×

Switch Account

slow speed to Shanghai Telecom

slow speed to Shanghai Telecom

SOLVED
Reply
Contributor jackc
Contributor
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎01-21-2010
Message 1 of 16
(12,692 Views)

my job requires me to connect servers in Shanghai Telecom everyday, every night I suffer from heavy packets loss and high pings from my home FIOS to Shanghai servers.

 

come on, Verizon should be better than this, please change the routes, route it through Level3 or something other than sprintlink.

 

Tracing route to 218.83.155.2 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
  2     5 ms     4 ms     8 ms  L100.PTLDOR-VFTTP-22.verizon-gni.net [98.108.166
.1]
  3     5 ms     4 ms     4 ms  G14-0-1-122.PTLDOR-LCR-01.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.138.28]
  4    10 ms     9 ms    11 ms  so-7-3-0-0.SEA01-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81
.28.160]
  5    11 ms    10 ms    11 ms  0.so-7-1-0.XT1.SEA7.ALTER.NET [152.63.105.57]
  6    14 ms    12 ms    11 ms  0.so-2-0-0.XT1.SEA1.ALTER.NET [152.63.104.225]
  7    11 ms    12 ms    12 ms  POS4-0.BR1.SEA1.ALTER.NET [152.63.105.81]
  8    11 ms    13 ms    12 ms  204.255.169.118
  9    20 ms    19 ms    19 ms  sl-crs1-tac-0-0-5-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.8.61
]
 10    43 ms    42 ms    42 ms  sl-crs1-sj-0-9-0-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.20.8]

 11    42 ms    41 ms    41 ms  sl-st20-sj-0-0-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.18.106]

 12   141 ms     *      143 ms  sl-china1-7-0.sprintlink.net [144.223.242.126]
 13   305 ms   306 ms   305 ms  202.97.51.145
 14   320 ms   324 ms   323 ms  202.97.33.101
 15     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 16   324 ms   320 ms     *     61.152.86.45
 17   325 ms   326 ms     *     124.74.210.226
 18   305 ms   307 ms     *     218.1.4.110
 19     *        *      324 ms  218.1.4.109
 20   305 ms   306 ms   304 ms  218.1.4.110
 21   323 ms   323 ms   323 ms  218.1.4.109
 22   305 ms   305 ms   304 ms  218.1.4.110
 23     *      323 ms   323 ms  218.1.4.109
 24   306 ms   304 ms   305 ms  218.1.4.110
 25   323 ms     *        *     218.1.4.109

15 REPLIES 15
Copper Contributor sgip2000
Copper Contributor
Posts: 43
Registered: ‎06-11-2009
Message 2 of 16
(12,634 Views)

Based on what you posted, it looks like Sprint is to blame for your problem.

Contributor jackc
Contributor
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎01-21-2010
Message 3 of 16
(12,628 Views)

true. the link between sprint and Shanghai telecom is saturated.

so to solve the problem, either Sprint need to increase the capacity to China Telecom or Verizon need to change the routing to Shanghai telecom bypass Sprint.

It should be easier for Verizon to change the routes than making Sprint fix the problem.

 

Guess what routes Verizon take when the destination is Fuzhou Telecom(city not very far away from Shanghai)?

 

 

Tracing route to 59.57.15.1 over a maximum of 30 hops

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  Wireless_Broadband_Router.home [192.168.1.1]
  2     4 ms     3 ms     4 ms  L100.PTLDOR-VFTTP-22.verizon-gni.net [98.108.166
.1]
  3     6 ms     4 ms     5 ms  G14-0-1-222.PTLDOR-LCR-02.verizon-gni.net [130.8
1.138.202]
  4    11 ms    10 ms    10 ms  P12-0.PTLDOR-LCR-01.verizon-gni.net [130.81.27.1
72]
  5    10 ms    10 ms    11 ms  so-7-3-0-0.SEA01-BB-RTR1.verizon-gni.net [130.81
.28.160]
  6    11 ms    11 ms    10 ms  0.so-7-1-0.XT1.SEA7.ALTER.NET [152.63.105.57]
  7    11 ms    12 ms    11 ms  0.so-2-0-0.XT1.SEA1.ALTER.NET [152.63.104.225]
  8    13 ms    11 ms    11 ms  POS4-0.BR2.SEA1.ALTER.NET [152.63.106.9]
  9    12 ms    13 ms    12 ms  204.255.169.22
 10    14 ms    17 ms    18 ms  ae-32-52.ebr2.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.68.105.62]

 11    25 ms    17 ms    18 ms  ae-1-100.ebr1.Seattle1.Level3.net [4.69.132.17]

 12    30 ms    35 ms    35 ms  ae-7-7.ebr2.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.132.49]
 13    26 ms    34 ms    35 ms  ae-82-82.csw3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.134.218]

 14    39 ms    28 ms    28 ms  ae-34-89.car4.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.134]

 15    28 ms    28 ms    27 ms  CHINA-TELEC.car4.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.71.114.1
02]
 16   198 ms   199 ms   199 ms  202.97.49.109
 17   198 ms   197 ms   197 ms  202.97.60.61
 18   199 ms   199 ms   199 ms  202.97.33.225
 19   206 ms   207 ms   206 ms  202.97.40.98
 20   209 ms   210 ms   209 ms  218.5.100.50
 21   212 ms   211 ms   212 ms  218.5.100.57
 22   208 ms   212 ms   210 ms  59.57.15.1

Trace complete.

 

much better result when going through Level3.

Highlighted
Contributor Beazst
Contributor
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎01-22-2010
Message 4 of 16
(12,615 Views)

Certainly I can see why the second route is more appealing.

 

It can be rather challenging to force Internet traffic (packets) to take a static route. 

 

This may seem like a logical solution but consider some of the ramifications:

 

  • the routers interconnecting you with Shanghai Telecom are unable to perform load balancing based on the relative network conditions
  • if the path is broken or disrupted the router will not be able to automatically  redirect traffic to a functional link
  • the risk of duplicating this issue on Level 3's network increases as a result of more traffic

 

Not to mention that a tracert is merely a point-in-time snapshot of network performance. 

 

Much like a system of roads and highways, traffic levels will vary throughout the day.  The latency you seem to be experiencing would have to be monitored over a period of time to determine if this is really a routing issue or a temporary problem resulting from network congestion. 

 

Your physical location relative to the server you are accessing can also influence this.  It does in fact take longer for electrical signals to travel around the world than it does to travel across town. 

 

I realize this doesn't fix the problem, but it's generally easier to accept that "latency happens" when we understand why. 

 

Hope this helps.  Robot Happy

Contributor jackc
Contributor
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎01-21-2010
Message 5 of 16
(12,562 Views)

i've been monitoring this issue constantly since I got FIOS, two months ago, the routes from my home FIOS to Shanghai telecom always goes through Sprint, usually day time the latency is ok, but it's a nightmare at night.

I myself is a network system administrator so i do understand these kind of stuff pretty well. since i'm not a Sprint customer, the only way for me is to seek help from Verizon, hoping they can change the routes, which I'm sure they can if they want to, but since i might be the only one got affecting by this, they probably not willing to do it just for me, in that case i'll have to live with VPN. Smiley Sad

Platinum Contributor I Platinum Contributor I
Platinum Contributor I
Posts: 5,175
Registered: ‎08-05-2008
Message 6 of 16
(12,552 Views)

 


@jackc wrote:

i've been monitoring this issue constantly since I got FIOS, two months ago, the routes from my home FIOS to Shanghai telecom always goes through Sprint, usually day time the latency is ok, but it's a nightmare at night.

I myself is a network system administrator so i do understand these kind of stuff pretty well. since i'm not a Sprint customer, the only way for me is to seek help from Verizon, hoping they can change the routes, which I'm sure they can if they want to, but since i might be the only one got affecting by this, they probably not willing to do it just for me, in that case i'll have to live with VPN. Smiley Sad


Jack,

 

I hope you realize that this is a primarily user-to-user forum, it is very unlikely that any of us here will be able to help. It is certainly possible that a Verizon employee might see this thread and take some action, but IMO not likely.

 

I suggest you go to dslreports.com and post your problem in the Verizon Direct forum there. That forum is staffed by Verizon employees and lots of people have been successful in getting their problems fixed, no guarantees of course but it might just work. Be sure to provide the trace-routes, etc. You will need to register to post, but registration is free, and nobody but you and Verizon employees can see your posts.

 

Good luck.

 

__________________________________
Justin
Verizon FiOS TV, Internet, and phone
QIP6416-P1, IMG 1.7C, Build 09.83
Keller, TX 76248

Platinum Contributor I
Platinum Contributor I
Posts: 5,881
Registered: ‎07-22-2009
Message 7 of 16
(12,411 Views)

Verizon will not statically assign your route to a single destination website.

 

your better option is to do a smartwhois look up on shanghai telecom and email their administrators. 

 

the internet is a self healing entity with regards to routes, it will take the shortest path, fastest path based calculations reported back by the routers on the net.

 

The problem will likely go away on it's own, but there is no way verizon will statically assign a single destination website/IP Address.

 

 

Gold Contributor I
Gold Contributor I
Posts: 1,692
Registered: ‎05-17-2009
Message 8 of 16
(12,396 Views)

Verizon will have very little that they can do about this. The routing is primarily controled by the company that owns the router. and they only control the route to the point it leaves their systems. So in this case Verizon routes it through their systems and then sends it to ALTER.NET.  Alter.net then controls it via their network and they decide to send it to sprintlink. Unfortunatly Sprintlink is notoriously slow. Always has been. The only thing that can be done is that Sprintlink needs to expand their bandwidth (not going to happen) or Alter.net to route through another path. (not always possible). Sometimes the link on the other end can only be via one system. Not always but sometimes. Dont know in this case. But the point of this is their may not be anything Verizon can do about this. Its possible they may have some pull with the other companies and make requests but I wouldnt hold my breath. I tried for years to get my link from Los Angeles to Washington DC changed to go Via Dallas to bypass Kansas City and Sprintlink. I played an game online with a server in Washington DC. When my route took me via KC I would hit sprintlink and get hosed. Never could get the routing changed. (of course this wasnt with Verizon but one of the competition) Now with Verizon. My route goes through Dallas and all is good. But it wasnt because Verizon did anything, its just that verizons Gateway is with another company.




====================================================================================

Error exists between keyboard and chair.
Contributor jackc
Contributor
Posts: 5
Registered: ‎01-21-2010
Message 9 of 16
(12,387 Views)

it isn't single ip routing problem, the issue applies to all servers and IP ranges in Shanghai Telecom. Yep, I did extensive tests on this for the past two months.

 

btw, Alter is Verizon Business. So yes, Verizon definitely able to change the routes, it is just they are willing to do or not.

Platinum Contributor I
Platinum Contributor I
Posts: 5,881
Registered: ‎07-22-2009
Message 10 of 16
(12,372 Views)

So yes, Verizon definitely able to change the routes, it is just they are willing to do or not.

 

They aren't on an individual customer basis.  They have to justify it with x amount of customers.  What you are talking about doing is at a NOC level and I used to work at a NOC And they do very little with altering paths, and even more rarely do they ever statically assign path's.

 

They will alter path's if it's a large scale outage affecting a huge amount of customers that requires the change.   When I say a huge amount of customers, these customers also have to be represented by call in's and tickets, or they have to see their alarms going off on their monitors, so most likely whatever is happening is within acceptable thresholds or what they consider acceptable thresholds.

How-To Videos
 
The following videos were produced by users like you!
   
Videos are subject to the Verizon Fios Community Terms of Service and User Guidelines and contains content that is not created by Verizon.



Verizon Troubleshooters
Unable to find your answer here? Try searching Verizon Troubleshooters for more options.