Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!noc.sura.net!oleary From: oleary@sura.net (dave o'leary) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Is the Internet usable for wide-area interactive conversations? Keywords: lack of Internet stability Message-ID: <1991Jun19.044623.19628@sura.net> Date: 19 Jun 91 04:46:23 GMT References: <2039.Jun1803.33.1391@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Jun18.224350.21721@Think.COM> Organization: SURAnet, College Park, MD Lines: 54 Yes, Dan, there are lots of problems on the Internet as far as route flaps and gateway crashes and congestion, etc. but I think you may have seen a particularly bad instance. A lot of the technology being used is less robust than it needs to be, but hey, we operations types have to keep our jobs somehow.... :-) Your message was dated at 3:30 GMT, which is 7:30 EST, right? That is about when things started to look bad here in College Park as power to the area was gone and one of the routers died of heat stroke. Although our going down shouldn't have affected NYU to Berkeley much, and we were mostly still up then. Script started on Wed Jun 19 00:23:41 1991 % traceroute -g nyu.edu berkeley.edu traceroute to berkeley.edu (128.32.133.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 sura6 (128.167.1.6) 20 ms 10 ms 0 ms 2 nss (192.80.214.254) 10 ms 0 ms 10 ms 3 Ithaca.NY.NSS.NSF.NET (129.140.74.9) 40 ms 30 ms 40 ms 4 lan.cornell.site.psi.net (192.35.82.1) 50 ms 50 ms 50 ms 5 cornell.syr.pop.psi.net (128.145.30.1) 90 ms 50 ms 40 ms 6 albpop.syr.pop.psi.net (128.145.20.2) 60 ms syr.wp.pop.psi.net (128.145.91.1) 70 ms albpop.syr.pop.psi.net (128.145.20.2) 70 ms 7 wp.nyc.pop.psi.net (128.145.84.1) 50 ms albpop.nyc2.pop.psi.net (128.145.80.1) 80 ms wp.nyc.pop.psi.net (128.145.84.1) 60 ms 8 nyc_P1.lan.nyc2.pop.psi.net (128.145.218.2) 60 ms 70 ms 70 ms 9 nyc2.nyu.site.psi.net (128.145.44.2) 90 ms 130 ms 80 ms 10 NYU.EDU (128.122.128.2) 80 ms 330 ms 90 ms 11 NYEGRESS.NYU.EDU (128.122.128.44) 70 ms 70 ms 70 ms 12 nyu.nyc2.pop.psi.net (128.145.44.1) 70 ms 80 ms 70 ms 13 nyc_C1.lan.nyc2.pop.psi.net (128.145.218.1) 150 ms 80 ms 90 ms 14 nyc2.albany.pop.psi.net (128.145.80.2) 90 ms 70 ms 90 ms 15 syrpop.albany.pop.psi.net (128.145.20.1) 120 ms 80 ms 80 ms 16 syr.cornell.site.psi.net (128.145.30.2) 70 ms 70 ms 70 ms 17 NSS.TN.CORNELL.EDU (192.35.82.100) 80 ms 80 ms 140 ms 18 Ann_Arbor.MI.NSS.NSF.NET (129.140.81.10) 240 ms 90 ms 100 ms 19 Salt_Lake_City.UT.NSS.NSF.NET (129.140.79.17) 170 ms 180 ms 400 ms 20 Palo_Alto.CA.NSS.NSF.NET (129.140.77.15) 260 ms 450 ms 240 ms 21 SU1.BARRNET.NET (131.119.254.5) 210 ms 250 ms 200 ms 22 UCB2.BARRNET.NET (131.119.2.4) 250 ms 300 ms 250 ms 23 inr-22-dmz.Berkeley.EDU (128.32.252.22) 240 ms 210 ms 190 ms 24 inr-35.Berkeley.EDU (128.32.168.35) 220 ms 190 ms 200 ms 25 ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (128.32.133.1) 210 ms 230 ms 230 ms % script done on Wed Jun 19 00:24:12 1991 Wow, this worked a lot better than I expected. Relatively consistent results, no packet loss, no route flaps (I am guessing that the albpop/ syr/wp stuff is cisco load balancing?). Anyway, the NYU-Berkeley path looks to be in pretty good shape now. Have fun, dave o'leary SURAnet NOC Mgr. oleary@sura.net (301)982-3214