Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #2403 > unrolled thread

Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out

Started by	billy <billy@is.invalid>
First post	2013-10-08 03:32 +0000
Last post	2013-10-13 02:04 +0200
Articles	20 on this page of 127 — 22 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.networking

  Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-08 03:32 +0000
    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "Gary R. Schmidt" <grschmidt@acm.org> - 2013-10-08 15:37 +1100
      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 14:26 +0000
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Thomas Keusch <fwd+usenet-spam2013q4-1381444031@spam2013q4.bsd-solutions-duesseldorf.de> - 2013-10-10 22:32 +0000
    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out David Hough <noone$$@llondel.org> - 2013-10-08 07:30 +0100
      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-08 19:32 +0100
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2013-10-08 23:16 +0300
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 17:39 +0000
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-09 11:28 -0700
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 18:52 +0000
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2013-10-09 22:47 +0300
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 20:50 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 21:30 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 01:05 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 01:09 +0000
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 19:51 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 20:42 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-10-09 22:09 +0100
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 01:07 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-10-10 07:41 +0100
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 21:36 +0000
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-09 15:51 -0700
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-10 00:15 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:19 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:33 +0000
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 10:54 +0000
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 11:09 +0000
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com> - 2013-10-10 16:34 -0500
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-10 22:40 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com> - 2013-10-10 18:27 -0500
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com> - 2013-10-10 16:49 -0700
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 00:40 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Thomas Keusch <fwd+usenet-spam2013q4-1381456101@spam2013q4.bsd-solutions-duesseldorf.de> - 2013-10-11 01:50 +0000
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 03:24 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out dyrmak <dyrmak@orange.fr.invalid> - 2013-10-11 08:50 +0000
                          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:26 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-11 16:03 +0000
                              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 20:19 +0000
                                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-11 20:38 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2013-10-11 21:34 +0300
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-11 00:00 +0100
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 11:18 +0000
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2013-10-09 15:16 +0300
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 17:41 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-09 19:22 +0100
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 21:18 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2013-10-09 20:44 +0000
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 21:46 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:39 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2013-10-10 01:30 +0000
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 01:32 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-10-09 22:25 -0400
                          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 03:48 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-10 05:10 +0000
                              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out ein <ein@no.spam> - 2013-10-10 13:24 +0200
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-10 10:31 +0100
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-10 17:37 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-11 00:01 +0100
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 20:21 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-10 21:04 +0000
                          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 01:18 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-11 00:03 +0100
                          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 00:57 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 01:07 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-10-11 08:56 +0100
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:47 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:58 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2013-10-10 01:24 +0000
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-10-09 12:23 +0000
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Chris Davies <chris-usenet@roaima.co.uk> - 2013-10-09 19:27 +0100
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 21:21 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 21:47 +0000
      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 10:43 +0000
      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 10:51 +0000
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out nemesis <nemesis@home.it> - 2013-10-09 08:14 -0300
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2013-10-09 12:24 +0100
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out nemesis <nemesis@home.it> - 2013-10-09 08:42 -0300
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 13:57 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2013-10-09 15:09 +0100
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 11:27 +0000
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out nemesis <nemesis@home.it> - 2013-10-09 08:58 -0300
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 18:44 +0000
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 19:58 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 21:23 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 21:38 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-09 16:14 -0700
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:30 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-09 18:02 -0700
                          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2013-10-10 01:37 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-10 03:17 +0000
                            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 20:03 +0000
                              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 20:06 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-09 21:27 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 22:15 +0000
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-10 00:35 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2013-10-10 09:15 +0100
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 01:40 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out nemesis <nemesis@home.it> - 2013-10-10 23:03 -0300
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:43 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-10-11 16:11 +0100
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-11 04:11 +0000
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 04:19 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 04:25 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-11 04:45 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out ein <ein@no.spam> - 2013-10-11 08:06 +0200
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:32 +0000
                        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:41 +0000
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:48 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-10-11 09:00 +0100
                    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:30 +0000
                      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com> - 2013-10-14 19:20 +0000
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2013-10-11 10:17 +0100
                Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out billy <billy@is.invalid> - 2013-10-11 14:23 +0000
                  Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid> - 2013-10-11 22:46 +0100
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2013-10-14 16:47 -0400
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-09 16:17 +0000
    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com> - 2013-10-10 16:41 -0500
      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-10 15:16 -0700
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-10 15:18 -0700
          Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com> - 2013-10-13 14:34 -0500
            Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2013-10-13 14:27 -0700
              Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com> - 2013-10-17 14:58 -0500
    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "petrus bitbyter" <petrus.bitbyter@hotmail.com> - 2013-10-11 22:17 +0200
    Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "petrus bitbyter" <petrus.bitbyter@hotmail.com> - 2013-10-11 22:42 +0200
      Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-10-11 21:16 +0000
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-10-11 18:15 -0400
        Re: Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out "petrus bitbyter" <petrus.bitbyter@hotmail.com> - 2013-10-13 02:04 +0200

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →

#2500

From	unruh <unruh@invalid.ca>
Date	2013-10-11 04:11 +0000
Message-ID	<jUK5u.48005$rD3.8989@fx08.iad>
In reply to	#2496

On 2013-10-11, billy <billy@is.invalid> wrote:
> Below (sorry for the top post) is the old traceroute from yesterday on
> Microknoppix.
>
> Here is the new traceroute from a few seconds ago.
> The route is entirely different!
> Since *UNDERSTANDING* is what we're after, can you give me
> insight into *how* all of a sudden, the route is so very different
> (and why it works now)?
>
> Who decides what route my packets will take?

Each router looks for a next hop to send the packet on to, each has a
default route to send it on if it does not know where it is. Thus, the
route is dynamic and determined on the fly-- it was purposely designed
that way so that if a nuclear war takes out Dallas, the packets go via
Minneapolis instead, automatically.

>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2501

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 04:19 +0000
Message-ID	<l37ukr$h9q$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2500

unruh wrote:

> the route is dynamic and determined on the fly

I do not disagree, since, in theory, that's how the Internet
was designed (redundancy).

However, in my experience here, all the traceroutes were 
the same path, time after time after time after time.

It is only when centos.org changed servers (between yesterday
and today) that the path taken was drastically different.

Even so, the *new* path is the same time after time.

So, it's not as dynamic as one might presume. 
In fact, it's pretty static.

Of course, if one of the routers were to be taken out, 
then I'm sure it would route around them - but barring 
that, the route sure *appears* to be static to me.

PS: Do you think the NSA is stealing my packets? :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2502

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 04:25 +0000
Message-ID	<l37uvg$huv$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2501

billy wrote:

> Of course, if one of the routers were to be taken out,
> then I'm sure it would route around them - but barring
> that, the route sure appears to be static to me.

This gives me an idea...

It seems that, when I try to traceroute to the old 
Centos.org site of yesterday (72.232.194.162), there
is this last router, from whence my packets never
go any further:
 layered-11.border1.dal004.pnap.net (63.251.44.74)

Now, if I ping that router, everything seems fine:
$ ping 63.251.44.74
PING 63.251.44.74 (63.251.44.74) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 63.251.44.74: icmp_req=1 ttl=238 time=62.0 ms
64 bytes from 63.251.44.74: icmp_req=2 ttl=238 time=63.1 ms
64 bytes from 63.251.44.74: icmp_req=3 ttl=238 time=72.0 ms
^C
--- 63.251.44.74 ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2014ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 62.017/65.710/72.006/4.478 ms

A traceroute works fine also:
# traceroute -M icmp 63.251.44.74
traceroute to 63.251.44.74 (63.251.44.74), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  2.850 ms  2.835 ms  2.834 ms
 2  67-218-118-85.ridgewireless.net (67.218.118.85)  2.882 ms  2.881 ms  5.680 ms
 3  10.50.0.1 (10.50.0.1)  12.477 ms  14.800 ms  14.797 ms
 4  10.25.0.1 (10.25.0.1)  20.777 ms  23.605 ms  23.601 ms
 5  10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1)  41.385 ms  144.151 ms  146.952 ms
 6  10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1)  619.953 ms  306.464 ms  306.448 ms
 7  69.36.226.193 (69.36.226.193)  306.421 ms  364.905 ms  364.883 ms
 8  vl2.core2.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.130)  364.865 ms  266.085 ms  266.063 ms
 9  216.156.84.141.ptr.us.xo.net (216.156.84.141)  266.044 ms  345.147 ms  346.288 ms
10  207.88.14.233.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.14.233)  366.961 ms  634.262 ms  667.273 ms
11  vb15.rar3.dallas-tx.us.xo.net (207.88.12.45)  667.264 ms  457.518 ms  461.442 ms
12  207.88.14.34.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.14.34)  529.257 ms  520.364 ms  520.332 ms
13  207.88.185.74.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.185.74)  520.314 ms  444.251 ms  485.246 ms
14  border1.pc1-bbnet1.dal004.pnap.net (216.52.191.19)  615.351 ms border1.pc2-bbnet2.dal004.pnap.net (216.52.191.81)  
444.807 ms border1.pc1-bbnet1.dal004.pnap.net (216.52.191.19)  462.102 ms
15  layered-11.border1.dal004.pnap.net (63.251.44.74)  73.068 ms  65.315 ms *

My key confusion is below:
Q: How can I tell if the problem getting to the old Centos server
is due to this router? Or to the next router in line?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2503

From	unruh <unruh@invalid.ca>
Date	2013-10-11 04:45 +0000
Message-ID	<JnL5u.35316$_e.11238@fx07.iad>
In reply to	#2501

On 2013-10-11, billy <billy@is.invalid> wrote:
> unruh wrote:
>
>> the route is dynamic and determined on the fly
>
> I do not disagree, since, in theory, that's how the Internet
> was designed (redundancy).
>
> However, in my experience here, all the traceroutes were 
> the same path, time after time after time after time.
>
> It is only when centos.org changed servers (between yesterday
> and today) that the path taken was drastically different.
>
> Even so, the *new* path is the same time after time.
>
> So, it's not as dynamic as one might presume. 
> In fact, it's pretty static.

Yes, and then because something changes, suddenly it is different. 

>
> Of course, if one of the routers were to be taken out, 
> then I'm sure it would route around them - but barring 
> that, the route sure *appears* to be static to me.
>
> PS: Do you think the NSA is stealing my packets? :)

Probably. They are missing so many packets that they need to collect all
the ones they can.

>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2504

From	ein <ein@no.spam>
Date	2013-10-11 08:06 +0200
Message-ID	<l384gf$2op$1@node1.news.atman.pl>
In reply to	#2503

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

unruh wrote:

Have you tired https://www.centos.org/ ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2512

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 14:32 +0000
Message-ID	<l392g0$5ke$4@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2504

ein wrote:

> Have you tired https://www.centos.org/ ?

Yes. I had mentioned it earlier, but, I have an old thread there
on the same topic, and I also contacted the gmane centos group
and I contacted the web sysadmins.

They're all saying that it works for them ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2513

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 14:41 +0000
Message-ID	<l3931o$8ns$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2512

billy wrote:

> They're all saying that it works for them ...

BTW, I have resigned myself to the conclusion that, in a cynical 
way, "the Internet doesn't really work", since it arbitrarily 
works for 99% of the sites I want to connect to, but, I know of
two that it just is flaky on.
 centos.org <== which I do care about
 linuxreference.com <== which I don't care about

The sheer capriciousness of the results is what's killing me because
it makes no sense for the Internet to not work.

The entire thing was designed to work - and this indicates that
(for me, for a few sites), it's just not working. 

Makes no sense - and that's what is killing me inside, eating me 
up.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2515

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 14:48 +0000
Message-ID	<l393ff$9pv$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2503

unruh wrote:

> Yes, and then because something changes, suddenly it is different.

You just gave me a diagnostic idea!
You guys have modems, but I have a transceiver instead of a modem.
I can log into the radio on the roof and let it run the traceroute!
That way, my entire house is eliminated as a variable!

Here's the traceroute just now from the radio:
RADIO: traceroute centos.org
# 	Host 	IP 	Responses
1		10.50.0.1	9.148 ms · 6.287 ms · 1.944 ms
2		10.25.0.1	12.735 ms · 9.051 ms · 10.880 ms
3		10.20.0.1	16.225 ms · 56.871 ms · 14.400 ms
4		10.0.0.1	53.791 ms · 40.530 ms · 12.047 ms
5		69.36.226.193	19.931 ms · 72.111 ms · 
30.576 ms
6		69.36.225.129	21.656 ms · 32.959 ms · 
20.087 ms
7		140.174.21.101	15.294 ms · 20.615 ms · 
18.735 ms
8		154.54.11.85	18.116 ms · 8.769 ms · 
16.054 ms
9		154.54.5.113	13.920 ms · 14.242 ms · 
15.359 ms
10		154.54.28.33	18.270 ms · 14.705 ms · 
20.000 ms
11		154.54.30.66	76.472 ms · 81.262 ms · 
66.369 ms
12		154.54.6.86	82.061 ms · 86.454 ms · 102.949 ms
13		154.54.42.10	92.515 ms · 94.962 ms · 
99.695 ms
14		154.54.44.106	94.444 ms · 169.748 ms · 
110.654 ms
15		154.54.6.142	178.136 ms · 166.632 ms · 
200.960 ms
16		154.54.37.234	178.396 ms · 227.571 ms · 
182.961 ms
17		154.54.76.198	253.605 ms · 197.191 ms · 
214.669 ms
18		85.12.30.227	170.040 ms !C · 193.573 
ms · 192.897 ms

Huh? It made it through? Let me run a quick traceroute on the laptop!
$ traceroute centos.org
traceroute to centos.org (85.12.30.227), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  7.298 ms  7.264 ms  7.247 ms
 2  67-218-118-85.ridgewireless.net (67.218.118.85)  20.239 ms  20.227 
ms  20.210 ms
 3  10.50.0.1 (10.50.0.1)  23.845 ms  23.830 ms  23.814 ms
 4  10.25.0.1 (10.25.0.1)  37.873 ms  37.860 ms  37.844 ms
 5  10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1)  37.829 ms  40.619 ms  40.597 ms
 6  10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1)  56.534 ms  134.350 ms  134.330 ms
 7  69.36.226.193 (69.36.226.193)  134.315 ms  97.897 ms  97.878 ms
 8  vl2.core2.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.130)  97.869 ms  97.845 ms  
97.834 ms
 9  xe-0-0-0-22.r07.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (140.174.21.101)  
102.205 ms  97.803 ms  102.171 ms
10  te0-7-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.85)  97.761 ms  
102.118 ms te0-4-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.49)  
102.104 ms
11  be2000.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.105)  102.098 ms 
be2047.ccr22.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.5.113)  102.081 ms 
be2000.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.105)  68.723 ms
12  be2165.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.65)  68.708 ms 
be2167.mpd22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.77)  68.693 ms 
be2165.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.65)  128.983 ms
13  be2134.mpd21.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.38)  138.168 ms  
138.156 ms be2135.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.34)  144.404 
ms
14  be2158.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.130)  160.871 ms 
be2157.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.118)  160.858 ms 
be2156.ccr21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.86)  160.827 ms
15  be2139.ccr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.178)  167.524 ms 
be2080.ccr22.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.6)  160.809 ms 
be2081.ccr21.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.10)  160.785 ms
16  be2091.ccr22.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.44.98)  167.479 ms 
be2092.ccr21.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.25.26)  167.456 ms 
be2090.ccr21.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.206)  167.431 ms
17  te0-5-0-6.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.87.65)  235.370 ms 
te0-5-0-6.ccr22.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.87.57)  235.330 ms 
be2183.ccr22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.58.70)  235.329 ms
18  te0-0-0-10.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.234)  225.581 
ms be2185.mpd22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.105)  225.554 ms 
be2183.ccr22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.58.70)  215.695 ms
19  10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  215.661 ms 
te0-3-0-15.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.78.217)  225.499 ms 
10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  215.632 ms
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *

Hmmm... so maybe it "is" my home broadband router (netgear standard
stuff).

Let me try with the linuxreference site...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2506

From	Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk>
Date	2013-10-11 09:00 +0100
Message-ID	<87mwmgb5ja.fsf@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
In reply to	#2501

billy <billy@is.invalid> writes:
> So, it's not as dynamic as one might presume. 
> In fact, it's pretty static.
> 
> Of course, if one of the routers were to be taken out, 
> then I'm sure it would route around them - but barring 
> that, the route sure *appears* to be static to me.

Dynamic does not mean “changes every time”.  At a given moment the
chances are that the best route to a given destination is the same as
the previous time a packet traversed it.

-- 
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2511

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 14:30 +0000
Message-ID	<l392dh$5ke$3@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2506

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> Dynamic does not mean “changes every time”.  
> At a given moment the chances are that the best route 
> to a given destination is the same as the previous time 

I can't disagree with you at all.

From *my* experience, the route is pretty much static, and, 
when it fails, it pretty much fails at the same point for 
hours, days, or months at a time.

For example, my traceroute two days ago to the old centos.org
at 72.232.194.162 failed around hop 15, while last night a 
traceroute (and all other tests) worked fine to the new Centos.org
at 85.12.30.227, yet, inexplicably, today, that same test failed!

Here's a traceroute yesterday that worked and one that failed
today, all to the same IP address!

WORKED YESTERDAY:
knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ traceroute www.centos.org
traceroute to www.centos.org (85.12.30.227), 30 hops max, 60 byte 
packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  2.940 ms  2.915 ms  5.895 ms
 2  67-218-118-85.ridgewireless.net (67.218.118.85)  23.983 ms  23.970 
ms  23.953 ms
 3  10.50.0.1 (10.50.0.1)  23.935 ms  23.920 ms  23.905 ms
 4  10.25.0.1 (10.25.0.1)  33.716 ms  33.701 ms  33.687 ms
 5  10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1)  113.640 ms  127.266 ms  127.251 ms
 6  10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1)  155.135 ms  198.034 ms  198.014 ms
 7  69.36.226.193 (69.36.226.193)  77.534 ms  88.951 ms  88.940 ms
 8  vl2.core2.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.130)  101.711 ms  101.700 
ms  107.203 ms
 9  xe-0-0-0-22.r07.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 
(140.174.21.101)  111.422 ms  111.419 ms  111.404 ms
10  te0-7-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.85)  111.376 
ms te0-4-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.49)  
111.352 ms te0-7-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.11.85)  111.341 ms
11  be2047.ccr22.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.5.113)  111.324 
ms  111.311 ms be2000.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.6.105)  111.251 ms
12  be2165.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.65)  111.238 ms 
be2166.mpd21.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.69)  58.660 ms 
be2165.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.65)  66.012 ms
13  be2132.ccr21.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.54)  168.366 ms 
be2135.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.34)  168.350 ms 
be2133.ccr22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.66)  165.709 ms
14  be2159.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.24.82)  168.316 
ms  168.300 ms be2158.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.7.130)  168.285 ms
15  be2079.ccr21.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.27.182)  139.555 
ms  133.671 ms be2138.ccr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.43.202)  155.781 ms
16  be2090.ccr21.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.206)  139.505 ms 
te0-3-0-1.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.230)  
208.018 ms te0-4-0-3.ccr22.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.44.190)  208.007 ms
17  te0-5-0-6.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.87.65)  211.696 ms 
be2182.ccr21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.77.245)  
226.780 ms te0-4-0-6.ccr22.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.44.214)  211.705 ms
18  be2185.mpd22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.105)  229.203 ms 
te0-0-0-4.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.76.190)  
310.294 ms be2185.mpd22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com 
(154.54.37.105)  310.272 ms
19  10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  305.393 ms 
te0-0-0-12.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.76.134)  310.218 ms 
10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  305.367 ms
20  10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  305.344 ms  305.321 
ms  310.147 ms
21  85.12.30.227 (85.12.30.227)  305.263 ms !X  305.254 ms !X  205.255 
ms !X
knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ 

FAILED TODAY:
knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ traceroute centos.org
traceroute to centos.org (85.12.30.227), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  6.125 ms  6.094 ms  6.077 ms
 2  67-218-118-85.ridgewireless.net (67.218.118.85)  33.527 ms  33.515 
ms  33.499 ms
 3  10.50.0.1 (10.50.0.1)  33.485 ms  39.686 ms  47.348 ms
 4  10.25.0.1 (10.25.0.1)  82.142 ms  82.128 ms  82.113 ms
 5  10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1)  101.802 ms  101.787 ms  101.771 ms
 6  10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1)  111.627 ms  52.710 ms  52.672 ms
 7  69.36.226.193 (69.36.226.193)  52.637 ms  25.633 ms  25.613 ms
 8  vl2.core2.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.130)  25.599 ms  25.584 ms  
32.306 ms
 9  xe-0-0-0-22.r07.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (140.174.21.101)  36.545 
ms  36.530 ms  36.515 ms
10  te0-7-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.85)  36.477 ms 
te0-4-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.49)  36.463 ms 
te0-7-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.85)  36.433 ms
11  be2000.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.105)  36.442 ms  
36.427 ms  17.909 ms
12  be2164.ccr21.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.33)  26.295 ms 
be2166.mpd21.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.69)  26.279 ms 
be2167.mpd22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.77)  31.666 ms
13  be2135.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.34)  81.979 ms 
be2134.mpd21.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.38)  81.949 ms 
be2135.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.34)  81.943 ms
14  be2159.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.24.82)  91.739 ms  
110.049 ms be2156.ccr21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.86)  110.039 
ms
15  be2140.ccr22.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.186)  118.042 ms 
be2080.ccr22.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.6)  112.212 ms 
be2137.ccr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.194)  118.011 ms
16  te0-2-0-1.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.190)  185.107 
ms te0-0-0-1.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.170)  185.082 ms  
185.048 ms
17  te0-3-0-6.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.142)  191.782 ms 
be2184.mpd21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.69)  204.548 ms 
te0-5-0-4.ccr22.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.87.53)  191.749 ms
18  te0-7-0-0.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.76.170)  191.771 
ms  199.379 ms be2184.mpd21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.69)  
199.369 ms
19  10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  199.355 ms  199.325 
ms te0-0-0-4.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.76.190)  207.195 ms
20  * * 10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  188.627 ms
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *
knoppix@Microknoppix:~$

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2531

From	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Date	2013-10-14 19:20 +0000
Message-ID	<l3hg6c$m7p$2@usenet01.boi.hp.com>
In reply to	#2511

billy <billy@is.invalid> wrote:
> From *my* experience, the route is pretty much static, and, when it
> fails, it pretty much fails at the same point for hours, days, or
> months at a time.

A terminology suggestion that might help when speaking with
knowledgable nitpickers (I'm a nitpicker, but cannot claim extensive
routing knowledge :) Rather than call it "static" call it "stable."
In network-geek-speek a "static" route is one that is, for lack of a
better term "hard wired" in the configuration router/endsystem, rather
than one determined automagically via a routing protocol.

rick jones
-- 
oxymoron n, commuter in a gas-guzzling luxury SUV with an American flag
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2508

From	"p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 10:17 +0100
Message-ID	<p9gf5997krotk47bio9lau167bi1grd4ul@4ax.com>
In reply to	#2496

On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 01:40:04 +0000, billy <billy@is.invalid> wrote:

>Below (sorry for the top post) is the old traceroute from yesterday on
>Microknoppix.
>
>Here is the new traceroute from a few seconds ago.
>The route is entirely different!
>Since *UNDERSTANDING* is what we're after, can you give me
>insight into *how* all of a sudden, the route is so very different
>(and why it works now)?

Well if you emailed that guy I expect he either sorted it out or
forwarded it to the person who could. If not God intervened.

Routes are decided by static entries and entries made by dynamic routing
protocols on each router.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routing

>Who decides what route my packets will take?

The owner of the router, sorta in consultation with their neighbours.

-- 
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath, 
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme, 
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook, 
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag, 
liar, and shill.

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2509

From	billy <billy@is.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 14:23 +0000
Message-ID	<l391v7$5ke$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to	#2508

p-0''0-h the cat (ES) wrote:

> Well if you emailed that guy I expect he either sorted it out or
> forwarded it to the person who could. If not God intervened.

Unfortunately, the short respit is over. This morning, I again, can
no longer connect to the (new) centos.org. Sigh ... 
I just wish I understood this better ... 

$ traceroute centos.org
traceroute to centos.org (85.12.30.227), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  7.301 ms  7.275 ms  7.258 ms
 2  67-218-118-85.ridgewireless.net (67.218.118.85)  20.126 ms  20.113 
ms  20.096 ms
 3  10.50.0.1 (10.50.0.1)  25.566 ms  25.551 ms  28.360 ms
 4  10.25.0.1 (10.25.0.1)  33.868 ms  36.207 ms  36.192 ms
 5  10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1)  38.464 ms  38.448 ms  38.431 ms
 6  10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1)  38.416 ms  118.426 ms  118.412 ms
 7  69.36.226.193 (69.36.226.193)  118.388 ms  33.867 ms  62.402 ms
 8  vl2.core2.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.130)  62.387 ms  65.348 ms  
65.333 ms
 9  xe-0-0-0-22.r07.snjsca04.us.bb.gin.ntt.net (140.174.21.101)  65.319 
ms  65.304 ms  70.705 ms
10  te0-4-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.10.49)  70.708 ms  
70.685 ms te0-7-0-32.ccr21.sjc03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.11.85)  
70.653 ms
11  be2047.ccr22.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.5.113)  70.638 ms  
70.623 ms be2000.ccr21.sjc01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.105)  33.395 
ms
12  be2165.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.65)  33.378 ms 
be2166.mpd21.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.69)  33.363 ms 
be2165.ccr22.sfo01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.28.65)  51.255 ms
13  be2135.mpd22.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.34)  119.248 ms 
be2134.mpd21.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.38)  119.241 ms 
be2132.ccr21.mci01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.54)  119.227 ms
14  be2158.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.130)  119.220 ms 
be2157.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.118)  119.191 ms 
be2156.ccr21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.86)  119.177 ms
15  be2080.ccr22.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.6)  136.953 ms 
be2139.ccr21.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.43.178)  136.938 ms 
be2079.ccr21.yyz02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.27.182)  136.908 ms
16  te0-2-0-3.ccr21.lpl01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.85.214)  192.925 
ms be2090.ccr21.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.30.206)  136.885 ms 
be2091.ccr22.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.44.98)  136.870 ms
17  be2185.mpd22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.105)  194.858 ms 
be2182.ccr21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.77.245)  194.846 ms 
be2184.mpd21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.37.69)  194.831 ms
18  be2183.ccr22.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.58.70)  196.838 ms  
196.794 ms te0-3-0-3.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.78.210)  
196.791 ms
19  te0-3-0-0.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.78.206)  199.738 
ms te0-7-0-10.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.76.209)  212.950 
ms te0-7-0-6.mag21.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.76.198)  221.482 ms
20  10ge-2-3.cr1.ams3.baseip.com (149.6.128.198)  212.901 ms  212.874 
ms  212.868 ms
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2524

From	"p-0''0-h the cat (ES)" <super.pooh@furryfreeware.invalid>
Date	2013-10-11 22:46 +0100
Message-ID	<53sg591pqck8rj567pgeut2nl4941jce29@4ax.com>
In reply to	#2509

On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:23:05 +0000, billy <billy@is.invalid> wrote:

>> Well if you emailed that guy I expect he either sorted it out or
>> forwarded it to the person who could. If not God intervened.
>
>Unfortunately, the short respit is over. This morning, I again, can
>no longer connect to the (new) centos.org. Sigh ... 
>I just wish I understood this better ... 

Forget trying to understand something not under your control. Focus on
contacting people who can help you.

Just put the domain name of the owner of the last router that replied
into

www.checkdomain.com and email the technical contact with the traceroutes
and brief synopsis of the issues.

Someone will sort it out in the end. That's their job.

Registration Service Provided By: DICODE

Domain Name: BASEIP.COM

 Registration Date: 19-Jan-2011 
 Expiration Date: 19-Jan-2014  

 Status:LOCKED
	Note: This Domain Name is currently Locked. 
	This feature is provided to protect against fraudulent
acquisition of the domain name, 
	as in this status the domain name cannot be transferred or
modified. 

 Name Servers:  
    ns1.baseip.com
    ns2.baseip.com

 Registrant Contact Details:
    Base IP B.V.
    T.A. Westervoorde (10815)        (tim@baseip.com)
    Zweedsestraat 8A28
    Deventer
    Overijssel,7418 BG
    NL
    Tel. +31.857733066

 Administrative Contact Details:  
    Base IP B.V.
    T.A. Westervoorde (10815)        (tim@baseip.com)
    Zweedsestraat 8A28
    Deventer
    Overijssel,7418 BG
    NL
    Tel. +31.857733066 

 Technical Contact Details:  
    Base IP B.V.
    T.A. Westervoorde (10815)        (tim@baseip.com)
    Zweedsestraat 8A28
    Deventer
    Overijssel,7418 BG
    NL
    Tel. +31.857733066 

 Billing Contact Details: 
    Base IP B.V.
    T.A. Westervoorde (10815)        (tim@baseip.com)
    Zweedsestraat 8A28
    Deventer
    Overijssel,7418 BG
    NL
    Tel. +31.857733066 

-- 
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath, 
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme, 
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook, 
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag, 
liar, and shill.

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2532

From	Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net>
Date	2013-10-14 16:47 -0400
Message-ID	<m3d2n7mvfv.fsf@hemphills.net>
In reply to	#2496

billy <billy@is.invalid> writes:

> Below (sorry for the top post) is the old traceroute from yesterday on
> Microknoppix.
>
> Here is the new traceroute from a few seconds ago.
> The route is entirely different!
> Since *UNDERSTANDING* is what we're after, can you give me
> insight into *how* all of a sudden, the route is so very different
> (and why it works now)?
>
> Who decides what route my packets will take?
>
> knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ traceroute www.centos.org
> traceroute to www.centos.org (85.12.30.227), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets

[snip first routing]

>> root@Microknoppix:/# traceroute -M icmp centos.org
>> traceroute to centos.org (72.232.194.162), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets

[snip second routing]

It's not the routing, it's the destination.  Do you see the IP addresses
in each of the above two routes?  The first one works, and the second
one doesn't.

The question is why do you get two different IP addresses for the name
"centos.org"?  The answer is probably that the name resolution (DNS) is
screwed up somewhere.  You can get around this by editing /etc/hosts by
inserting the following line:

85.12.30.22   www.centos.org centos.org

This temporary fix will only work as long as they don't change their IP
address (again?).  Why did it work for TOR?  Because they use different
name servers than you do.

To address some of the other things mentioned in this thread: pings and
traceroutes can be blocked at any point along the route.  Successful
pings and traceroutes that go all the way to the destination tell you a
lot, but ping failures and traceroutes that don't go all the way don't
tell you so much.  They do not indicate a problem along the route, or at
the destination.

Also, the suggestion of too large an MTU wasn't a bad one.  It can cause
the symptoms you were seeing, but I think you've proven that it is not
your problem.  I haven't seen MTU issues in a long time, though.

Scott
-- 
Scott Hemphill	hemphill@alumni.caltech.edu
"This isn't flying.  This is falling, with style."  -- Buzz Lightyear

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2423

From	unruh <unruh@invalid.ca>
Date	2013-10-09 16:17 +0000
Message-ID	<Gkf5u.46932$K71.32242@fx21.iad>
In reply to	#2410

He asks you to do ping -M ... and you do traceroute -M ...
They are different programs and -M means different things to them. Why
in the world would you do traceroute -M when asked to do ping -M?

(man ping
man traceroute)
traceroute is NOT ping.


On 2013-10-09, billy <billy@is.invalid> wrote:
> David Hough wrote:
>
>> Is it an MTU/fragmentation issue? (Check out ping -M)
>
> I'm not sure what an MTU fragmentation issue is, but, if it
> is related to helping to EXPLAIN why I can't connect via the 
> web to centos.org, I'll be glad to run *any* diagnostic procedure!
>
> Here's the traceroute -M results: 
>
> # traceroute -M icmp www.centos.org
> traceroute to www.centos.org (72.232.194.162), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
>  1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  2.836 ms  2.828 ms  2.827 ms
>  2  MY_WISP_IP_REDACTED (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx)  2.835 ms  5.766 ms  5.768 ms
>  3  10.50.0.1 (10.50.0.1)  12.510 ms  12.509 ms  16.000 ms
>  4  10.25.0.1 (10.25.0.1)  18.880 ms  18.878 ms  18.875 ms
>  5  10.20.0.1 (10.20.0.1)  31.081 ms  31.335 ms  34.052 ms
>  6  10.0.0.1 (10.0.0.1)  34.050 ms  18.724 ms  28.518 ms
>  7  69.36.226.193 (69.36.226.193)  28.488 ms  28.064 ms  28.043 ms
>  8  vl2.core1.scl.layer42.net (69.36.225.129)  28.025 ms  47.434 ms  47.413 ms
>  9  216.156.84.141.ptr.us.xo.net (216.156.84.141)  47.394 ms  30.086 ms  30.064 ms
> 10  207.88.14.233.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.14.233)  80.031 ms  60.416 ms  70.204 ms
> 11  vb15.rar3.dallas-tx.us.xo.net (207.88.12.45)  70.189 ms  120.949 ms  120.925 ms
> 12  207.88.14.34.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.14.34)  120.893 ms  75.048 ms  75.028 ms
> 13  207.88.185.74.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.185.74)  75.009 ms  68.640 ms  101.778 ms
> 14  border1.pc2-bbnet2.dal004.pnap.net (216.52.191.81)  101.762 ms border1.pc1-bbnet1.dal004.pnap.net (216.52.191.19)  77.155 ms  87.903 
> ms
> 15  layered-11.border1.dal004.pnap.net (63.251.44.74)  87.889 ms  120.374 ms  123.342 ms
> 16  * * *
> 17  * * *
> 18  * * *
> 19  * * *
> 20  * * *
> 21  * * *
> 22  * * *
> 23  * * *
> 24  * * *
> 25  * * *
> 26  * * *
> 27  * * *
> 28  * * *
> 29  * * *
> 30  * * *
> #
>
> Does any of that help diagnose WHY this one IP address times out on 
> port 80 for months on end (and then works just fine for months)?
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2482

From	"ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com>
Date	2013-10-10 16:41 -0500
Message-ID	<l376v7$crc$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#2403

it times out - done -

http://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=http%3acentos.org&run=networktools#

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2483

From	Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid>
Date	2013-10-10 15:16 -0700
Message-ID	<bbon8oF3mddU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#2482

ps56k wrote:
> it times out - done -
>
> http://mxtoolbox.com/SuperTool.aspx?action=http%3acentos.org&run=networktools#

Presently centos.org is down for everyone

http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/centos.org  It's not just you! 
http://centos.org looks down from here.

http://www.isup.me/www.centos.org  It's not just you! 
http://www.centos.org looks down from here.

That has not been the case for the duration of this thread.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2484

From	Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid>
Date	2013-10-10 15:18 -0700
Message-ID	<bbonceF3mddU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#2483

Mike Easter wrote:

> Presently centos.org is down for everyone

Initiating server query ...
Looking up IP address for domain: www.centos.org
The IP address for the domain is: 85.12.30.227
Connecting to the server on standard HTTP port: 80
The port is closed, so our connection attempt was refused.
Query complete.

-- 
Mike Easter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2528

From	"ps56k" <pschuman_no5pam_m3@interserv.com>
Date	2013-10-13 14:34 -0500
Message-ID	<l3esl2$p3$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#2484

weird - yup -
it times out from my network - and other "online testing sites" -
so... ????

Ping -          centos.org - 85.12.30.227       --> Amsterdam location
Ping - www.centos.org - 72.232.194.162 ---> ????

So, where does the -    72.232.194.162      come from ??
vs my DNS lookup is showing 85.12.30.227   ??

  2  NS1.LAYEREDTECH.COM  72.232.1.236
AUTH  0 ms  Received 1 Answers , rcode=
PTR: PointerName=www.centos.org,

cname:www.centos.org
Lookup failed after 1 name server timed out or responded non-authoritatively

-----------
Here's his traceroute run:
knoppix@Microknoppix:~$ traceroute www.centos.org
traceroute to www.centos.org (72.232.194.162), 30 hops max, 60 byte

----------
      HopCount IP Address HostName
      1 208.123.79.34 net208-123-79-34.static-customer.corenap.com
      2 198.252.182.180 aus-core-10-v12.corenap.com
      3 24.155.184.106 xe-0-0-2-509.AUSTTXMIM002.aggr09.austtx.grandecom.net
      4 24.155.121.76 xe-0-0-0-0.aggr08.austtx.grandecom.net
      5 4.30.74.53 ae5-868.edge9.Dallas1.Level3.net
      6 4.69.145.200 ae-4-90.edge3.Dallas1.Level3.net
      7 4.71.170.6 LAYERED-TEC.edge3.Dallas1.Level3.net
      8 * * * * * *
      9 72.232.194.162 www.centos.org


---------

their TCP/IP world seems messed up somewhere within their DNS records -

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 6 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next page →

csiph-web

Frustrated that I don't UNDERSTAND why my network times out

Contents

#2500

#2501

#2502

#2503

#2504

#2512

#2513

#2515

#2506

#2511

#2531

#2508

#2509

#2524

#2532

#2423

#2482

#2483

#2484

#2528