 7/ 100 = 7% 2/ 100 = 2% 24.220.19.33
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    11 --- 100/ 100 =100% 95/ 100 = 95% 206.126.236.21
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    12 --- 100/ 100 =100% 95/ 100 = 95% 108.170.246.65
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    13 --- 100/ 100 =100% 95/ 100 = 95% 216.239.41.13
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    14 759ms 5/ 100 = 5% 0/ 100 = 0% 8.8.8.8

    Trace complete.

    Hope this is what you were looking for :p ( I have no clue how you got it to look that nice, sorry for the ugliness)
     
  8. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    Reformatted, it looks like:
    Code:
    0 192.168.1.10
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    1 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.1.1
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    2 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.7.1
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    3 3ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.254.251
        2/ 100 = 2% |
    4 721ms 8/ 100 = 8% 6/ 100 = 6% 192.168.251.254
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    5 734ms 9/ 100 = 9% 7/ 100 = 7% 10.0.3.97
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    6 768ms 10/ 100 = 10% 8/ 100 = 8% 96.3.200.185
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    7 727ms 2/ 100 = 2% 0/ 100 = 0% 96.2.129.177
        2/ 100 = 2% |
    8 740ms 9/ 100 = 9% 5/ 100 = 5% 24.220.255.57
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    9 737ms 4/ 100 = 4% 0/ 100 = 0% 24.220.7.6
        1/ 100 = 1% |
    10 736ms 7/ 100 = 7% 2/ 100 = 2% 24.220.19.33
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    11 --- 100/ 100 =100% 95/ 100 = 95% 206.126.236.21
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    12 --- 100/ 100 =100% 95/ 100 = 95% 108.170.246.65
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    13 --- 100/ 100 =100% 95/ 100 = 95% 216.239.41.13
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    14 759ms 5/ 100 = 5% 0/ 100 = 0% 8.8.8.8
    1) ping times are terrible on nodes 4-10, but that's not your fault & you can't change that EXCEPT get another ISP.

    2) notice node 3: 3 3ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0%
    that's what we expect.

    3) nodes 4,5,6, 8, 10 have x/100 where x is >0; BUMBER! Poor node reliability to say the least.

    4) link errors between 3-4, 7-8, 9-10 are issues again which you can not change :sigh:

    testing node (6) 96.3.200.185 ---
    NetRange: 96.3.200.184 - 96.3.200.191
    CIDR: 96.3.200.184/29
    NetName: NET-96-3-200-184-29
    NetHandle: NET-96-3-200-184-1
    Parent: NET-96-2-0-0-15 (NET-96-2-0-0-1)
    NetType: Reassigned
    OriginAS: AS11232
    Customer: Invisimax (C05732873)
    RegDate: 2015-05-19
    Updated: 2015-05-19
    Ref: https://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-96-3-200-184-1

    CustName: Invisimax
    Address: 5030 GATEWAY DR
    City: Grand Forks
    StateProv: ND
    PostalCode: 58203
    Country: US
    RegDate: 2015-05-19
    Updated: 2016-08-01​

    Looks to be North Dakota .. Says Fixed WiFi service?

    Look for alternative service is my recommendation.
     
  9. Swannnson

    Swannnson TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Ugh what a bummer, yes, ND, that's where I'm from. Unfortunately there aren't any other ISP's around me. If I were to call them and tell them the problems I was experiencing, what would I say to them? From what you were saying it seems to be completely their fault... If I were to call them and say 'node x, x, x, x, and x, etc are failing, this is your fault' would they even fix it? Either way... thank you for your help. Kinda weird how you can pull up all that information from my IP's I gave you tho :'(
     
  10. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    Here's who's who:

    4:- 192.168.251.254 Invisimax, Grand Forks
    6:- 96.3.200.185 Invisimax, Grand Forks
    7:- 96.2.129.177 Midcontinent Communications, Sioux Falls
    8:- 24.220.255.57 Midcontinent Communications, Sioux Falls
    9:- 24.220.7.6 Midcontinent Communications, Sioux Falls
    10:- 24.220.19.33 Midcontinent Communications, Sioux Falls

    13:- 216.239.41.13 GOOGLE​

    These are nodes in the Internet shared by many, not under your control, and likely suffering from your ISP

    These are YOU and your ISP:
    Code:
    0 192.168.1.10
        0/ 100 = 0% |
    1 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.1.1
       0/ 100 = 0% |
    2 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.7.1
       0/ 100 = 0% |
    3 3ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.254.251
       2/ 100 = 2% |
    4 721ms 8/ 100 = 8% 6/ 100 = 6% 192.168.251.254
       0/ 100 = 0% |
    5 734ms 9/ 100 = 9% 7/ 100 = 7% 10.0.3.97
    Nodes 4-5 is where the problems begin. The PING of 700+ is just terrible.
    It is unusual to see multiple 192.168.x.y plus a 10.0.x.y as these are LOCAL addresses and not public.
    I conclude you're inside some company structure and not at home -- pls confirm.
     
  11. Swannnson

    Swannnson TS Rookie Topic Starter

    Ahh, I am at home, but I think I may know what you are talking about. We have a structure for our internet where 2 other families are run off as well. I guess this is the 'company' structure you are talking about. Is this causing the problem? Sorry.. I have no clue. There is a reason I came to this forum after all!! There is a worker coming out tomorrow morning. We'll see what he has to say about all this. Did a speed test earlier today and got 0 download and 2 upload.. don't even know what to say.

     
  12. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    Make sure you have wired router to router and never router--system--router
     
  13. Swannnson

    Swannnson TS Rookie Topic Starter

    We aren't wired- we are over air. Can't get wired over 1.5 Mbps down/up because the ISP that owns our ground refuses to plow better cable. Went through a whole ordeal calling state senators trying to get the company to give the ground up, to no avail.
     
  14. jobeard

    jobeard TS Ambassador Posts: 11,891   +1,273

    Your system is:
    0 192.168.1.10
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    1 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.1.1
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    2 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.7.1
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    3 3ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.254.251
    2/ 100 = 2% |
    4 721ms 8/ 100 = 8% 6/ 100 = 6% 192.168.251.254
    0/ 100 = 0% |
    5 734ms 9/ 100 = 9% 7/ 100 = 7% 10.0.3.97
    NODE 0 and your router is at node 1. The ISP is node 6
    • 6 768ms 10/ 100 = 10% 8/ 100 = 8% 96.3.200.185

    Your tech should have access to the system at node 5, 10.0.3.97 or possible one lower node 4 192.168.251.254

    I have no idea how nodes 2-4 could possible be connected via wifi, but YOUR traffic travels thru ALL nodes shown
     

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...