BurstNET/Nocster Down?

Portal Home > Knowledgebase > Articles Database > BurstNET/Nocster Down?

Posted by sysc, 12-29-2003, 04:35 PM
[root@salient root]# traceroute 64.191.61.1 traceroute to 64.191.61.1 (64.191.61.1), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets 1 69.28.171.1 (69.28.171.1) 0.339 ms 0.275 ms 0.259 ms 2 so0-3-0.jr1.phx1.llnw.net (69.28.139.225) 0.757 ms 0.769 ms 0.717 ms 3 g2-0.502.hr1.PHX1.gblx.net (208.51.41.229) 0.728 ms 0.629 ms 0.615 ms 4 pos5-2-622M.cr2.PHX1.gblx.net (67.17.71.45) 0.777 ms 0.797 ms 0.712 ms 5 pos1-0-2488M.cr2.LAX1.gblx.net (67.17.68.134) 10.399 ms 10.431 ms 10.396 ms 6 so1-0-0-2488M.ar1.LAX2.gblx.net (67.17.67.169) 10.520 ms 10.580 ms 10.552 ms 7 208.50.13.198 (208.50.13.198) 10.500 ms 10.384 ms 10.810 ms 8 p6-0.core01.lax01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.2.209) 10.608 ms 10.575 ms 1 0.627 ms 9 p5-0.core01.san01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.78) 13.540 ms 13.428 ms 13. 413 ms 10 p6-0.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.5) 64.436 ms 64.198 ms 64.3 69 ms 11 p15-0.core01.tpa01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.46) 70.054 ms 70.180 ms 70 .039 ms 12 p5-0.core01.mco01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.141) 70.077 ms 70.047 ms 69 .925 ms 13 p14-0.core01.jax01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.154) 70.098 ms 69.988 ms 7 0.281 ms 14 p5-0.core01.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.138) 70.382 ms 69.903 ms 70 .243 ms 15 p5-0.core02.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.162) 70.174 ms 70.367 ms 70 .009 ms 16 p15-0.core01.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.21) 70.223 ms 69.870 ms 69 .916 ms 17 p4-0.core01.phl01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.18) 73.358 ms 74.081 ms 73. 569 ms 18 g7.ba21.b003003-1.phl01.atlas.cogentco.com (38.112.34.138) 73.687 ms 73.66 4 ms 73.579 ms 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 66.197.191.45 (66.197.191.45) 81.030 ms * 81.096 ms [root@salient root]#
Posted by sysc, 12-29-2003, 04:36 PM
Back up. --- 64.191.61.1 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3021ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 80.808/80.967/81.123/0.137 ms [root@salient root]# ping 64.191.61.240 PING 64.191.61.240 (64.191.61.240) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=81.5 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=2 ttl=52 time=80.3 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=3 ttl=52 time=80.1 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=6 ttl=52 time=80.0 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=9 ttl=52 time=80.0 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=10 ttl=52 time=80.4 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=11 ttl=52 time=80.5 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=12 ttl=52 time=80.2 ms 64 bytes from 64.191.61.240: icmp_seq=13 ttl=52 time=81.3 ms --- 64.191.61.240 ping statistics --- 13 packets transmitted, 9 received, 30% packet loss, time 12079ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 80.044/80.523/81.507/0.543 ms [root@salient root]#
Posted by HostJedi, 12-29-2003, 04:54 PM
Please wait atleast 2-3 minutes before making such a post. This is waste of your time, our time, and WHT readers time. This could have been a momenary loss of a route, a small flood being filtered, or something similar that caused the router CPU to spike. The router does take a minute to re-balance traffic, or deal with the issue, in such cases. MODS: Please delete this thread...it is quite jumping the gun...and the topic quite incorrect. SMA PRES/CEO
Posted by sysc, 12-29-2003, 05:00 PM
How so? This is called "Network Outages and Updates" the network was DOWN wether or not it was only a few mins does not really matter, the fact of the matter is it was DOWN.
Posted by HostJedi, 12-29-2003, 05:02 PM
It was not "down"...your own traceroute posted even shows traffic going thru! A more appropriate title would have been: "BurstNET/Nocster Issues" or "BurstNET/Nocster Packet Loss". A report on 60 seconds of issues, which are part of life on the Internet, does not due anyone any good, especially your own provider. A post such as this leads me to believe you are sitting there constantly pinging the network, waiting for any slight traffic oddity, and jumping to WHT to post about it immediately, without waiting to see if it clears up within a few seconds. If clients did this for every provider out there, the WHT server would be overloaded, this happens so often on the Internet. Also, you shouldn't be assuming the network is down just because "you" cannot get thru, or are having problems. 'You" are only one route, and doesn't mean other routes are having the same issue. In the future, if you are going to jump the gun, atleast post traceroutes from other locations as well. SMA PRES/CEO Last edited by HostJedi; 12-29-2003 at 05:11 PM.
Posted by Esr Tek, 12-29-2003, 05:13 PM
Requested and agreed..
Posted by thedavid, 12-29-2003, 05:18 PM
FWIW We monitor some servers at burst from ev1 - and it was not down at all today from our logs. Closing thread.