Jumping on the bandwagon. I have not had the chance to follow the entire thread
but have seen this behavior from AT&T Uverse, Time Warner, and Verizon FIOS. I
believed initially this was a capacity issue with Google and Youtube. The
reason for this thought is fairly simple with no scientific tro
Cc: John Zettlemoyer ,nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Time Warner Cable YouTube throttling
RIT is probably on a commercial circuit and from what i have seen on this
chain so far, it is only affecting home/consumer users. At MSOE (msoe.edu)
i dont show any latency but we are on TWTC. Anyone chime in
Also if your upstream has Google Global Cache (or whatever it's
called), the results can be very different I suppose.
Does Google use different naming structure for IPv6 CDN? Maybe this
particular cache does not offer IPv6.
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;r3---sn-n2uxaxjvh-j5xe.c.youtube.com. IN A
;; ANS
essage-
> From: John Zettlemoyer [mailto:j...@razorservers.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 11:19 PM
> To: 'Derek Ivey'
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Time Warner Cable YouTube throttling
>
> Yup... This might be more helpful.
> I went t
42.86 (209.48.42.86) 16.673 ms 64.114 ms 64.054 ms
12 208.117.251.184 (208.117.251.184) 16.313 ms 16.306 ms 16.486 ms
-MJ
-Original Message-
From: John Zettlemoyer [mailto:j...@razorservers.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 11:19 PM
To: 'Derek Ivey'
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject:
I know only too well that Verizon's peering with Cogent in the DC/IAD
area is beyond saturated. Looking at the traceroute you have below it
would appear to be the same problem:
>> 5 0.xe-10-0-0.BR2.IAD8.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.165) 15.007 ms 15.109 ms
>> 14.975 ms
>> 6 144.232.8.209 (144.232.8.
Yup... This might be more helpful.
I went to r19.sn-p5qlsm7d.c.youtube.com for better comparison.
Verizon FIOS
1 8 ms 4 ms 4 ms l100.cmdnnj-vfttp-27.verizon-gni.net
[98.110.113.1]
2 9 ms 6 ms 7 ms g0-3-3-6.cmdnnj-lcr-22.verizon-gni.net
[130.81.182.44]
310 ms
1) You can use wireshark or other monitor to determine the IP address that your
video stream is originating from.
2) Upstream traceroutes to that address are probably not of that much interest.
The downstream path (carrying the video from the server to your house) can
follow a different path
I think your trace routes are just to their web servers. You need to figure out
where the actual videos are being streamed from. I used the Developer Tools
(Network tab) in Google Chrome to figure this out. The FQDNs will probably look
like the ones in my trace routes.
Derek
On Mar 6, 2013, a
On Mar 6, 2013, at 10:30 PM, "Robert M. Enger" wrote:
>
> 1) You can use wireshark or other monitor to determine the IP address that
> your video stream is originating from.
I just used the Developer Tools in Google Chrome to figure this out.
>
> 2) Upstream traceroutes to that address are
I've been seeing the same thing and was thinking it was me.
Just to add to some of the results here...
Verizon FIOS
132 ms 3 ms 5 ms l100.cmdnnj-vfttp-27.verizon-gni.net
[98.110.113.1]
233 ms 6 ms 7 ms g0-3-3-7.cmdnnj-lcr-22.verizon-gni.net
[130.81.183.186]
32
That looks like your problem right there. Have you tried connecting via
ethernet instead and seeing how Youtube performs?
On 3/6/2013 10:09 PM, Min wrote:
yes, i'm use wireless at home.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Derek Ivey wrote:
Why are your response times so high at your first hop?
yes, i'm use wireless at home.
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:03 PM, Derek Ivey wrote:
> Why are your response times so high at your first hop? Are you maxing out
> your connection or connected to your router over wireless?
>
> Derek
>
> On 3/6/2013 9:58 PM, Min wrote:
>>
>> I use FIOS. Here is my re
Why are your response times so high at your first hop? Are you maxing
out your connection or connected to your router over wireless?
Derek
On 3/6/2013 9:58 PM, Min wrote:
I use FIOS. Here is my result:
HostLoss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. Wire
I use FIOS. Here is my result:
HostLoss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. Wireless_Broadband_Router.home0.0% 165 285.1 563.9 68.2 2007. 376.1
2. L100.WASHDC-VFTTP-127.verizon-gn 0.0% 165 299.8 560.3 59.1 2021. 384.4
3. G0-9-4-1.WASHDC-LCR-22
One thing to keep in mind is that youtube may be anycast. Google's
distributed file system is pretty amazing and it could be traffic to one
specific datacenter that is possibly slow.
-Grant
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Min wrote:
> I use FIOS. In my case, I suspected two things.
>
> 1. c
The 1st one gets slow at XO and the 2nd and 3rd get slow at Sprint.
Now the interesting one with XO is that it is routed in a /30 that is
assigned to Google by XO.
network:Class-Name:network
network:ID:NET-XO-NET-d1302a54
network:Auth-Area:209.48.0.0/15
network:Network-Name:XO-NET-d1302a54
networ
3 traces all indicated the last hub are 80~100ms faster than the
second last hub. Interesting.
Min
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:07 PM, Derek Ivey wrote:
> I just got home and tested with quite a few 1080p videos. No issues over my
> Hurricane Electric IPv6 tunnel. I did notice frequent stops to buf
I just got home and tested with quite a few 1080p videos. No issues over
my Hurricane Electric IPv6 tunnel. I did notice frequent stops to buffer
on my FiOS IPv4 connection. I have a 50 Mbps down connection and don't
even come close to maxing it when watching Youtube videos.
Here are a few tra
Can any one provide traceroutes to youtube to see if there is any
correlation between last mile providers?
-Grant
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Derek Ivey wrote:
> I don't think it's just Time Warner. Definitely looks like XO. I have
> Verizon FiOS and it was pretty bad for me as well (not su
I don't think it's just Time Warner. Definitely looks like XO. I have
Verizon FiOS and it was pretty bad for me as well (not sure if it still is
since I'm not home right now). There's also atleast two threads in the
Verizon FiOS section on Broadband Reports:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r280276
I'd like to help, too, I'm from a TWC business class site with 650 Mbps
bandwidth and still regularly poor performance with YouTube.
-Rick
Sent from my iPhone 4S
On Mar 6, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>>
>> - Origin
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randy Carpenter
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube
>> > on our home connections, which are all Time Warner Cable.
>> > So
- Original Message -
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randy Carpenter
> wrote:
> >
> > We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube
> > on our home connections, which are all Time Warner Cable.
> > Some searching on forums and such revealed a work around:
> >
> > B
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
> We have recently been having some serious speed issues with YouTube on our
> home connections, which are all Time Warner Cable.
> Some searching on forums and such revealed a work around:
>
> Block 206.111.0.0/16 at the router.
>
this wa
25 matches
Mail list logo
