[CZ-bugs] Fw: Re: CZ down?
Daniel Mietchen
daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com
Sun Mar 28 00:18:37 CDT 2010
Thanks, Dan - this clears up some confusion.
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 6:43 AM, dan nessett <dnessett at yahoo.com> wrote:
> In checking the cz-bugs list archive, I noticed that I sent the following message to myself, rather than to the list. I am forwarding it to the list now, since some of my subsequent messages make no sense without it as context.
>
> Dan Nessett
>
> --- On Sat, 3/27/10, dan nessett <dnessett at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> From: dan nessett <dnessett at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CZ-bugs] CZ down?
>> To: "dan nessett" <dnessett at yahoo.com>
>> Date: Saturday, March 27, 2010, 5:32 PM
>> Again. You need to learn how to
>> interpret traceroute output. The "* * *" after hop 5 need
>> not occur as the result of a distressed gateway. A common
>> reason is the gateway does not send ICMP "time exceeded"
>> responses (because its admins wish to cloak its identity).
>> The time values given after each gateway represent the time
>> from when the traceroute routine sends the probe message and
>> the time it receives the ICMP time exceeded response. The
>> fact that the times shown after
>> vl26.core3.chi01.steadfast.net and locke.citizendium.org are
>> significantly greater than the times after
>> vl26.core3.chi01.steadfast.net does not necessarily indicate
>> that there are problems with steadfast networks internal
>> network (although it may). It may mean that the
>> transatlantic hop is experiencing significant problems
>> (which seems likely, since the increase in time between
>> 92.79.213.154 [a system somewhere in Germany] and
>> linx1.lon00.steadfast.net is over 60 ms.).
>>
>> You need to spend some time reading the traceroute man
>> page.
>>
>> I just ran traceroute for both reid and locke from my
>> system in Fremont, CA. Here are the results:
>>
>> 1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 36 bytes to
>> 192.168.1.50 1.046 ms 0.507 ms 0.416 ms
>> 2 * * *
>> 3 ge-3-8-ur02.fremont.ca.sfba.comcast.net
>> (68.85.191.189) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 9.302
>> ms 8.322 ms 11.534 ms
>> 4 te-0-8-0-3-ar01.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net
>> (68.85.154.118) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 18.245
>> ms 9.292 ms 8.946 ms
>> 5 pos-0-5-0-0-cr01.sacramento.ca.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.90.137) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 12.078
>> ms 17.428 ms 11.297 ms
>> 6 pos-1-15-0-0-cr01.losangeles.ca.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.85.86) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 22.781 ms
>> 23.353 ms 24.819 ms
>> 7 pos-0-15-0-0-cr01.dallas.tx.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.85.138) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 57.787
>> ms 56.504 ms 57.657 ms
>> 8 pos-0-11-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.85.222) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 79.925
>> ms 79.046 ms 79.049 ms
>> 9 pos-1-9-0-0-cr01.chicago.il.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.85.57) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 92.551 ms
>> 92.650 ms 93.328 ms
>> 10 pos-0-1-0-0-pe01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.86.38) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 93.503 ms
>> 92.440 ms 93.609 ms
>> 11 * * *
>> 12 vl26.core3.chi01.steadfast.net (208.100.32.25) 36
>> bytes to 192.168.1.50 103.052 ms 92.448 ms
>> 92.599 ms
>> 13 locke.citizendium.org (208.100.41.195) 48 bytes to
>> 192.168.1.50 98.023 ms 94.320 ms 91.092
>> ms
>>
>> 1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 36 bytes to
>> 192.168.1.50 1.423 ms 0.399 ms 0.500 ms
>> 2 * * *
>> 3 ge-3-8-ur02.fremont.ca.sfba.comcast.net
>> (68.85.191.189) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 7.466
>> ms 8.898 ms 9.428 ms
>> 4 te-0-8-0-3-ar01.oakland.ca.sfba.comcast.net
>> (68.85.154.118) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 10.346
>> ms 9.505 ms 11.955 ms
>> 5 pos-0-3-0-0-cr01.sacramento.ca.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.90.129) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 17.014
>> ms 14.386 ms 11.474 ms
>> 6 pos-1-12-0-0-cr01.losangeles.ca.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.86.6) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 22.980 ms
>> 22.350 ms 21.508 ms
>> 7 pos-0-12-0-0-cr01.dallas.tx.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.86.118) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 58.007
>> ms 56.418 ms 59.677 ms
>> 8 pos-0-11-0-0-cr01.atlanta.ga.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.85.222) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 81.888
>> ms 79.601 ms 78.033 ms
>> 9 pos-1-9-0-0-cr01.chicago.il.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.85.57) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 92.600 ms
>> 93.569 ms 91.067 ms
>> 10 pos-0-1-0-0-pe01.350ecermak.il.ibone.comcast.net
>> (68.86.86.38) 36 bytes to 192.168.1.50 91.549 ms
>> 92.036 ms 91.574 ms
>> 11 * * *
>> 12 vl26.core3.chi01.steadfast.net (208.100.32.25) 36
>> bytes to 192.168.1.50 90.536 ms 101.919 ms
>> 91.122 ms
>> 13 reid.citizendium.org (208.100.41.196) 48 bytes to
>> 192.168.1.50 91.538 ms 93.066 ms 93.579
>> ms
>>
>> As you see, there is little jitter in the time values
>> within the steadfast network internal network. Also notice
>> that in each case gateways 2 and 11 did not return ICMP time
>> exceeded messages. It is likely that gateway 11 is at the
>> edge of the steadfast networks internal network (like
>> linx1.lon00.steadfast.net), suggesting that gateway 5 in
>> your traceroute output also doesn't return ICMP time
>> exceeded responses.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> --- On Sat, 3/27/10, dan nessett <dnessett at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > From: dan nessett <dnessett at yahoo.com>
>> > Subject: Re: [CZ-bugs] CZ down?
>> > To: cz-bugs at mail.citizendium.org,
>> "Daniel Mietchen" <daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com>
>> > Date: Saturday, March 27, 2010, 4:01 PM
>> >
>> >
>> > --- On Sat, 3/27/10, Daniel Mietchen <daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > From: Daniel Mietchen <daniel.mietchen at googlemail.com>
>> > > Subject: [CZ-bugs] CZ down?
>> > > To: cz-bugs at mail.citizendium.org
>> > > Date: Saturday, March 27, 2010, 3:12 PM
>> > > daniels-macbook:~ daniel$ traceroute
>> > > en.citizendium.org
>> > > traceroute: Warning: en.citizendium.org has
>> multiple
>> > > addresses; using
>> > > 208.100.41.195
>> > > traceroute to en.citizendium.org
>> (208.100.41.195), 64
>> > hops
>> > > max, 40 byte packets
>> > > 1 easy.box (192.168.2.1) 3.571 ms 1.922
>> > > ms 0.896 ms
>> > > 2 dslb-088-072-160-001.pools.arcor-ip.net
>> > > (88.72.160.1) 16.361 ms
>> > > 145.254.8.93 (145.254.8.93) 16.989 ms 16.588
>> > > ms
>> > > 3 92.79.213.154 (92.79.213.154) 40.598
>> > > ms 40.479 ms 38.809 ms
>> > > 4 linx1.lon00.steadfast.net
>> (195.66.225.48)
>> > > 104.045 ms 105.534 ms
>> > > 105.882 ms
>> > > 5 * * *
>> > > 6 vl26.core3.chi01.steadfast.net
>> > > (208.100.32.25) 125.923 ms
>> > > 128.512 ms 126.852 ms
>> > > 7 locke.citizendium.org (208.100.41.195)
>> > > 127.023 ms 157.237 ms 126.693 ms
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > CZ-bugs mailing list
>> > > CZ-bugs at mail.citizendium.org
>> > > http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-bugs
>> > >
>> >
>> > This traceroute shows that locke is up, not down. You
>> need
>> > to learn how to interpret traceroute messages. Also,
>> as I
>> > stated once before, the significant delay/problem
>> appears to
>> > occur on the transatlantic hop, not within steadfast
>> > networks.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > CZ-bugs mailing list
>> > CZ-bugs at mail.citizendium.org
>> > http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-bugs
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CZ-bugs mailing list
> CZ-bugs at mail.citizendium.org
> http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-bugs
>
--
http://www.google.com/profiles/daniel.mietchen
More information about the CZ-bugs
mailing list