Hi Logan,
At 00:55 29-10-2015, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:
>However, as I showed in my blog post, it's taking on average 662ms. The
>same latency that it would take as it goes to Europe and then back to
>Mauritius. A few days ago, I was gettin 67ms from Emtel to Orange and
>vice-versa. Obviously, something happened that caused the latency to
>spike to 662ms.
The ping output from the Mauritius Telecom network to 196.192.112.2
(in Mauritius) is as follows:
PING 196.192.112.2 (196.192.112.2): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 196.192.112.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=249 time=212.038 ms
64 bytes from 196.192.112.2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=249 time=211.898 ms
64 bytes from 196.192.112.2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=249 time=212.436 ms
64 bytes from 196.192.112.2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=249 time=212.049 ms
64 bytes from 196.192.112.2: icmp_seq=4 ttl=249 time=211.900 ms
--- 196.192.112.2 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 211.898/212.064/212.436/0.351 ms
The traffic goes from telecomplus.net to London and back to emtel.com
through another network provider. Here is the ping output from the
Mauritius Telecom network to 41.76.47.65:
PING 41.76.47.65 (41.76.47.65): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 41.76.47.65: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=7.213 ms
64 bytes from 41.76.47.65: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=6.320 ms
64 bytes from 41.76.47.65: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=7.532 ms
64 bytes from 41.76.47.65: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=6.314 ms
64 bytes from 41.76.47.65: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=6.422 ms
--- 41.76.47.65 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 6.314/6.760/7.532/0.514 ms
The traffic goes from telecomplus.net to emtel.com. The reply at
https://twitter.com/OrangeMauritius/status/659622196529221632 is correct.
The following is part of a reply from Daniel Shaw (MIXP):
"What I can confirm for certain is: Both Emtel and Mauritius Telecom are
active at the MIXP.
That is:
- They both have an active port that is up.
- Both their ports do show traffic.
So we can know that they both do peer with at least one other network that
is at the IX, possibly more than one."
Either some details were omitted from the above or the person was not
aware of the network issue.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
Received on Fri Oct 30 2015 - 11:44:05 PST