LAG issue - HowTo solve it

fuzzylunkin1 · Post by **fuzzylunkin1** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:45 am

This might make it worse for some people.

I get approx 47ms to Planet (not on my satellite right now) and 173 to HE London.

I actually get faster to Europe than to the US (Chicago 427ms).

However I support the idea. It's 100% worth a shot

.

TurkeyXIII · Post by **TurkeyXIII** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:27 am

I get 299 ms from Melbourne to the Hong Kong node, compared with 220 directly to planet and 414 to GPZ. I'd like to try it anyway, but I can't see it making a huge improvement.

bigrou · Post by **bigrou** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:33 am

Average of 160 ms to planet and 20 ms to tunnelbroker's Paris node. (29 to London)
I would definitely like to try it.

voobscout · Post by **voobscout** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 2:18 pm

Dogbones wrote:QUOTE (Dogbones @ Apr 27 2009, 04:44 AM) 127 ping to tunnelbroker versus 153 ms ping to planet. I wouldn't really call this eliminating lag.
I am with sgt_baker on this. Worth giving it a try and I can set up the beta server for testing. But at least from my un scientific test as well as sgt_baker's I am not sure how many people will be helped by this. Perhaps Germany->US may see an improvement.

There're quite a few ipv6 tunnel brokers, wikipedia provides a summary here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IPv6_tunnel_brokers

The best option is to find out which POP is the closest to you, IP-wise, since geographical distances rarely account for ISP peering agreements ;-)

sgt_baker wrote:QUOTE (sgt_baker @ Apr 26 2009, 06:30 PM) ^^My point here is that perhaps the weak link in this idea will be the IPv4 section of the equation. Just from this rudimentary and initial assessment, tunnelbroker appear to have very limited peering on the IPv4 end of things. I would, however, still be very interested in experimenting with both versions of IP.

Baker has a good point, HE broker seems to have limited peering indeed, although in some colocations they got good uplinks. I would also wager, that even Baker will be able to find an acceptable ipv6 POP, if he tries out different IPs, not that he needs it, but just for the heck of it.

I'm definetely not saying this solution would fit absolutely everybody, those who get ipv4 awesomeness from their ISPs would still continue to use the best available option to them.

Aside from HE, there're http://www.sixxs.net and http://www.go6.net/ for Canada/US.

For our AU users, there's

http://broker.aarnet.net.au/ - 202.158.196.131
http://ipv6.internode.on.net/ - 150.101.0.201

For our thai pilots:

http://tb.ipv6.nectec.or.th/ - 203.185.129.133

Norway pilots could use:
http://www.ipv6tunnel.ssc.net/ - 213.179.32.14

French pilots:

http://tunnel-broker.renater.fr - (i don't speak french, so i couldn't lookup ipv4 POP)

Anyways, we should experiment with the idea, important thing is, it would not detract from ipv4 enjoyment, since the same server would be able to allow both ipv6 and ipv4 pilots to fly together, so let's give it a try.

---

PS. My "personal" comments are irrelevant, while i was creating the original post, i was extremely intoxicated and probably thought i was being funny lol... In retrospect, i should have simply given a concise semi-technical description and been done with it.

Grimmwolf_GB · Post by **Grimmwolf_GB** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 3:48 pm

I am not yet convinced, that it will really solve the issue. I would not terribly mind it, but would not want to install the stuff. (pkk, zapper, hello.

)

voobscout · Post by **voobscout** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:10 pm

Grimmwolf_GB wrote:QUOTE (Grimmwolf_GB @ Apr 27 2009, 05:48 PM) I am not yet convinced, that it will really solve the issue. I would not terribly mind it, but would not want to install the stuff. (pkk, zapper, hello. )

will you be convinced if your latency would be halved ? Besides, there isn't anything you need to install, it's just a bunch of configs and it can totally be automated... In the event, that this flies off, we'll have it so completely user friendly and seamless, you wouldn't know there's anything going on under the hood...

infact, it can even be built into asgs, sort of, check the latency, figure out if ipv4 is better then ipv6 and go with the flow... but that's getting ahead of ourselves.

Exo · Post by **Exo** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:11 pm

I can't imagine there being anything wrong with trialling it against a test server.

Adept · Post by **Adept** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:24 pm

I certainly wouldn't mind getting better ping to planet. 170 is ok, but not great. I look forward to seeing how this pans out.

parcival · Post by **parcival** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:19 pm

Let us know when a server is ready for testing.

voobscout · Post by **voobscout** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 11:54 pm

I'm working on "useless" performance gouging form, i'll post the link here as soon as it'll be ready for mainstream consumption.

PM to DB has been dispatched. Hopefully not many people spam his inbox ;-)

the new battly cry: IPv6 FTW !