Ok sorry, the denver side for us is 208.89.160.11 and the dallas softlayer side for us is 70.87.254.1 You are right about different paths it appears that the route back is direct via level3 instead of 360/zayo and same latency is present so looks like more likely a softlayer issue? trace from our dallas box(softlayer) to our denver box(greenhouse): 2: po101.dsr01.dllstx5.networklayer.com (70.87.254.1) 1.941ms 3: po51.dsr01.dllstx3.networklayer.com (70.85.127.105) 2.217ms 4: ae16.bbr01.eq01.dal03.networklayer.com (173.192.18.224) 1.719ms 5: ae0.bbr01.cs01.lax01.networklayer.com (173.192.18.141) 32.448ms 6: 360.net.any2ix.coresite.com (206.223.143.201) 657.255ms 7: lax1-core-01-xe-0-0-0.360.net (66.62.2.213) 36.196ms 8: den1-core-01-ae0.360.net (66.62.2.169) 246.045ms 9: den1-edge-01-lag2.360.net (66.62.2.194) asymm 8 271.648ms 10: 66.62.160.30 (66.62.160.30) asymm 9 543.816ms 11: CYSWYDC01ESW1-001-1-1.GREENHOUSEDATA.NET (208.89.160.11) asymm 10 793.839ms reached from denver box to dallas (mtr is all thats installed and cant install anything else connectivity is too horrible) Packets Pings Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 2. CYSWYDC01RTR1-001-0-1.GREENHOUSEDATA.NET 0.0% 17 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.0 3. ge-6-13.car2.Denver1.Level3.net 5.9% 17 4.6 121.9 4.6 417.4 116.1 4. ae-21-52.car1.Denver1.Level3.net 0.0% 17 101.9 25.2 2.9 140.6 40.6 5. te1-5.bbr01.cf01.den01.networklayer.com 43.8% 17 565.9 479.9 169.5 919.2 214.1 6. ae7.bbr01.cs01.den01.networklayer.com 37.5% 17 642.3 665.4 170.0 928.8 261.4 7. ae12.bbr02.eq01.dal03.networklayer.com 50.0% 17 1168. 650.2 95.4 1168. 391.4 8. po32.dsr01.dllstx3.networklayer.com 31.2% 17 423.9 643.3 80.0 1135. 368.2 9. po101.dsr01.dllstx5.networklayer.com 50.0% 16 347.1 814.1 347.1 1874. 508.6 thanks for pointing it out chris On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:00 AM, Jeremy Chadwick <jdc@koitsu.org> wrote:
Chris,
You need to provide traceroutes from both directions. The below is for Dallas --> Denver, but the return path (Denver --> Dallas) needs to be provided too. You might find that the return path goes through some provider other than Zayo/360/Abovenet/whateverthey'recalledtoday.
I know that's hard to do when the path has latency or packet loss (which you don't show in your results -- you only show latency), but this is exactly what a cronjob traceroute writing to a log file is for. :-)
My point: remember that routing on the Internet most of the time is asymmetric. Reference material (read, do not skim):
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog47/presentations/Sunday/RAS_Traceroute_N4...
Finally, you didn't provide IP addresses of either server (in Denver or Dallas), so when you ask for "someone else to test", that's not easily doable, at least not to the endpoints involved (pinging routers is not sufficient evidence, sadly).
-- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@koitsu.org | | UNIX Systems Administrator http://jdc.koitsu.org/ | | Mountain View, CA, US | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP 4BD6C0CB |
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:10:32PM -0500, chris wrote:
Seeing massive packet loss and high latency from 360.net (which appears to be owned by zayo/abovenet/whatever) in denver....
Here is a trace snip from our server @ softlayer in dallas to one of our servers in denver
5: ae0.bbr01.cs01.lax01.networklayer.com (173.192.18.141) 29.698ms 6: no reply 7: 66.62.2.213 (66.62.2.213) 4588.320ms 8: den1-core-01-xe-1-1-0.360.net (66.62.2.166) 22583.831ms
I only have one one server in denver that I can reproduce this with hoping someone can else can test and reproduce similar issues
thanks chris
_______________________________________________ Outages mailing list Outages@outages.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages