nanog mailing list archives

Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis

From: Mark Foster <blakjak () blakjak net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 10:54:42 +1300 (NZDT)




On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Chris Stone wrote:


On Tuesday 13 December 2005 02:46 pm, you wrote:


router@m40> ping google.com
PING google.com (72.14.207.99): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=447.727 ms
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=445.543 ms
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=442.937 ms
64 bytes from 72.14.207.99: icmp_seq=4 ttl=244 time=443.776 ms


Looks ok here from Denver, CO:

PING google.com (64.233.187.99) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 64.233.187.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=235 time=56.4 ms
64 bytes from 64.233.187.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=236 time=56.2 ms
64 bytes from 64.233.187.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=235 time=55.9 ms



You do realise you're talking to a 'different' google.com, right?

That said, I tested both of the above IP's without any problems, viareach.com, if it helps.


Mark.

Current thread:

www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Erik Sundberg (Dec 13)
- Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Chris Stone (Dec 13)
  - Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Mark Foster (Dec 13)
- Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Bill Sehmel (Dec 13)
- Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Richard A Steenbergen (Dec 13)
  - Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Richard A Steenbergen (Dec 13)
    - Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis Christopher L. Morrow (Dec 13)
    - Re: www.google.com latency/packet loss/very slow thru savvis william(at)elan.net (Dec 13)