Re: Latency

From: S Moonesamy <sm+mu_at_elandsys.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 13:20:09 -0700

Hi Logan,
At 12:09 02-10-2015, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:
>[logan_at_logan ~]$ ping 72.21.221.118
>PING 72.21.221.118 (72.21.221.118) 56(84) bytes of data.
>64 bytes from 72.21.221.118: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=325 ms
>64 bytes from 72.21.221.118: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=315 ms
>64 bytes from 72.21.221.118: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=313 ms
>64 bytes from 72.21.221.118: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=314 ms
>64 bytes from 72.21.221.118: icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=315 ms
>
>Saving around 60 ms on average is always an added benefit. I believe
>that Orange can provide around 90-120 ms latency to the US. I saw it
>on an Orange business line back in 2007.

I agree that it is useful to save that 60 ms. I doubt that it is
technically possible to go under 200 ms with existing connectivity to
reach the US.

>And ISPs need to fix their network to minimise those latencies :)
>Why am i getting 315ms while you're gettin 385 ms ?

   5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
   round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 323.839/325.810/328.747/1.832 ms

I am getting around 325 ms at the moment. There is a higher latency
than usual on the ISP's network. It is difficult to convince ISPs to
fix their network when there isn't enough public information to show
that there is a latency problem.

>At least, we can make it hard for them not to consider Mauritius :)

One of the functions of the ICT Advisory Council is that it "shall
advise the Minister on any matter relating to" "the improvement of
information and communication services including telecommunication
services;". Isn't it up to Mr Meetoo, Mr Sookun and you to make it
hard for Mauritius not to be considered? :-)

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
Received on Fri Oct 02 2015 - 20:25:44 PST