nanog mailing list archives
Re: Peering Latency
From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 09:52:29 -0700
On Jul 3, 2014 9:47 AM, "Sam Norris" <Sam () sandiegobroadband com> wrote:
Hey all - new to the list but not to the community... Wondering if this is typical when there is too small of a pipe between
peering
arrangements: From Level3 to Time Warner ADDRESS STATUS 2 4.69.133.206 4ms 4ms 4ms 3 4.69.153.222 9ms 4ms 4ms 4 4.69.158.78 8ms 4ms 4ms (L3) 5 66.109.9.121 28ms 53ms 29ms (TWC) <------ 6 107.14.19.87 30ms 28ms 28ms 7 66.109.6.213 27ms 28ms 28ms 8 72.129.1.1 32ms 32ms 32ms 9 72.129.1.7 27ms 26ms 25ms 10 67.52.158.145 28ms 29ms 31ms From TWC to Level3 # ADDRESS RT1 RT2 RT3 STATUS 2 24.43.183.34 5ms 5ms 6ms 3 72.129.1.14 8ms 8ms 8ms 4 72.129.1.2 6ms 8ms 8ms 5 107.14.19.30 7ms 8ms 8ms 6 66.109.6.4 8ms 8ms 8ms 7 107.14.19.86 5ms 5ms 5ms 8 66.109.9.122 34ms 33ms 31ms (TWC)
<------
9 4.69.158.65 31ms 30ms 29ms (L3) 10 4.69.153.221 33ms 33ms 34ms 11 4.69.133.205 32ms 32ms 31ms I am showing, typically at night, a 20-40ms jump when hopping from Level3
to
Time Warner and back in Tustin, CA. This does not happen when using
Cogent or
other blended providers bandwidth. I believe they are probably stuffing
too
many bits thru the peering there and wondering whats the best way to
prove to
them both (we pay for both) that they need to fix it. During non-peak traffic times these look normal (sub 10s). Sam
This latency usually means a change in the return path as you cross an AS boundry. The first AS may have a local peering for the best return path while the 2nd AS on the return path has to go to a different region to take the bgp best path
Current thread:
- Peering Latency Sam Norris (Jul 03)
- Re: Peering Latency Ca By (Jul 03)
- Re: Peering Latency Charles N Wyble (Jul 03)