Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shanghai,China
    Posts
    247

    how to contacty WebNX DC to fix the connect issue between there to shanghai,China

    ping:
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=187ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=187ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=51
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=187ms TTL=51
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=51
    Reply from 67.220.215.119: bytes=32 time=189ms TTL=51
    Request timed out.

    Ping statistics for 67.220.215.119:
    Packets: Sent = 195, Received = 169, Lost = 26 (13% loss),
    Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 186ms, Maximum = 192ms, Average = 187ms

    tracert:
    Tracing route to server.mydays.org [67.220.215.119]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
    2 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 61.152.239.193
    3 2 ms 7 ms 11 ms 222.73.175.165
    4 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 61.152.87.153
    5 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 61.152.86.50
    6 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 202.97.33.34
    7 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 202.97.34.46
    8 190 ms 190 ms 190 ms 202.97.51.102
    9 190 ms 323 ms 190 ms 218.30.54.110
    10 164 ms 165 ms 164 ms vl3805.na21.b002695-2.lax04.atlas.cogentco.com [
    38.20.33.194]
    11 190 ms 190 ms 190 ms 38.99.246.27
    12 165 ms 164 ms 164 ms 67-220-192-101.hosted.static.webnx.com [67.220.1
    92.101]
    13 188 ms * 187 ms server.mydays.org [67.220.215.119]

    I have sent serval tickets to 6sync.com's tech support,they checked the network & tell me the problem looks isolated to the connection between Shanghai,China <> VPS.I rechecked it ,in other us vps to ping my vps,it'ok,it's like they say.but they tell me they can't fix it,since it's not their network issue or vps node issue.

    6sync's vps is good,also the network,but this issue let me have no idea with it,could someone help me to contact WebNX DC to check the problem ?thank you

    sorry for my poor english
    My Personal Sites:Oh !!!MIYU-GのDAYs
    http://www.1221.in
    MY LIFE IS COOL,SO IS MY VPS I WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT VPS

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    934
    http://webnx.com/customer-care/contactus.html
    https://clients.webnx.com/

    I don't believe WebNX sells VPS anymore after the HyperVM incident. Assuming you were a VPS client prior to that (if they still kept VPS dept.). If you are getting a VPS through third-party, you will need to contact them instead.

    Both gentlemen Dario and Daniel are very good in responding and resolving issues. Good luck getting everything work out.
    Last edited by quad3datwork; 11-13-2009 at 12:28 PM. Reason: Added support URL
    SysAdmin.xyz
    Having severs with customer data on it without proper monitoring is like having one night stand without using protections - eventually, there will be an 'oh s**t!' moment.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shanghai,China
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by quad3datwork View Post
    http://webnx.com/customer-care/contactus.html
    https://clients.webnx.com/

    I don't believe WebNX sells VPS anymore after the HyperVM incident. Assuming you were a VPS client prior to that (if they still kept VPS dept.). If you are getting a VPS through third-party, you will need to contact them instead.

    Both gentlemen Dario and Daniel are very good in responding and resolving issues. Good luck getting everything work out.
    I mean I think 6sync is reseller of WebNX,the connect issue between my vps to Shanghai,China they could check instead of 6sync.com since can't do much more help
    My Personal Sites:Oh !!!MIYU-GのDAYs
    http://www.1221.in
    MY LIFE IS COOL,SO IS MY VPS I WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT VPS

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Groton, Connecticut
    Posts
    925
    We had the same problem few weeks ago, about the packet loss from China to WebNx's datacenter. We actually notified them about it, they told us that it was a routing problem from China, so we just left it alone. It's been weeks and the problem still continue to persist, I didn't really bother emailing them again..

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shanghai,China
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by eSited View Post
    We had the same problem few weeks ago, about the packet loss from China to WebNx's datacenter. We actually notified them about it, they told us that it was a routing problem from China, so we just left it alone. It's been weeks and the problem still continue to persist, I didn't really bother emailing them again..
    then do you email them again,any result ?
    My Personal Sites:Oh !!!MIYU-GのDAYs
    http://www.1221.in
    MY LIFE IS COOL,SO IS MY VPS I WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT VPS

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    /bin/sh
    Posts
    814
    Quote Originally Posted by MIYU-HITORI View Post
    then do you email them again,any result ?
    Why do some not read all the way to the end..

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    934
    Hi, you can try contact WebNX first and see if they will take a look. I highly doubt they will help you out since you are not a "direct" customer with them. If you understand how escalation works, you will always go through your direct host, and your host will in term contact WebNX. It's just how the corporate world works, welcome to it.

    I assume you already checked with your ISP/uplink prior to blaming the issue to WebNX networks. Sometimes problem can be both ways.

    Try the your test with following IPs, one is WebNX one is FDC. If both are getting packet lost, there may be a problem on your side as well.

    • 67.220.208.195 (WebNX)
    • 66.90.110.154 (FDC Chicago)



    (Read your blog, hope things gets better for you soon. Cheers! )
    SysAdmin.xyz
    Having severs with customer data on it without proper monitoring is like having one night stand without using protections - eventually, there will be an 'oh s**t!' moment.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shanghai,China
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by quad3datwork View Post
    Hi, you can try contact WebNX first and see if they will take a look. I highly doubt they will help you out since you are not a "direct" customer with them. If you understand how escalation works, you will always go through your direct host, and your host will in term contact WebNX. It's just how the corporate world works, welcome to it.

    I assume you already checked with your ISP/uplink prior to blaming the issue to WebNX networks. Sometimes problem can be both ways.

    Try the your test with following IPs, one is WebNX one is FDC. If both are getting packet lost, there may be a problem on your side as well.

    • 67.220.208.195 (WebNX)
    • 66.90.110.154 (FDC Chicago)



    (Read your blog, hope things gets better for you soon. Cheers! )
    thank you,quad3datwork,I will do that & I will contact 6sync.com again for that issue
    My Personal Sites:Oh !!!MIYU-GのDAYs
    http://www.1221.in
    MY LIFE IS COOL,SO IS MY VPS I WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT VPS

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Scotland, UK
    Posts
    2,549
    MIYU-HITORI, show the traceroute in the other direction (from your server -> the ip you traced from originally).
    Server Management - AdminGeekZ.com
    Infrastructure Management, Web Application Performance, mySQL DBA. System Automation.
    WordPress/Magento Performance, Apache to Nginx Conversion, Varnish Implimentation, DDoS Protection, Custom Nginx Modules
    Check our wordpress varnish plugin. Contact us for quote: [email protected]

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shanghai,China
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott.Mc View Post
    MIYU-HITORI, show the traceroute in the other direction (from your server -> the ip you traced from originally).
    here it is:

    [email protected] ~ $ traceroute 61.152.239.220
    traceroute to 61.152.239.220 (61.152.239.220), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
    1 67-220-215-65.hosted.static.webnx.com (67.220.215.65) 0.338 ms 0.529 ms 0.799 ms
    2 cr3-lax01.webnx.com (67.220.192.102) 0.765 ms 0.731 ms 0.702 ms
    3 gige-g2-17.core1.lax2.he.net (216.218.196.189) 0.648 ms 0.619 ms 0.446 ms
    4 10gigabitethernet2-1.core1.lax1.he.net (72.52.92.121) 0.697 ms 0.660 ms 0.541 ms
    5 64.62.227.34 (64.62.227.34) 28.607 ms 28.576 ms 28.537 ms
    6 202.97.49.117 (202.97.49.117) 28.731 ms 29.258 ms 29.329 ms
    7 (202.97.51.113) 190.920 ms * *
    8 * (202.97.33.49) 159.512 ms 159.487 ms
    9 (202.97.33.57) 162.615 ms 162.580 ms 162.532 ms
    10 61.152.86.45 (61.152.86.45) 159.588 ms 167.354 ms 167.410 ms
    11 61.152.87.154 (61.152.87.154) 161.641 ms 169.541 ms *
    12 * * *
    13 61.152.239.220 (61.152.239.220) 190.501 ms 190.610 ms 190.517 ms
    My Personal Sites:Oh !!!MIYU-GのDAYs
    http://www.1221.in
    MY LIFE IS COOL,SO IS MY VPS I WILL TELL YOU MORE ABOUT VPS

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    380
    Hi,

    Can't PM you MIYU-HITORI.

    Nelson

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    934
    I think it may be the problem with WebNX hopping over HE.net.


    $ traceroute 114.246.74.197
    traceroute to 114.246.74.197 (114.246.74.197), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
    1 67-220-208-193.hosted.static.webnx.com (67.220.208.193) 0.530 ms 0.497 ms 0.483 ms
    2 cr3-lax01.webnx.com (67.220.192.102) 0.441 ms 0.432 ms 0.419 ms
    3 gige-g2-17.core1.lax2.he.net (216.218.196.189) 3.039 ms 3.028 ms 3.010 ms
    4 10gigabitethernet2-1.core1.lax1.he.net (72.52.92.121) 2.991 ms 2.963 ms 3.187 ms
    5 10gigabitethernet1-3.core1.pao1.he.net (72.52.92.21) 21.822 ms 21.809 ms 22.152 ms
    6 10gigabitethernet4-1.core1.sjc2.he.net (72.52.92.70) 12.150 ms 12.158 ms 12.278 ms
    7 216.218.209.114 (216.218.209.114) 211.416 ms 211.440 ms 211.430 ms
    8 219.158.25.45 (219.158.25.45) 206.730 ms 206.740 ms 206.729 ms
    9 219.158.4.217 (219.158.4.217) 207.922 ms 207.921 ms 207.901 ms
    10 219.158.4.77 (219.158.4.77) 224.261 ms 224.248 ms 224.236 ms
    11 123.126.0.178 (123.126.0.178) 224.184 ms 224.177 ms 224.165 ms
    12 61.148.152.138 (61.148.152.138) 225.658 ms 230.894 ms 230.876 ms
    13 61.148.153.122 (61.148.153.122) 231.562 ms
    Pinging local router w/o problems:
    64 bytes from 72.52.92.70: icmp_seq=143 ttl=59 time=14.4 ms
    64 bytes from 72.52.92.70: icmp_seq=144 ttl=59 time=14.4 ms
    64 bytes from 72.52.92.70: icmp_seq=145 ttl=59 time=12.3 ms
    64 bytes from 72.52.92.70: icmp_seq=146 ttl=59 time=12.5 ms

    --- 72.52.92.70 ping statistics ---
    146 packets transmitted, 146 received, 0% packet loss, time 144972ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 10.284/12.858/23.072/1.944 ms
    I am not sure why it routes from CA => DE, that's pretty long distance. It seems HE.net routers having packet lost issues.
    $ ping -c 20 216.218.209.114
    PING 216.218.209.114 (216.218.209.114) 56(84) bytes of data.
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=1 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=2 ttl=243 time=220 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=3 ttl=243 time=215 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=4 ttl=243 time=215 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=5 ttl=243 time=216 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=6 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=7 ttl=243 time=212 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=8 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=9 ttl=243 time=215 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=10 ttl=243 time=214 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=11 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=12 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=14 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=15 ttl=243 time=216 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=16 ttl=243 time=216 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=17 ttl=243 time=215 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=18 ttl=243 time=218 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=19 ttl=243 time=217 ms
    64 bytes from 216.218.209.114: icmp_seq=20 ttl=243 time=217 ms

    --- 216.218.209.114 ping statistics ---
    20 packets transmitted, 19 received, 5% packet loss, time 18997ms
    rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 212.273/216.657/220.633/1.700 ms

    Someone here correct me if I am wrong about how the networking goes, since I am no network expert/engineer.

    I've submitted ticket to WebNX to see what they says. Right now seems like defective router going out to me.


    *UPDATE*
    Weird, I have a customer on IP block 119.96.184.XXX pinging his VPS (WebNX) with no packet lost.
    Last edited by quad3datwork; 11-17-2009 at 01:50 PM. Reason: Notes
    SysAdmin.xyz
    Having severs with customer data on it without proper monitoring is like having one night stand without using protections - eventually, there will be an 'oh s**t!' moment.

Similar Threads

  1. Tracert from Shanghai, China to nLayer
    By zhihao in forum Colocation and Data Centers
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-21-2009, 08:14 PM
  2. Tracert from Shanghai, China to PacificRack
    By zhihao in forum Colocation and Data Centers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-21-2009, 07:16 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-01-2008, 01:07 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-29-2008, 12:11 AM

Posting Permissions

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