Sponsored

Poor Service

Shaun

ULTIMATE Member
Vawn> Is the new routing better for you now, you seem to get off COLT earlier now :)

Shaun :)
 

Vawn

Regular Member
yes m8 i now seem to get a ping of 65 insted of 300-500. as you can see here.

D:\Documents and Settings\Vawn>ping 193.35.135.106

Pinging 193.35.135.106 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=73ms TTL=108
Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=66ms TTL=108
Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=66ms TTL=108
Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=63ms TTL=108

Ping statistics for 193.35.135.106:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 63ms, Maximum = 73ms, Average = 67ms

D:\Documents and Settings\Vawn>ping 195.149.21.73

Pinging 195.149.21.73 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=60ms TTL=119

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.73:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 60ms, Average = 57ms

its so much better. lets just hope it stays that way.
good job david. :)

<small>[ 19.11.2002, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Vawn ]</small>
 
Vawn, Moonraker

We have implemented a change that we are testing for a day or so. It seemed to have an immediate effect. It was a routing issue within some configuration outside of Quiks' control, but once found (Yesterday) COLT fixed it very quickly (Today). If it is still ok tomorrow, then hopefully the fix will be permanent.

Then we can move on to improving our product rangge, members page etc. And when we enforce the AUP there will be more capacity for others.

Regards to all, thanks for your feed back over recent weeks, and thanks for your patience. I will post an update tomorrow or Thursday, and will bring other news over coming weeks.
 

Moonraker

Casual Member
Thanks for the update David.

My experience at the moment is it is during the day ( especially between 10:00 - 17:00) when it is worst which is quite a turnabout from most ISP's I have used. I guess there are some heavy business users.

Ping is indeed nice at the moment as Vawn says.

Look forward to hearing about the updates etc later in the week.
 

Vawn

Regular Member
just finished night shift to find my ping is still exerlent, think me sticking with Quick has proved a good move as it looks like i have a top notch ping, d/l rate and costomer service second to none, making Quick the best isp i have ever had once aggain :D .

Thanks goes to David for all his hard work and patiance with my windging. (think i spelled that right ? lol ), cant thank you enugh David.

cheers steve :)
 
Hello again to all

Ping times seem ok. We are still monitoring, and on Friday I need to confirm to COLT that all is ok, and that I accept the new configuration.

Please let me know if there are any major problems.

Regards
 

Shaun

ULTIMATE Member
Vawn> Glad the problem is sorted, now I am so jealous at those pings, I never get near those :'(

I get 110-115 for the IP you just posted, I suppose thats good for dial-up 56k :)

Shaun :)
 

Vawn

Regular Member
yep m8 100-115 is good for a 56k , i know ppl who would be jelious of those 56k pings.

and as you can see QuickInternet is sorted for sure , got same pings as these no matter what time i ping the servers.

D:\Documents and Settings\Vawn>ping bbc.co.uk

Pinging bbc.co.uk [132.185.132.204] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 132.185.132.204: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=245
Reply from 132.185.132.204: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=245
Reply from 132.185.132.204: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=245
Reply from 132.185.132.204: bytes=32 time=61ms TTL=245

Ping statistics for 132.185.132.204:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 61ms, Average = 56ms

D:\Documents and Settings\Vawn>ping 193.35.135.106

Pinging 193.35.135.106 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=108
Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=108
Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=108
Reply from 193.35.135.106: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=108

Ping statistics for 193.35.135.106:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 65ms, Maximum = 68ms, Average = 66ms

D:\Documents and Settings\Vawn>ping 195.149.21.73

Pinging 195.149.21.73 with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=59ms TTL=119
Reply from 195.149.21.73: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=119

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.73:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 57ms, Maximum = 59ms, Average = 57ms

all thnx to David btw :)
 

Moonraker

Casual Member
Not bad Vawn. But you could have done better <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Ping has started ...

PING 132.185.132.204 (132.185.132.204): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 132.185.132.204: icmp_seq=0 ttl=244 time=54.021 ms
64 bytes from 132.185.132.204: icmp_seq=1 ttl=244 time=55.023 ms
64 bytes from 132.185.132.204: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=52.9 ms
64 bytes from 132.185.132.204: icmp_seq=3 ttl=244 time=54.382 ms

--- 132.185.132.204 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 52.9/54.081/55.023 ms</pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">and:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Ping has started ...

PING 193.35.135.106 (193.35.135.106): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 193.35.135.106: icmp_seq=0 ttl=107 time=59.088 ms
64 bytes from 193.35.135.106: icmp_seq=1 ttl=107 time=59.789 ms
64 bytes from 193.35.135.106: icmp_seq=2 ttl=107 time=63.8 ms
64 bytes from 193.35.135.106: icmp_seq=3 ttl=107 time=64.561 ms

--- 193.35.135.106 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 59.088/61.809/64.561 ms </pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">and:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Ping has started ...

PING 195.149.21.73 (195.149.21.73): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 195.149.21.73: icmp_seq=0 ttl=118 time=53.171 ms
64 bytes from 195.149.21.73: icmp_seq=1 ttl=118 time=54.046 ms
64 bytes from 195.149.21.73: icmp_seq=2 ttl=118 time=52.302 ms
64 bytes from 195.149.21.73: icmp_seq=3 ttl=118 time=49.799 ms

--- 195.149.21.73 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 49.799/52.329/54.046 ms </pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">note these are with large packet sizes than Vawn.

If you want to be really jealous check out this latest traceroute to <a href="http://www.bbc.com" target="_blank">www.bbc.com</a> and compare to earlier postings:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Traceroute has started ...

traceroute to www.bbc.com (212.58.224.112), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 4.756 ms 3.801 ms 4.57 ms
2 cust-e1s031292-s1-0-5-5-1.kjc-1.kjc.lon.uk.colt.net (213.86.146.42) 37.655 ms 38.319 ms 41.92 ms
3 router.quik.co.uk (212.36.160.253) 37.783 ms 38.216 ms 39.293 ms
4 213.86.52.66 (213.86.52.66) 37.711 ms 38.593 ms 39.313 ms
5 g1-0.core-1.pct.lon.uk.colt.net (212.161.120.33) 37.577 ms 37.851 ms 39.143 ms
6 p1-2.ibr-2.ctf.lon.uk.colt.net (195.110.65.173) 44.494 ms 37.422 ms 38.564 ms
7 s5-0.ibr-1.kjc.lon.uk.colt.net (213.86.6.2) 39.708 ms 39.812 ms 37.785 ms
8 pos2-0-roobarb.lon.router.colt.net (212.74.64.25) 39.305 ms 37.456 ms 38.57 ms
9 pos1-0-oscar.lon.router.colt.net (212.74.64.18) 41.285 ms 51.213 ms 37.463 ms
10 rt-linx-b.thdo.bbc.co.uk (195.66.226.103) 38.542 ms 37.992 ms 41.404 ms
11 212.58.224.112 (212.58.224.112) 42.123 ms 40.802 ms 45.761 ms</pre><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Now thats pretty sweet :) Thanks David for this.
 

Shaun

ULTIMATE Member
C:\>ping <a href="http://www.bbc.com" target="_blank">www.bbc.com</a>

Pinging <a href="http://www.bbc.com" target="_blank">www.bbc.com</a> [212.58.224.126] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.126: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.126: bytes=32 time=125ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.126: bytes=32 time=110ms TTL=250
Reply from 212.58.224.126: bytes=32 time=125ms TTL=250

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.126:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 110ms, Maximum = 141ms, Average = 125ms

Tracing route to <a href="http://www.bbc.com" target="_blank">www.bbc.com</a> [212.58.224.126]
[ 1] ( 212.140.212.97 ) [ 125ms] webport-cl4-hg2.ilford.mdip.bt.net
[ 2] ( 192.168.1.70 ) [ 219ms]
[ 3] ( 194.74.77.228 ) [ 125ms] interconnect4-l0.ilford.fixed.bt.net
[ 4] ( 194.74.16.84 ) [ 125ms] core1-gig2-1.ilford.ukcore.bt.net
[ 5] ( 194.74.65.117 ) [ 109ms] core1-pos8-0.telehouse.ukcore.bt.net
[ 6] ( 195.66.224.103 ) [ 109ms] rt-linx-a.thdo.bbc.co.uk
[ 7] ( 212.58.224.126 ) [ 204ms] www26.thdo.bbc.co.uk
-- Traceroute complete --

Muhahahahahahaha, 7 servers, would be brill if only I had ISDN :D

Shaun :)
 
All

I'm really pleased that all is well. Could you point me at a good place to get started for a newbie gamer. It's about time I looked at whatever it is that seems to keep people glued to the screen for hours.

Regards

Dave Mitchell
 

Vawn

Regular Member
Oh you need to get Unreal Taunament and come to #ut.orange so that we can play and i can show you the tricks of UT.
BTW im ADMIN of all Orange servers and an accumplished UT gamer :)
if you do decide to play UT then let me know and i will give you my msm email so you can contact me quickly and we can have a bit of fun :) .

BTW goto <a href="http://www.planetunreal.com" target="_blank">www.planetunreal.com</a> and have a look at UT.

<small>[ 23.11.2002, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: Vawn ]</small>
 
Top
Promotion
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £19.95 (*22.00)
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: Promo Code: HYPER20
  • SSE £22.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • xln telecom £22.74 (*47.94)
    Avg. Speed 66Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • TalkTalk £22.95 (*29.95)
    Avg. Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Plusnet £22.99 (*35.98)
    Avg. Speed 36Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: £75 Reward Card
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
Promotion
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. BT (2724)
  2. FTTP (2619)
  3. FTTC (1759)
  4. Building Digital UK (1708)
  5. Politics (1614)
  6. Openreach (1574)
  7. Business (1391)
  8. FTTH (1317)
  9. Statistics (1209)
  10. Mobile Broadband (1179)
  11. Fibre Optic (1045)
  12. 4G (1017)
  13. Wireless Internet (1002)
  14. Ofcom Regulation (993)
  15. Virgin Media (981)
  16. EE (672)
  17. Sky Broadband (658)
  18. TalkTalk (645)
  19. Vodafone (643)
  20. 5G (476)
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules