Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ... | 25
608 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted
2degrees

  # 2315454 12-Sep-2019 09:49
4 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

NickMack:

 

Kodiack:

 

I'm on a static IP, but would the changes for this have affected routing at all? I'm in Wellington and have noticed that all of my traffic is now being routed via Auckland. This means that I have mates that have lower latency from Dunedin to Wellington than I do from Wellington to Wellington. My bandwidth has also taken a significant hit.

 

I've noticed that I also appear to be connecting to Google and Geekzone via IPv4 instead of IPv6. I still have a public IPv6 address and it is used for some sites, but not all. What gives?

 

Here's a result to a local speed test server:

 

 

Seeing similar results across all of them. Latency used to be 1-2 ms, downstream bandwidth used to be ~940 Mbps, and upstream bandwidth used to be 400+ Mbps.

 

Here's a couple of traceroutes to local servers:

 

Tracing route to speedtest.xtreme.net.nz [2401:7c00::30]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  fritz.box [2406:e001:2:9e01:f2b0:14ff:fec0:7f6b]
  2     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  2406:e000:2801::30
  3    10 ms     9 ms    31 ms  2001:7fa:11:6:0:5c67:0:1
  4    19 ms    19 ms    19 ms  2001:7fa:11:6:0:47e0:0:1
  5    20 ms    19 ms    19 ms  speedtest.xtreme.net.nz [2401:7c00::30]

 

 

 

Tracing route to fast-dog.wlg.acsdata.co.nz [114.110.33.94]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  fritz.box [192.168.178.1]
  2     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  65.7.69.111.static.snap.net.nz [111.69.7.65]
  3    11 ms    10 ms    10 ms  snap1.ape.nzix.net [192.203.154.120]
  4    10 ms    10 ms    10 ms  acsdata.ape.nzix.net [192.203.154.117]
  5    18 ms    18 ms    18 ms  te0-0-0-1537.v4wlg0.acsdata.co.nz [103.239.11.1]
  6    19 ms    18 ms    18 ms  vlan1091.wlg0fw.acsdata.co.nz [202.21.136.178]
  7    19 ms    18 ms    19 ms  fast-dog.wlg.acsdata.co.nz [114.110.33.94]

 

 

 

All-in-all, very appalling results and a drastic decrease in service quality.

 

 

Hiya,

 

Suspect there's more than one issue here - The routing issue after investigation is due to the route being advertised by WIX peering exchange and based on the current configuration it's not hitting the route reflectors and being updated in the local table on the BNG (where subscribers terminate to). An Engineer is looking into this now.

 

The speed issue could be a number of things, my suggestion is you follow normal investigation and work through this link - https://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=85&topicid=239862 as it's highly likely to be localised.

 

Nick

 

 

Update - Issue identified, Change is written, QA'ed and will be deployed in change window early tomorrow morning for routing issue.

 

Nick.





608 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted
2degrees

  # 2316994 13-Sep-2019 09:21
3 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

NickMack:

 

NickMack:

 

Kodiack:

 

I'm on a static IP, but would the changes for this have affected routing at all? I'm in Wellington and have noticed that all of my traffic is now being routed via Auckland. This means that I have mates that have lower latency from Dunedin to Wellington than I do from Wellington to Wellington. My bandwidth has also taken a significant hit.

 

I've noticed that I also appear to be connecting to Google and Geekzone via IPv4 instead of IPv6. I still have a public IPv6 address and it is used for some sites, but not all. What gives?

 

Here's a result to a local speed test server:

 

 

Seeing similar results across all of them. Latency used to be 1-2 ms, downstream bandwidth used to be ~940 Mbps, and upstream bandwidth used to be 400+ Mbps.

 

Here's a couple of traceroutes to local servers:

 

Tracing route to speedtest.xtreme.net.nz [2401:7c00::30]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  fritz.box [2406:e001:2:9e01:f2b0:14ff:fec0:7f6b]
  2     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  2406:e000:2801::30
  3    10 ms     9 ms    31 ms  2001:7fa:11:6:0:5c67:0:1
  4    19 ms    19 ms    19 ms  2001:7fa:11:6:0:47e0:0:1
  5    20 ms    19 ms    19 ms  speedtest.xtreme.net.nz [2401:7c00::30]

 

 

 

Tracing route to fast-dog.wlg.acsdata.co.nz [114.110.33.94]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  fritz.box [192.168.178.1]
  2     2 ms     1 ms     1 ms  65.7.69.111.static.snap.net.nz [111.69.7.65]
  3    11 ms    10 ms    10 ms  snap1.ape.nzix.net [192.203.154.120]
  4    10 ms    10 ms    10 ms  acsdata.ape.nzix.net [192.203.154.117]
  5    18 ms    18 ms    18 ms  te0-0-0-1537.v4wlg0.acsdata.co.nz [103.239.11.1]
  6    19 ms    18 ms    18 ms  vlan1091.wlg0fw.acsdata.co.nz [202.21.136.178]
  7    19 ms    18 ms    19 ms  fast-dog.wlg.acsdata.co.nz [114.110.33.94]

 

 

 

All-in-all, very appalling results and a drastic decrease in service quality.

 

 

Hiya,

 

Suspect there's more than one issue here - The routing issue after investigation is due to the route being advertised by WIX peering exchange and based on the current configuration it's not hitting the route reflectors and being updated in the local table on the BNG (where subscribers terminate to). An Engineer is looking into this now.

 

The speed issue could be a number of things, my suggestion is you follow normal investigation and work through this link - https://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=85&topicid=239862 as it's highly likely to be localised.

 

Nick

 

 

Update - Issue identified, Change is written, QA'ed and will be deployed in change window early tomorrow morning for routing issue.

 

Nick.

 

 

Hiya All,

 

Update - This change was deployed this morning, issue resolved here. We also identified a few other places where we need to deploy this change and we are working through this and will deploy according.

 

Nick.





 
 
 
 


940 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2317001 13-Sep-2019 09:36
Send private message quote this post

timmmay:

 

2degrees have resolved my issue so I'm happy staying with them.

 

Moving to CG-Nat should free up massive numbers of IPs shouldn't it? That should fix the situation of running low?

 

 

 

 

How did you manage to resolve the issue, through the helpdesk? Did they  issue you a static IP or just leave you off the CGNAT changeover? 

 

I reached out to the 2degrees rep here but never heard anything back.

 

 

 

EDIT-Oh no  I was wrong, I do have a message from 2degrees, hopefully they can help me out.


623 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2317002 13-Sep-2019 09:36
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

I can confirm the fix is working. Tested latency on my phone before heading out and it's back to the low and excellent values I've come to expect. I'll retest a bit more on desktop this evening, but I have a feeling that it's back to 100%. Thanks for the communication and fix!



130 posts

Master Geek


  # 2317451 13-Sep-2019 23:10
Send private message quote this post

I've been on CGNAT for a week and a half. I haven't noticed a difference in my internet (latency and throughput appears the same), other than CityLink's webcams (wixcam.citylink.co.nz) resulting in TCP reset packets sent, and idle SSH sessions (no terminal activity, no keepalive packets sent) to IPv4 hosts dying after 5-10 minutes. (I've now configured SSH to send keepalives every minute so the sessions don't die anymore)

 

It would be nice to be able to choose between a CGNAT IP and a public (dynamic) IP, similar to selecting between internet and direct APNs on mobile data. (If this already exists, please excuse my ignorance)


/dev/null
9029 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2317452 13-Sep-2019 23:17
Send private message quote this post

ethanbmnz:

 

I've been on CGNAT for a week and a half. I haven't noticed a difference in my internet (latency and throughput appears the same), other than CityLink's webcams (wixcam.citylink.co.nz) resulting in TCP reset packets sent, and idle SSH sessions (no terminal activity, no keepalive packets sent) to IPv4 hosts dying after 5-10 minutes. (I've now configured SSH to send keepalives every minute so the sessions don't die anymore)

 

It would be nice to be able to choose between a CGNAT IP and a public (dynamic) IP, similar to selecting between internet and direct APNs on mobile data. (If this already exists, please excuse my ignorance)

 

 

Citylinks webcams have been mostly down lately (confirmed on multiple connections). Also, use Mosh, it is great! https://mosh.org/





940 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2325109 26-Sep-2019 10:16
Send private message quote this post

2degreesCare:

 


Hi All,

 

Just an update.

 

Our phased approach to CG-NAT is actually going quite well. Majority of our customers haven't noticed any change however we understand alot of you will.
If you have any concerns with your broadband service -specifically the impact CG-NAT will have on your setup please get in touch via PM and we’ll talk you through the options we have. ^SW

 

 

 

 

Hi @2degreescare, I sent through the requested details a couple of weeks ago, are you able to find an option for me?

 

 


 
 
 
 


MCD

21 posts

Geek


  # 2325417 26-Sep-2019 16:13
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Hi,

 

I recently noticed that my DDNS set up (router to ZoneEdit) on my 2degrees connection was no longer working. After quite a bit of digging around I came across this Geekzone thread that let me know what was going on...

 

I'm surprised and disappointed that this was not communicated to your customers, since I ended up wasting quite a bit of time troubleshooting and searching for solutions.

 

What are my options from here (please don't say $120 p/a for a static IP)?

 

I PM'd this issue, along with my account information on 17/09/19.

 

Thanks!

 

2degreesCare:

 


Hi All,

 

Just an update.

 

Our phased approach to CG-NAT is actually going quite well. Majority of our customers haven't noticed any change however we understand alot of you will.
If you have any concerns with your broadband service -specifically the impact CG-NAT will have on your setup please get in touch via PM and we’ll talk you through the options we have. ^SW

 


/dev/null
9029 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2325628 26-Sep-2019 22:02
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Everyone: this is an unofficial support medium for 2degrees. If you want to discuss options you should phone them. One of my friends did just did and found them to be both very helpful and quick to resolve the issue.




4671 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2339996 18-Oct-2019 08:48
7 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Hmm looks like I was moved over to cgnat overnight....I didn't know about this thread before hand...and after reading through it, I saw mention of "I'm sure they'll notify people"   Uh nope.....suddenly any inbound connection I had is dead....and first I heard of it was when asking about the address my USG was reporting my wan, and what external web sites were reporting (Thanks @kyhwana)

 

Pretty crappily handled if you ask me.





Previously known as psycik

OpenHAB: Gigabyte AMD A8 BrixOpenHAB with Aeotech ZWave Controller, Raspberry PI, Wemos D1 Mini, Zwave, Xiaomi Humidity and Temperature sensors and Bluetooth LE Sensors
Media:Chromecast v2, ATV4, Roku3, HDHomeRun Dual
Windows 10
Host (Plex Server/Crashplan): 2x2TB, 2x3TB, 1x4TB using DriveBender, Samsung 850 evo 512 GB SSD, Hyper-V Server with 1xW10, 1xW2k8, 2xUbuntu 16.04 LTS, Crashplan, NextPVR channel for Plex,NextPVR Metadata Agent and Scanner for Plex


36 posts

Geek


  # 2340409 18-Oct-2019 23:32
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Eh, my bill is due in 2 days, so I guess I'll be looking for a new isp over the weekend... Thanks for not letting us know about these changes~ And 120NZD a year for a static ip? lmao


/dev/null
9029 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  # 2340414 19-Oct-2019 00:04
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

JohnFlower:

 

Eh, my bill is due in 2 days, so I guess I'll be looking for a new isp over the weekend... Thanks for not letting us know about these changes~ And 120NZD a year for a static ip? lmao

 

Do you have a valid reason for needing a public IP? Also, did you phone them to be told this? As they've stated earlier on here, they're sorting customers on a case-by-case basis but many people simply don't need a public IP.

 

But look at it from another point of view. I can see why customers were not notified by this change. IPv4 addressing is very, very expensive these days and if they notified customers then they'll have customers phone through not understanding what it means, or thinking they need it when really they don't. Sorting it for those few customers who do need it (like for example myself who has services hosted) on a case-by-case basis does make sense. There is more of a PR disaster notifying customers of these things - most of their customer-base likely doesn't even know what an IP address is and just want their "WiFi" to work so there is no need to confuse these customers with terms they don't understand.

 

This is why when Trustpower implemented CG-NAT a few years ago we didn't really hear anything either. I am sure other ISP's have implemented it on the quiet also (or are about to) as in reality this is what is required as IPv4 space is both expensive, and limited.





820 posts

Ultimate Geek


  # 2340440 19-Oct-2019 03:33
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

michaelmurfy: Sorting it for those few customers who do need it (like for example myself who has services hosted) on a case-by-case basis does make sense. There is more of a PR disaster notifying customers of these things - most of their customer-base likely doesn't even know what an IP address is and just want their "WiFi" to work so there is no need to confuse these customers with terms they don't understand.

 

 

 

With other words, changing a law without any notice is only to prevent confusion 'cause most of the people will not understand it's content (not even by chance)? Funny.

 

Out of interest: Do you pay for your static IP?





- ISP1: T-OneBox FTTH modem, 1/.5G, full DS, VLAN7, VoIP + ipTV streaming flat

 

- ISP2: 4G/LTE USB modem + TL-MR3020, 100/40M data plan (wireless fallback)

 

- NET: ZBOX nano router, 2 C2960X-48TS-L, 2 GWN7630, 1 GWN7610, 2 UPS

 

- SVR: E3C236 32G/20T, 2 H2 16G/500G, HC1 5T, N2 128G | HC2 14T, HC2 1T

 

- USR: DeskMini 310, NUC8i7HVK, Aspire E5, EliteBook 840, Galaxy Tab, 4K TV

 

- IoT: 3 public/1 private LoRaWAN gateways, various openHAB bindings (CCU3)

 

- 3D: Ender-3, Ender-3 Pro, Ultimaker 2E+, Ultimaker 3, Ultimaker S5, MP-CNC

 

- ipPBX: GRP2613, GO-Box 100, SPA112 (Fax and W-48, a 1948 Siemens phone)


2766 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2340441 19-Oct-2019 04:02
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Tinkerisk:

michaelmurfy: Sorting it for those few customers who do need it (like for example myself who has services hosted) on a case-by-case basis does make sense. There is more of a PR disaster notifying customers of these things - most of their customer-base likely doesn't even know what an IP address is and just want their "WiFi" to work so there is no need to confuse these customers with terms they don't understand.


 


With other words, changing a law without any notice is only to prevent confusion 'cause most of the people will not understand it's content (not even by chance)? Funny.


Out of interest: Do you pay for your static IP?



Treating customers like mushrooms isn't a way to build trust or loyalty, especially when those affected are likely to be reasonably seriously impacted and very vocal about it.

This was never good news but treating customers like you respect them is usually a good idea. This reeks of "this is easier for us" rather than considering customers.

36 posts

Geek


  # 2340485 19-Oct-2019 10:56
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

michaelmurfy:

 

Do you have a valid reason for needing a public IP?

 

Yes. And I'd prefer to keep my dynamic ip thanks~

 

But look at it from another point of view. I can see why customers were not notified by this change. IPv4 addressing is very, very expensive these days and if they notified customers then they'll have customers phone through not understanding what it means, or thinking they need it when really they don't. Sorting it for those few customers who do need it (like for example myself who has services hosted) on a case-by-case basis does make sense. There is more of a PR disaster notifying customers of these things - most of their customer-base likely doesn't even know what an IP address is and just want their "WiFi" to work so there is no need to confuse these customers with terms they don't understand.

 

You might be able to see it this way, but this is still a breaking change. Whether people notice a change or not is irrelevant. All customers should be notified... It's the right thing to do if you even remotely value the people giving you money.

 

 


1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ... | 25
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Switch your broadband provider now - compare prices


Twitter and LinkedIn »



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Ring launches indoor-only security camera
Posted 23-Jan-2020 17:26


New report findings will help schools implement the digital technologies curriculum content
Posted 23-Jan-2020 17:25


N4L to upgrade & support wireless internet inside schools
Posted 23-Jan-2020 17:22


Netflix releases 21 Studio Ghibli works
Posted 22-Jan-2020 11:42


Vodafone integrates eSIM into device and wearable roadmap
Posted 17-Jan-2020 09:45


Do you need this camera app? Group investigates privacy implications
Posted 16-Jan-2020 03:30


JBL launches headphones range designed for gaming
Posted 13-Jan-2020 09:59


Withings introduces ScanWatch wearable combining ECG and sleep apnea detection
Posted 9-Jan-2020 18:34


NZ Police releases public app
Posted 8-Jan-2020 11:43


Suunto 7 combine sports and smart features on new smartwatch generation
Posted 7-Jan-2020 16:06


Intel brings innovation with technology spanning the cloud, network, edge and PC
Posted 7-Jan-2020 15:54


AMD announces high performance desktop and ultrathin laptop processors
Posted 7-Jan-2020 15:42


AMD unveils four new desktop and mobile GPUs including AMD Radeon RX 5600
Posted 7-Jan-2020 15:32


Consolidation in video streaming market with Spark selling Lightbox to Sky
Posted 19-Dec-2019 09:09


Intel introduces cryogenic control chip to enable quantum computers
Posted 10-Dec-2019 21:32



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.