High Ping
#1
Posted 09 June 2007 - 06:09 PM
#2
Posted 09 June 2007 - 07:23 PM
#3
Posted 09 June 2007 - 07:27 PM
Quote
#4
Posted 09 June 2007 - 07:32 PM
#5
Posted 09 June 2007 - 07:42 PM
Quote
#6
Posted 09 June 2007 - 07:51 PM
#7
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:01 PM
© Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:Documents and SettingsOleg>ping google.com -n 25
Pinging google.com [72.14.207.99] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=66ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=67ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=68ms TTL=241
Reply from 72.14.207.99: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=241
Ping statistics for 72.14.207.99:
Packets: Sent = 25, Received = 25, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 66ms, Maximum = 70ms, Average = 68ms
#8
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:18 PM
#9
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:26 PM
#10
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:34 PM
Quote
Some people see those results. But the odds that you are going to get them to do anything to get them that low is slim to none. I mostly see people with pings more like yours. I have been fighting the latency battle with my sat provider. Lots of --->
#11
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:41 PM
#12
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:44 PM
#13
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:45 PM
Quote
Well actually more around the 600-700ms range, but anyway I don't wanna pull your post off topic with my same old sob story Ive had for months
Quote
#14
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:56 PM
Quote
well, 600-700ms is about the minimum that's even physically possible with no congestion whatsoever... 1000 to 1500 is a much more realistic figure for satellite
#15
Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:57 PM
Quote
I'm going to haft to disagree here...I see plenty of Hughes systems that average in the 600-700ms range and their satellites are MUCH more congested than Wildblue's.
#16
Posted 09 June 2007 - 09:01 PM
#17
Posted 09 June 2007 - 09:15 PM
Quote
unless it's changed since I had it a couple months ago, that wasn't what I saw.. I don't recall ever having a ping under 900ms, or seeing anyone else that low for that matter..
#18
Posted 10 June 2007 - 06:17 AM
The reason your getting these high ping times is because your modem is set on a mode called interleaved, what this does is check every packet that is sent from your modem in the dslam, so because its being checked it takes twice as long to be sent.
You want your modem switched to a mode called fast path. This does no checking of your packets.
All you have to do is call bellsouth tech support and tell them that i want to be switched to fast path.
#19
Posted 10 June 2007 - 07:18 AM
#20
Posted 10 June 2007 - 08:11 AM
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
© Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:Documents and SettingsOleg>ping yahoo.com -n 20
Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 26ms, Maximum = 28ms, Average = 27ms
C:Documents and SettingsOleg>
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users













