Results 1 to 35 of 35
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    190

    unitedcolo - no more cogent?

    I think ive been smoking something I dont know about...

    All I get is internap and he.net incoming and outgoing on this uc box..


    traceroute to fdcservers.net (66.28.242.138), 64 hops max, 44 byte packets
    1 66.111.34.1 (66.111.34.1) 0.814 ms 0.410 ms 0.497 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.716 ms 0.627 ms 0.805 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.367 ms 1.416 ms 1.329 ms
    4 paix.cogentco.com (198.32.176.131) 10.277 ms 9.918 ms 9.301 ms
    5 p6-0.core01.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.145) 3.093 ms 3.205 ms 3.385 ms
    6 p14-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.41) 77.636 ms 77.350 ms 77.258 ms
    7 g49.ba02.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.74) 77.597 ms 77.665 ms 77.454 ms
    8 Datacenter.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.21.82) 86.448 ms 86.140 ms 84.986 ms
    9 66.28.242.138 (66.28.242.138) 82.722 ms 79.412 ms 89.029 ms

    traceroute to cvsup.above.net (208.185.175.214), 64 hops max, 44 byte packets
    1 66.111.34.1 (66.111.34.1) 0.444 ms 0.434 ms 0.429 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.679 ms 0.631 ms 0.590 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.638 ms 1.429 ms 1.414 ms
    4 gsr12012.sjc.he.net (216.218.130.1) 2.872 ms 2.606 ms 2.425 ms
    5 mae-west.above.net (198.32.200.31) 78.253 ms 78.398 ms 78.751 ms
    6 pos3-1.mpr1.sjc2.us.mfnx.net (216.200.254.161) 78.646 ms 78.548 ms 79.001 ms
    7 pos9-0.mpr2.sjc2.us.mfnx.net (216.200.0.234) 78.398 ms 78.492 ms 78.225 ms
    8 pos1-0.mpr6.sjc2.us.mfnx.net (208.185.156.70) 76.650 ms 76.474 ms 76.414 ms
    9 pos3-0.er6a.sjc2.us.mfnx.net (208.184.232.238) 76.735 ms 76.535 ms 76.740 ms
    10 cvsup.above.net (208.185.175.214) 77.118 ms 77.270 ms 77.096 ms
    C Code. C code run. Run, code, run...
    Segmentation fault (core dumped).. aww sh!t

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    44
    hehe they must have installed a new line or something :p ...


    Code:
    traceroute to fdcservers.net (66.28.242.138), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
     1  66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1)  14.128 ms  1.410 ms  0.738 ms
     2  66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2)  0.945 ms  0.609 ms  0.592 ms
     3  paix.he.net (198.32.176.20)  1.526 ms  1.278 ms  1.340 ms
     4  paix.cogentco.com (198.32.176.131)  3.346 ms  3.439 ms  3.307 ms
     5  p6-0.core01.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.145)  8.118 ms  7.673 ms  7.917 ms
     6  p14-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.41)  77.547 ms  77.345 ms  145.675 ms
     7  g49.ba02.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.74)  77.581 ms  77.520 ms  159.399 ms
     8  Datacenter.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.21.82)  88.473 ms  88.706 ms  86.208 ms
     9  66.28.242.138 (66.28.242.138)  86.186 ms  79.618 ms  84.046 ms

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Tasmania, Australia.
    Posts
    3,587
    Nice from Australia.

    traceroute to 66.111.32.10 (66.111.32.10), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
    1 FastEthernet6-0.civ-service1.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.1.65) 0.454 ms 0.476 ms 0.334 ms
    2 GigabitEthernet3-0.civ-core2.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.10.129) 0.488 ms 0.37 ms 0.359 ms
    3 GigabitEthernet2-2.dkn-core1.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.6.126) 0.646 ms 0.53 ms 0.526 ms
    4 Pos4-0.ken-core4.Sydney.telstra.net (203.50.6.121) 3.956 ms 3.874 ms 3.819 ms
    5 Pos2-0.pad-core4.Sydney.telstra.net (203.50.6.22) 4.245 ms 3.978 ms 3.969 ms
    6 GigabitEthernet0-0.syd-core01.Sydney.net.reach.com (203.50.13.242) 4.085 ms 4.132 ms 3.974 ms
    7 202.84.143.17 (202.84.143.17) 191.538 ms 191.616 ms 191.334 ms
    8 i-13-0.paix-core01.PaloAlto.net.reach.com (202.84.251.49) 174.834 ms 174.987 ms 174.701 ms
    9 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 174.728 ms 174.858 ms 174.71 ms
    10 border1-g1-2.pao1.wworks.net (198.32.176.162) 334.608 ms 395.417 ms 248.185 ms
    11 GigE-9.sfo-core1.pnap.net (66.111.47.1) 278.254 ms 176.196 ms 190.3 ms
    12 www.unitedcolo.com (66.111.32.10) 176.193 ms 176.235 ms 176.048 ms

    Gary

  4. #4
    from my servint box:

    traceroute to fdcservers.net (66.28.242.138), 64 hops max, 44 byte packets
    1 sc-mc-3-g-2-0-0-1000M.servint.net (209.50.224.3) 6.211 ms 0.942 ms 0.557 ms
    2 res1-avici1-g1-6-2.gnaps.net (65.123.21.202) 1.855 ms 1.768 ms 1.623 ms
    3 dcx-edge-01.inet.qwest.net (65.123.21.201) 1.909 ms 1.965 ms 1.950 ms
    4 dca-core-03.inet.qwest.net (205.171.9.161) 2.467 ms 2.415 ms 2.071 ms
    5 dca-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.9.49) 2.687 ms 3.128 ms 2.910 ms
    6 atl-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.8.153) 17.781 ms 18.498 ms 18.708 ms
    7 atl-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net (205.171.21.102) 18.083 ms 17.614 ms 18.424 ms
    8 205.215.2.53 (205.215.2.53) 18.040 ms 17.968 ms 17.497 ms
    9 g6-2.core01.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.28.201) 17.537 ms 17.296 ms 17.711 ms
    10 p14-0.core02.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.126) 29.818 ms 29.481 ms 29.523 ms
    11 p6-0.core01.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.82) 35.615 ms 35.745 ms 35.317 ms
    12 p15-0.core02.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.14) 35.344 ms 35.342 ms 35.202 ms
    13 p14-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.86) 44.098 ms 44.994 ms 44.188 ms
    14 g50.ba02.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.78) 44.703 ms 44.371 ms 44.586 ms
    15 Datacenter.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.21.82) 54.551 ms 53.745 ms 53.348 ms
    16 66.28.242.138 (66.28.242.138) 51.744 ms 51.116 ms 55.039 ms

    sexy

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    924
    WTF, I must be still asleep
    Unlimited Space & Bandwidth
    http://localhost/
    Providing hosting since 17/99/3003

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    190
    Originally posted by mulligan
    from my servint box:

    traceroute to fdcservers.net (66.28.242.138), 64 hops max, 44 byte packets
    1 sc-mc-3-g-2-0-0-1000M.servint.net (209.50.224.3) 6.211 ms 0.942 ms 0.557 ms
    2 res1-avici1-g1-6-2.gnaps.net (65.123.21.202) 1.855 ms 1.768 ms 1.623 ms
    3 dcx-edge-01.inet.qwest.net (65.123.21.201) 1.909 ms 1.965 ms 1.950 ms
    4 dca-core-03.inet.qwest.net (205.171.9.161) 2.467 ms 2.415 ms 2.071 ms
    5 dca-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.9.49) 2.687 ms 3.128 ms 2.910 ms
    6 atl-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.8.153) 17.781 ms 18.498 ms 18.708 ms
    7 atl-brdr-03.inet.qwest.net (205.171.21.102) 18.083 ms 17.614 ms 18.424 ms
    8 205.215.2.53 (205.215.2.53) 18.040 ms 17.968 ms 17.497 ms
    9 g6-2.core01.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.28.201) 17.537 ms 17.296 ms 17.711 ms
    10 p14-0.core02.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.126) 29.818 ms 29.481 ms 29.523 ms
    11 p6-0.core01.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.82) 35.615 ms 35.745 ms 35.317 ms
    12 p15-0.core02.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.14) 35.344 ms 35.342 ms 35.202 ms
    13 p14-0.core02.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.86) 44.098 ms 44.994 ms 44.188 ms
    14 g50.ba02.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.78) 44.703 ms 44.371 ms 44.586 ms
    15 Datacenter.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.21.82) 54.551 ms 53.745 ms 53.348 ms
    16 66.28.242.138 (66.28.242.138) 51.744 ms 51.116 ms 55.039 ms

    sexy
    ? you traced fdcservers not unitedcolo retard
    C Code. C code run. Run, code, run...
    Segmentation fault (core dumped).. aww sh!t

  7. #7
    traceroute to unitedcolo.net (66.111.32.10), 64 hops max, 44 byte packets
    1 sc-mc-3-g-2-0-0-1000M.servint.net (209.50.224.3) 0.469 ms 0.301 ms 0.337 ms
    2 res1-avici1-g1-15-1.gnaps.net (206.223.115.41) 2.243 ms 1.322 ms 1.560 ms
    3 ash-ix.he.net (206.223.115.37) 1.094 ms 1.433 ms 1.206 ms
    4 pos3-1.gsr12008.pao.he.net (65.19.141.234) 73.023 ms 73.302 ms 73.269 ms
    5 border1-g1-2.pao1.wworks.net (198.32.176.162) 74.009 ms 74.673 ms 74.680 ms
    6 GigE-9.sfo-core1.pnap.net (66.111.47.1) 74.761 ms 74.357 ms 74.025 ms
    7 www.unitedcolo.com (66.111.32.10) 74.474 ms 74.290 ms 74.880 ms

    Last edited by mulligan; 10-17-2002 at 01:54 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,926
    Anybody have any idea what's going on here? If this is permenant, it pust UC back on my 'I want one' list

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,262
    are youguys tracing to or from ucg? seems there for a while all things to ucg were pnap and from ucg were williams/cogent

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,262
    ok from an united colo box looks like i see no cogent

    all of these are from a ucg box --> the internet

    ---------

    [[email protected] zac]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute webreseller.net
    traceroute to webreseller.net (66.54.216.242), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.527 ms 0.337 ms 0.301 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.768 ms 0.688 ms 0.526 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.394 ms 1.300 ms 1.377 ms
    4 interconnect-eng.SanJose1.Level3.net (209.245.146.201) 2.210 ms 1.431 ms 1.428 ms
    5 GigabitEthernet3-0.core1.SanJose1.Level3.net (209.244.3.245) 2.027 ms 1.760 ms 1.669 ms
    6 ae0-53.mp1.SanJose1.Level3.net (64.159.2.65) 2.376 ms 2.288 ms 2.255 ms
    7 so-0-1-0.mp1.Philadelphia1.Level3.net (64.159.0.141) 80.743 ms 80.656 ms 80.577 ms
    8 gige9-0.hsipaccess1.Philadelphia1.Level3.net (64.159.0.146) 80.881 ms 80.725 ms 80.823 ms
    9 unknown.Level3.net (63.209.178.162) 81.443 ms 80.928 ms 80.775 ms
    10 66.54.175.194 (66.54.175.194) 81.893 ms 81.153 ms 81.635 ms
    11 o1-4bd1.phl053s101.yipes.com (66.54.144.109) 83.040 ms 81.842 ms 81.817 ms
    12 o1-53s11.phl054si01.yipes.com (66.54.144.190) 83.100 ms 82.626 ms 82.413 ms
    13 66.7.139.82 (66.7.139.82) 83.878 ms 82.588 ms 83.257 ms
    14 webreseller.net (66.54.216.242) 83.256 ms 83.179 ms 82.599 ms
    [[email protected] zac]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute rackshack.net
    traceroute to rackshack.net (207.218.223.142), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.458 ms 0.382 ms 0.308 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.627 ms 0.512 ms 0.509 ms
    3 63.251.61.229 (63.251.61.229) 1.377 ms 2.382 ms 2.696 ms
    4 63.251.63.67 (63.251.63.67) 4.181 ms 1.597 ms 1.217 ms
    5 p1-1-0-0.a00.snfcca02.us.ra.verio.net (140.174.21.121) 3.080 ms 3.224 ms 2.818 ms
    6 p4-0-0-0.a02.plalca01.us.ra.verio.net (129.250.122.53) 4.758 ms 3.362 ms p4-5-1-0.a02.plalca01.us.ra.verio.net (129.250.122.149) 4.940 ms
    7 ge-5-2-0.r06.plalca01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.15.1) 5.676 ms 4.498 ms 3.174 ms
    8 p4-6-0.r00.sndgca01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.10) 17.513 ms 16.356 ms 15.932 ms
    9 p4-0-0-0.r02.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.185) 79.319 ms 79.288 ms 78.895 ms
    10 p16-2-0-0.r00.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.46) 79.317 ms 78.594 ms 79.121 ms
    11 * *
    [[email protected] zac]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute yahoo.com
    traceroute: Warning: yahoo.com has multiple addresses; using 66.218.71.198
    traceroute to yahoo.com (66.218.71.198), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.394 ms 0.324 ms 0.380 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.843 ms 0.514 ms 0.511 ms
    3 bas1-m.pao.yahoo.com (198.32.176.135) 3.320 ms 3.838 ms 1.545 ms
    4 ge-0-0-0-p32.pat2.pao.yahoo.com (216.115.100.76) 1.886 ms 2.299 ms 4.881 ms
    5 vl11.bas2.scd.yahoo.com (66.218.64.138) 2.722 ms 2.220 ms 2.336 ms
    6 alteon3.68.scd.yahoo.com (66.218.68.12) 4.321 ms 4.328 ms 4.592 ms
    [[email protected] zac]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute hostmania.net
    traceroute to hostmania.net (216.52.184.234), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.405 ms 0.331 ms 0.302 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 9.512 ms 334.684 ms 0.791 ms
    3 63.251.61.229 (63.251.61.229) 1.610 ms 0.700 ms 0.883 ms
    4 63.251.63.67 (63.251.63.67) 1.197 ms 1.373 ms 0.813 ms
    5 p1-1-0-0.a00.snfcca02.us.ra.verio.net (140.174.21.121) 3.698 ms 3.009 ms 3.226 ms
    6 p4-0-0-0.a02.plalca01.us.ra.verio.net (129.250.122.53) 2.921 ms 3.532 ms p4-5-1-0.a02.plalca01.us.ra.verio.net (129.250.122.149) 2.897 ms
    7 xe-1-2-0.r20.plalca01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.29.41) 2.979 ms 3.255 ms 3.250 ms
    8 p16-1-1-1.r20.dllstx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.4.104) 110.251 ms 76.232 ms 75.706 ms
    9 p16-0-0-0.r02.dllstx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.23) 75.684 ms 75.790 ms 74.435 ms
    10 ge-0-0-0.a11.dllstx01.us.ra.verio.net (129.250.31.59) 75.288 ms 75.549 ms 75.438 ms
    11 so-1-2-0.a11.dllstx01.us.ce.verio.net (157.238.227.226) 49.069 ms 46.895 ms 47.197 ms
    12 216.52.191.94 (216.52.191.94) 46.480 ms 46.201 ms 47.452 ms
    13 216.52.184.234 (216.52.184.234) 48.808 ms 45.842 ms 46.074 ms
    [[email protected] zac]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute he.net
    traceroute to he.net (216.218.186.2), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.395 ms 0.328 ms 0.499 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 2.430 ms 0.586 ms 0.884 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.841 ms 1.743 ms 1.253 ms
    4 gsr12012.sjc.he.net (216.218.130.1) 3.126 ms 2.655 ms 2.809 ms
    5 he.net (216.218.186.2) 3.465 ms 2.649 ms 2.644 ms
    [[email protected] zac]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute servint.net
    traceroute to servint.net (209.50.251.77), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.398 ms 0.408 ms 0.313 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.807 ms 0.917 ms 0.591 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.319 ms 1.374 ms 1.268 ms
    4 pos3-0.gsr12012.ash.he.net (65.19.141.233) 74.263 ms 73.412 ms 73.630 ms
    5 res1-avici1-g1-5-7.gnaps.net (199.232.56.121) 1628.086 ms 278.642 ms 74.166 ms
    6 sc-mc-1-g-1-0-1000M.servint.net (199.232.56.122) 75.507 ms 75.301 ms 75.180 ms
    7 www.servint.net (209.50.251.77) 77.421 ms 74.791 ms 74.519 ms
    [[email protected] zac]$

  11. #11
    Looking good. Please keep us posted if Cogent gets thrown in there again. Also, how is your uptime now?
    Domain Software, LLC.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Darmstadt, Germany
    Posts
    1,096
    interesting!
    i noticed that they got a he.net line since a week or sth. but didn't really "realize" it ) or didn't think it was worth a post.
    In just two days, tomorrow will be yesterday.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,262
    Originally posted by BiGWill
    interesting!
    i noticed that they got a he.net line since a week or sth. but didn't really "realize" it ) or didn't think it was worth a post.
    wonder how big that line is though or how much they will be pushing out of it

    because he owns

  14. #14
    This is the trace I got to unitedcolo.com:

    1 23 ms 38 ms 52 ms 66.189.0.2 002-0-189-66.wo.cpe.charter-ne.com. 253
    2 15 ms 30 ms 44 ms 66.189.0.230 230-0-189-66.wo.cpe.charter-ne.com. 252
    3 16 ms 30 ms 44 ms 12.125.39.13 [Missing reverse DNS entry] 251
    4 30 ms 44 ms 12.123.40.98 gbr1-p70.cb1ma.ip.att.net. 250
    5 15 ms 30 ms 44 ms 12.122.5.57 gbr4-p70.cb1ma.ip.att.net. 249
    6 46 ms 62 ms 75 ms 12.122.2.49 gbr4-p40.cgcil.ip.att.net. 248
    7 46 ms 61 ms 75 ms 12.122.1.125 gbr3-p60.cgcil.ip.att.net. 247
    8 78 ms 93 ms 107 ms 12.122.2.150 gbr3-p30.sffca.ip.att.net. 246
    9 78 ms 92 ms 107 ms 12.122.1.162 gbr1-p50.sffca.ip.att.net. 245
    10 78 ms 92 ms 107 ms 12.123.13.57 gar1-p360.sffca.ip.att.net. 244
    Cory Cone
    www.XstreamHost.com

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,262
    yea i just called them and they are'nt using williams/cogent anymore they are keeping for backup but are only using the good stuff now so hooray.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    1,074
    so i guess that means they no longer are going to offer their $49 servers?


    and, is williams considered in the same group as cogent? i see alot of people down on williams lately.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,954
    Originally posted by zdwebhosting
    yea i just called them and they are'nt using williams/cogent anymore they are keeping for backup but are only using the good stuff now so hooray.
    I'll believe it when i see the MRTG graphs reporting that, do they provide MRTG for the public to eye?

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,262
    Originally posted by porcupine


    I'll believe it when i see the MRTG graphs reporting that, do they provide MRTG for the public to eye?
    dunno i just goin by server reportings server i got access to there

    and call and ask them for public mrtg i dont know if they have it or not.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    924
    I go via HE
    Unlimited Space & Bandwidth
    http://localhost/
    Providing hosting since 17/99/3003

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Colorado, US
    Posts
    108
    ive done 10 traceroutes and all are he and internap and all the "good stuff" They use Cogent for backups now so its all good.
    Rave5 Web Solutions
    http://www.rave5.com

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,954

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    521
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.423 ms 0.382 ms 0.353 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.740 ms 0.513 ms 0.570 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.353 ms 1.346 ms 1.239 ms
    4 paix.cogentco.com (198.32.176.131) 10.926 ms 3.417 ms 2.929 ms
    5 p6-0.core01.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.145) 3.038 ms 21.556 ms 3.214 ms
    6 p14-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.41) 94.742 ms 86.403 ms 77.449 ms
    7 g49.ba02.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.74) 77.537 ms 81.525 ms 77.229 ms
    8 Datacenter.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.21.82) 100.539 ms 87.501 ms 78.565 ms
    9 66.28.242.138 (66.28.242.138) 82.378 ms 80.115 ms 80.596 ms

    Wewt...good 'ol Cogent.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    190
    Originally posted by mushrew
    1 66.111.38.1 (66.111.38.1) 0.423 ms 0.382 ms 0.353 ms
    2 66.111.47.2 (66.111.47.2) 0.740 ms 0.513 ms 0.570 ms
    3 paix.he.net (198.32.176.20) 1.353 ms 1.346 ms 1.239 ms
    4 paix.cogentco.com (198.32.176.131) 10.926 ms 3.417 ms 2.929 ms
    5 p6-0.core01.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.145) 3.038 ms 21.556 ms 3.214 ms
    6 p14-0.core01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.41) 94.742 ms 86.403 ms 77.449 ms
    7 g49.ba02.b000268-0.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.74) 77.537 ms 81.525 ms 77.229 ms
    8 Datacenter.demarc.cogentco.com (66.28.21.82) 100.539 ms 87.501 ms 78.565 ms
    9 66.28.242.138 (66.28.242.138) 82.378 ms 80.115 ms 80.596 ms

    Wewt...good 'ol Cogent.
    thats not cogent thats HE -> cogent peer
    C Code. C code run. Run, code, run...
    Segmentation fault (core dumped).. aww sh!t

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    521
    Cogent is cogent...it's only HE.net locally which makes pretty much no difference in latency.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,991
    You must consider though, that FDCservers is on Cogent, and BGP will try to use the least number of ASNs, e.g. HE will go straight to Cogent at PAIX.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,262
    did you not see my post with all the trace's on it? all of them are taking somthing BUT cogent out so i see no cogent right out of thier lines

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    5,383
    Originally posted by Faggle


    ? you traced fdcservers not unitedcolo retard
    Clustered Hosting With Continuous Data Protection (CDP)
    http://www.solidinternet.com
    8 Years of hosting excellence!

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,790
    Hi,

    From my home connection:
    Code:
    $ /usr/sbin/traceroute unitedcolo.net
    traceroute to unitedcolo.net (66.111.32.10), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
     1  10.232.64.1 (10.232.64.1)  10.095 ms  27.434 ms  8.261 ms
     2  172.20.32.65 (172.20.32.65)  10.829 ms  10.855 ms  8.771 ms
     3  172.23.32.195 (172.23.32.195)  10.235 ms  9.900 ms  17.507 ms
     4  172.20.8.20 (172.20.8.20)  28.802 ms  47.962 ms  10.492 ms
     5  172.20.6.3 (172.20.6.3)  20.085 ms  68.275 ms  48.207 ms
     6  61.8.233.65 (61.8.233.65)  12.443 ms  11.039 ms  12.461 ms
     7  ge-0-0-0.r00.sngpsi01.sg.bb.verio.net (61.8.234.61)  14.657 ms  30.197 ms  17.429 ms
     8  p1-0-1-1.r81.snjsca04.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.13)  238.534 ms  194.410 ms  272.762 ms
     9  p4-7-0-0.r01.snjsca05.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.4.70)  197.590 ms p4-7-0-0.r00.snjsca05.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.4.88)  201.766 ms  262.249 ms
    10  p4-1-0.r02.snjsca05.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.2.24)  199.282 ms  195.777 ms p4-5-0.r02.snjsca05.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.2.27)  247.963 ms
    11  mwa.he.net (198.32.200.17)  191.116 ms  214.985 ms  201.785 ms
    12  gige-g0-0-vlan2.gsr12008.pao.he.net (216.218.132.1)  195.641 ms  326.964 ms  191.707 ms
    13  border1-g1-2.pao1.wworks.net (198.32.176.162)  202.051 ms  229.229 ms  203.759 ms
    14  GigE-9.sfo-core1.pnap.net (66.111.47.1)  206.016 ms  238.269 ms  218.755 ms
    15  www.unitedcolo.com (66.111.32.10)  206.988 ms  228.075 ms  191.813 ms
    Thanks.

    Kindest regards,
    Choon
    Giam Teck Choon
    :: Join choon.net Community today to share your tips and tricks on server issues please ::
    :: Singapore Dedicated Servers :: Singapore Virtual Private Servers :: Linux/FreeBSD Server Management ::

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Auckland - New Zealand
    Posts
    1,572
    ? you traced fdcservers not unitedcolo retard
    Yeah explain yourself... now that was not neither professional or nice....

  30. #30
    We've been picking up "utility" dedicated servers in various provider colo areas in order to support a new product we intent to roll out.

    One of the servers is in United Colo's colo area...

    They've been great to date (the server has remained powered up and hasn't crashed) and the price is right ($49?!). All would be well except for about a week ago they decided to block all inbound and outbound ICMP (which according to them is due to potential Denial of Service Attacks).

    Traceroutes still work, and just about any other sevice I have tested (snmp/vpns/other udp/tcp ports) still are open, it's just your basic pings that are blocked.

    The changes were made without notifying the customer base (maybe in response to various attacks that may have occured) and requests to unblock the icmp blocking were met with polite refusal.

    I shared with them simple cisco config changes that would allow them to rate limit icmp rather than block it completely, but they said they would continue to block icmp.

    If you are anal like we are about monitoring if your servers are up via icmp, you may want to consider another provider until they relax their stance on blocking icmp... It's easy to justify to yourself that you can't ping your server, but you can't easily justify it to your downstream customers.

    On a side note, is anyone aware of any colo providers that block icmp en mass to their complete customer base without their knowledge?

    Darin
    Last edited by dwayrynen; 10-18-2002 at 09:23 AM.
    [COLOR=royal blue]Deru[/COLOR] Communications
    www.deru.net

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    574
    Originally posted by zdwebhosting

    all of these are from a ucg box --> the internet
    Hold up... I thought UCG was connected to the internet!

    You mean UCQ is only forwarding to the internet?!


    False advertising!



  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    574
    Originally posted by dwayrynen
    If you are anal like we are about monitoring if our servers are up via icmp, you may want to consider another provider until they relax their stance on blocking icmp...
    what specifically are you using icmp in regards to monitoring?

    Ping isn't a very good way to test if a box is up or not, under linux, a kernel panic can render the system useless, but it still will reply to pings.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    70
    Originally posted by clockwork

    Ping isn't a very good way to test if a box is up or not, under linux, a kernel panic can render the system useless, but it still will reply to pings.
    I agree.
    I've experienced the sistuation when one of my servers stopped working because of the kernel panic.
    It still replied to pings that I didn't realize the problem until my hosting customers called me...

  34. #34
    I'll be the last person that will defend ping as the be all/end all way to determine if a server is up or not and it's sure not a great performance metric (neither is traceroute), but it's a basic test, integrated into most any network monitoring system, and I'll stand by my observation that United Colo is the the only provider that I am aware of that blocks it for all their colo customers.

    As for kernel panics occuring that will allow pings to be responded to while other basic services are not, that's why we monitor all services the boxes provide. :-)

    Darin
    [COLOR=royal blue]Deru[/COLOR] Communications
    www.deru.net

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    574
    Originally posted by dwayrynen
    I'll stand by my observation that United Colo is the the only provider that I am aware of that blocks it for all their colo customers.

    I'm pretty sure Fastservers.net does.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •