<html> ??<br> <br> anybody knowing what's going on with CW ??<br> <br> also anybody from CNN.....you got barely connectivity southbound<br> <br> <br> done from nitrous....<br> <br> <font size=3>Tracing the route to cnn.com (207.25.71.25) <br> 1 p219.t3.ans.net (192.157.69.13) 0 msec 0 msec 4 msec <br> 2 h12-1.t60-6.Reston.t3.ans.net (140.223.61.29) [AS 1673] 8 msec 8 msec 8 msec <br> 3 f2-1.t60-2.Reston.t3.ans.net (140.223.60.132) [AS 1673] 8 msec 8 msec 8 msec <br> 4 h9-1.t104-0.Atlanta.t3.ans.net (140.223.61.22) [AS 1673] 28 msec 28 msec 28 msec <br> 5 f2-0.c104-10.Atlanta.t3.ans.net (140.222.104.120) [AS 1673] 32 msec 28 msec 28 msec <br> 6 * * * <br> 7 * * h0-0.enss3222.t3.ans.net (207.25.70.6) [AS 1324] !A <br> <br> <br> --<br> <br> Bert<br> Datanet Security<br> Naples, Fla<br> <br> </font></html>
Your e-mail is barely showing through all that HTML. We are a CW customer, and what I am seeing is that traffic destined for CW address blocks is going by way of Sprint. In one case, traffic to my network, when originating at best.com, looks like: traceroute to 206.97.151.8 (206.97.151.8), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 core1-fe8-1-0.mv.best.net (206.184.139.129) 102.991 ms 0.630 ms 0.899 ms 2 Hssi4-0-0.GW1.SCL1.ALTER.NET (137.39.133.89) 2.435 ms 1.839 ms 3.061 ms 3 103.ATM3-0.XR2.SCL1.ALTER.NET (146.188.145.118) 1.533 ms 2.539 ms 2.327 ms 4 294.ATM2-0.TR2.SCL1.ALTER.NET (146.188.146.26) 3.034 ms 2.493 ms 2.858 ms 5 107.ATM6-0.TR2.LAX2.ALTER.NET (146.188.137.145) 8.721 ms 8.147 ms 8.474 ms 6 298.ATM7-0.XR2.LAX4.ALTER.NET (146.188.249.13) 8.273 ms 8.605 ms 9.889 ms 7 192.ATM6-0-0.BR1.LAX1.ALTER.NET (146.188.248.29) 8.647 ms 9.412 ms 11.511 ms 8 sl-bb4-ana-1-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.8.181) 161.911 ms 157.648 ms 160.786 ms 9 sl-bb22-ana-3-2.sprintlink.net (144.232.1.29) 150.348 ms 148.671 ms 155.872 ms 10 sl-bb2-ana-4-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.1.14) 162.540 ms * * 11 * core3-hssi3-0.Bloomington.cw.net (206.157.77.41) 2126.225 ms * 12 * * core1.Dallas.cw.net (204.70.4.217) 988.692 ms 13 border1-fddi-0.Dallas.cw.net (204.70.114.18) 996.910 ms 1015.055 ms 1014.235 ms 14 inturnet.Dallas.cw.net (204.70.115.42) 1003.216 ms * * 15 * bosch.intur.net (206.97.151.8) 997.691 ms * Traffic from me to best.com looks like: traceroute to shell4.ba.best.com (206.184.139.135), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 eth-0.cisco-1.intur.net (206.97.151.1) 2.106 ms 2.073 ms 2.088 ms 2 border1-serial3-0.Dallas.cw.net (204.70.115.41) 72.321 ms 16.649 ms 203.451 ms 3 core1-fddi-0.Dallas.cw.net (204.70.114.17) 4.789 ms 5.113 ms 10.839 ms 4 bordercore1.SanFrancisco.cw.net (166.48.12.1) 72.705 ms 42.307 ms 41.859 ms 5 best-internet.SanFrancisco.cw.net (166.48.13.250) 1001.36 ms 1052.2 ms 1010.41 ms 6 core1-hssi8-0-0.mv.best.net (206.86.228.89) 979.218 ms 1007.01 ms 1000.45 ms 7 shell4.ba.best.com (206.184.139.135) 1013.52 ms * 1018.15 ms My guess is that at hop #5 the returns start going by way of the asymetric return path, and hence the long delay (and often high lossage). The problem seems to be that CW address space is being sucked into ALTER.NET or sprintlink.net for some reason. Is this still Qwest? -- -- *-----------------------------* Phil Howard KA9WGN * -- -- | Inturnet, Inc. | Director of Internet Services | -- -- | Business Internet Solutions | eng at intur.net | -- -- *-----------------------------* philh at intur.net * --