Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-29 Thread Peter Dambier


Neal R wrote:


  I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point link.


What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
were different back then.


  Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...


I remember voiping over the pond, from Frankfurt, germany to New York.

We had to twist asterisk to even accept the sip. Time was between
80 and 90 msec. The experienced time was higher. Roger, Over and Out
with their interstallar hamradio experience could do it, but to a
normal citizen it was unuseble.

(dsl 1000 customer, close to Frankfurt)

 1  krzach.peter-dambier.de (192.168.48.2)  2.918 ms   3.599 ms   3.926 ms
 2  * * *
 3  217.0.78.58  85.268 ms   85.301 ms   102.059 ms
 4  f-ea1.F.DE.net.DTAG.DE (62.154.18.22)  102.092 ms   110.057 ms   126.310 ms
 5  p2-0.core01.fra01.atlas.cogentco.com (212.20.159.38)  126.344 ms * *
 6  * * *
 7  p3-0.core01.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.145)  132.262 ms   139.333 
ms   147.174 ms
 8  p12-0.core01.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.198)  76.436 ms   76.444 
ms   84.374 ms
 9  t1-4.mpd02.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.1.74)  99.840 ms   99.873 ms   
107.508 ms
10  t3-2.mpd01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.185)  209.678 ms   217.428 
ms   225.601 ms
11  t2-4.mpd01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.22)  233.514 ms * *
12  vl3491.mpd01.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.210)  243.741 ms * *
13  * * *
14  ge-1-3-0x24.aa1.mich.net (198.108.23.241)  165.776 ms   174.752 ms   
193.770 ms
15  www.merit.edu (198.108.1.92)(H!)  193.812 ms (H!)  201.863 ms (H!)  209.704 
ms

(colo in Amsterdam)

 1  205.189.71.253 (205.189.71.253)  0.227 ms  0.257 ms  0.227 ms
 2  ge-5-2-234.ipcolo1.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (212.72.46.165)  0.985 ms  0.811 
ms  0.856 ms
 3  ae-32-54.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (4.68.120.126)  4.235 ms  6.575 ms  
1.360 ms
 4  ae-2.ebr2.London1.Level3.net (4.69.132.133)  19.097 ms  12.816 ms  18.220 ms
 5  ae-4.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.69.132.109)  78.197 ms  78.769 ms  87.062 
ms
 6  ae-71-71.csw2.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.69.134.70)  78.068 ms  79.058 ms  
89.192 ms
 7  ae-22-79.car2.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.68.16.68)  142.665 ms  135.007 ms  
214.243 ms
 8  te-7-4-71.nycmny2wch010.wcg.Level3.net (4.68.110.22)  75.824 ms  75.695 ms  
76.566 ms
 9  64.200.249.153 (64.200.249.153)  282.356 ms  138.384 ms  243.104 ms
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  www.merit.edu (198.108.1.92)  112.906 ms !C  110.515 ms !C  113.418 ms !C

Try Switch (swizzerland) they are testing warp tunnels - but not producting yet 
:)


Cheers
Peter and Karin

--
Peter and Karin Dambier
Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana
Rimbacher Strasse 16
D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher
+49(6209)795-816 (Telekom)
+49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de)
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://iason.site.voila.fr/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/
http://www.cesidianroot.com/



Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-29 Thread Leigh Porter



I used to get about 60ms from router to router in TAT12/13 (I think) 
from London Telehouse to NY Telehouse.





Security Admin (NetSec) wrote:

Sprint has probably the lowest latency in the industry; I use them for a Los 
Angeles - London IPSec VPN.  Typical latency is around 140-150 ms rt (70-75 ms 
one-way)

40 ms RT is not possible in this reality, unless the speed of light is 
increased or one transimits through subspace (see Star Trek)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neal R
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 4:21 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: trans-Atlantic latency?



  I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point link.


What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
were different back then.


  Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...

--
This mail was scanned by BitDefender
For more informations please visit http://www.bitdefender.com



  


Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-29 Thread Andy Ashley




Peter Dambier wrote:


Neal R wrote:


  I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point 
link.



What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
were different back then.


  Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...


I remember voiping over the pond, from Frankfurt, germany to New York.

We had to twist asterisk to even accept the sip. Time was between
80 and 90 msec. The experienced time was higher. Roger, Over and Out
with their interstallar hamradio experience could do it, but to a
normal citizen it was unuseble.

(dsl 1000 customer, close to Frankfurt)

 1  krzach.peter-dambier.de (192.168.48.2)  2.918 ms   3.599 ms   
3.926 ms

 2  * * *
 3  217.0.78.58  85.268 ms   85.301 ms   102.059 ms
 4  f-ea1.F.DE.net.DTAG.DE (62.154.18.22)  102.092 ms   110.057 ms   
126.310 ms

 5  p2-0.core01.fra01.atlas.cogentco.com (212.20.159.38)  126.344 ms * *
 6  * * *
 7  p3-0.core01.ams03.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.145)  132.262 ms   
139.333 ms   147.174 ms
 8  p12-0.core01.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.198)  76.436 ms   
76.444 ms   84.374 ms
 9  t1-4.mpd02.lon01.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.1.74)  99.840 ms   
99.873 ms   107.508 ms
10  t3-2.mpd01.bos01.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.0.185)  209.678 ms   
217.428 ms   225.601 ms

11  t2-4.mpd01.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.22)  233.514 ms * *
12  vl3491.mpd01.ord03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.6.210)  243.741 ms * *
13  * * *
14  ge-1-3-0x24.aa1.mich.net (198.108.23.241)  165.776 ms   174.752 
ms   193.770 ms
15  www.merit.edu (198.108.1.92)(H!)  193.812 ms (H!)  201.863 ms 
(H!)  209.704 ms


(colo in Amsterdam)

 1  205.189.71.253 (205.189.71.253)  0.227 ms  0.257 ms  0.227 ms
 2  ge-5-2-234.ipcolo1.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (212.72.46.165)  0.985 
ms  0.811 ms  0.856 ms
 3  ae-32-54.ebr2.Amsterdam1.Level3.net (4.68.120.126)  4.235 ms  
6.575 ms  1.360 ms
 4  ae-2.ebr2.London1.Level3.net (4.69.132.133)  19.097 ms  12.816 ms  
18.220 ms
 5  ae-4.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.69.132.109)  78.197 ms  78.769 
ms  87.062 ms
 6  ae-71-71.csw2.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.69.134.70)  78.068 ms  79.058 
ms  89.192 ms
 7  ae-22-79.car2.NewYork1.Level3.net (4.68.16.68)  142.665 ms  
135.007 ms  214.243 ms
 8  te-7-4-71.nycmny2wch010.wcg.Level3.net (4.68.110.22)  75.824 ms  
75.695 ms  76.566 ms

 9  64.200.249.153 (64.200.249.153)  282.356 ms  138.384 ms  243.104 ms
10  * * *
11  * * *
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  www.merit.edu (198.108.1.92)  112.906 ms !C  110.515 ms !C  
113.418 ms !C


Try Switch (swizzerland) they are testing warp tunnels - but not 
producting yet :)



Cheers
Peter and Karin


Hi,

Over Level 3 transit from their London 2 gateway to the New York, 111 
8th St. gateway:


(0.0.0.0)(tos=0x0 psize=64 
bitpattern=0x00)
Fri Jun 29 10:56:25 2007

Keys:  Help   Display mode   Restart statistics   Order of fields   quit

Packets   Pings
Host  
Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
1. 
v5-csw01.ln1.qubenet.net
0.0%   1881.4   6.2   0.7 197.4  24.7
2. 
bdr01.ln1.qubenet.net  
0.0%   1881.3   5.0   0.6 214.4  26.4
3. 
ipcolo2.london2.level3.net
0.0%   1881.3   1.4   0.8   2.4   0.3
4. 
ae-0-52.bbr2.London2.Level3.net
0.0%   1881.4   2.8   1.0  52.2   5.9
5. 
ae-0-0.bbr2.NewYork1.Level3.net   
0.0%   187   67.4  69.1  66.4 181.3  12.0

   as-0-0.bbr1.NewYork1.Level3.net
6. 
ae-31-89.car1.NewYork1.Level3.net 
0.0%   187   67.5  69.3  66.7 227.1  13.9

 

Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-29 Thread Jim Segrave

On Thu 28 Jun 2007 (18:20 -0500), Neal R wrote:
 
 
   I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
 connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
 decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
 currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
 the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
 he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point link.
 
 
 What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
 get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
 crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
 ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
 exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
 were different back then.
 
 
   Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
 expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
 based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
 muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...


He'll need a Black  Dekker drill with a hammer attachment, and an
absolutely prodigious stone cutting bit, a convenient wormhole, or a
waiver on the laws of physics.

-- 
Jim Segrave   [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-29 Thread Brian Knoll (TTNET)

A reasonable latency to expect between Chicago and London would be 92ms
RTT.

Brian Knoll


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Neal R
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 6:21 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: trans-Atlantic latency?



  I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point
link.


What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
were different back then.


  Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...


Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-28 Thread Iljitsch van Beijnum


On 29-jun-2007, at 1:20, Neal R wrote:


What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance?


You'll want to ask whether this is one-way latency or round trip time.

I'm seeing this from Amsterdam:

 6  51.ae0.cr2.iad1.us.scnet.net (216.246.102.94)  82.686 ms  82.762  
ms  82.808 ms
 7  15.xe-1-2-0.cr1.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.36.246)  100.792 ms   
100.830 ms  100.798 ms
 8  v53.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.95.138)  101.051 ms  101.087  
ms  101.042 ms
 9  v223.aggr223.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.94.30)  101.301 ms   
101.318 ms  101.423 ms


I don't think you're going to do significantly better than this, I'd  
be amazed if anyone can do London - Chicago below 90 ms round trip.




Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-28 Thread Majdi S. Abbas

On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 06:20:31PM -0500, Neal R wrote:
   I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
 connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
 decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
 currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
 the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
 he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point link.

Chicago to London: ~3950 mi
New York to London: ~3470 mi

c == 186,282 mi/sec (in a vacuum)

0.66 * c == 122,946 mi/sec

CHI-LON: 32.128 ms
NYC-LON: 28.224 ms

That is one way, absolute best case, and the cables never run quite
the way you want them to.  If he's looking for 40 ms RTT, he is not going to
get it.  If he just needs 40 ms one way to London, it is possibly doable,
even from Chicago.

I couldn't readily find lengths for the individual segments of
TAT-14, so as a representative example, we'll use TAT-12/13.  From RI to
the UK: 3,674 mi.

( 3674 / (0.66 * c) ) * 1000 == 29.883 ms, doubled for 59.766 ms
RTT.

Real world numbers seem to suggest many carriers run between 70 and 
80 ms RTT from NYC to London, and I just measured around 100 ms RTT from
Chicago to a host in the UK.

--msa


Re: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-28 Thread Jay Hennigan


Neal R wrote:


  I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point link.


Paging Scotty, warp factor 4 please!


What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
were different back then.


The speed of light hasn't changed much.

Propagation delay alone, assuming a 3000 mile straight-line path 
(probably on the short side) and 0.7 velocity factor in the transport 
medium is around 45 milliseconds round trip. Chicago to the East coast 
is about another 1000 miles or 15 ms, so 60ms. is probably a bit on the 
low side.


Serialization delay depends on bit rate and packet size, easy enough to 
calculate.


Switching delay, probably minimal.


  Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...


--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Impulse Internet Service  -  http://www.impulse.net/
Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV


RE: trans-Atlantic latency?

2007-06-28 Thread Security Admin (NetSec)

Sprint has probably the lowest latency in the industry; I use them for a Los 
Angeles - London IPSec VPN.  Typical latency is around 140-150 ms rt (70-75 ms 
one-way)

40 ms RT is not possible in this reality, unless the speed of light is 
increased or one transimits through subspace (see Star Trek)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neal R
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 4:21 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: trans-Atlantic latency?



  I have a customer with IP transport from Sprint and McLeod and fiber
connectivity to Sprint in the Chicago area. The person making the
decisions is not a routing guy but is very sharp overall. He is
currently examining the latency on trans-Atlantic links and has fixed on
the idea that he needs 40ms or less to London through whatever carrier
he picks. He has spoken to someone at Cogent about a point to point link.


What is a reasonable latency to see on a link of that distance? I
get the impression he is shopping for something that involves dilithium
crystal powered negative latency inducers, wormhole technology, or an
ethernet to tachyon bridge, but its been a long time (9/14/2001, to be
exact) since I've had a trans-Atlantic circuit under my care and things
were different back then.


  Anyone care to enlighten me on what these guys can reasonably
expect on such a link? My best guess is he'd like service from Colt
based on the type of customer he is trying to reach, but its a big
muddle and I don't get to talk to all of the players ...

--
This mail was scanned by BitDefender
For more informations please visit http://www.bitdefender.com



--
This mail was scanned by BitDefender
For more informations please visit http://www.bitdefender.com