Forum Discussion
Latency Or Satellite Shortcomings?
How are you measuring the latency?
- Do my replies not show in the thread or did it simply not take? In case of the latter I'll paste it here:
First the latency is so bad it's noticeable without any tools. My web browsers agree with me with the multiple time outs
I have done the ping command from my Windows Command Prompt many times. They match what testmy.net produces on a whole.
All of my devices are wireless. However I have tested as protocol dictates with Ethernet wire connection and the radio off.
I'm not sure why you sent that link because it confirmed my introductory post on the "physics". They state they get 700ms where other providers 1700ms. That is what I get on a good night. Currently my ping showed 2245ms and testmy.net was a little higher. You say testmy.net is not accurate. I believe it to be "real world". From thier site:
TML runs on the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) (layer 4 - transport) where as normal ping runs on ICMP (layer 3 - network). ICMP is not used to exchange data between systems and has no way of interacting or detecting issues with the layers above it (layers 4 through 7). It simply can't give a full picture of what's happening on layer 4
It also read that other providers overbook If that is the case it solves the issue of late night latency improvement. I appreciate your edit you added because the paste of the latency topic is knowledge I possess.
I have done all the obvious and basic troubleshooting. However if you believe I've missed something I am open to any tips or diagnostic steps you have.
Would you know the data capacity throughput of the satellite? I believe it to be 200 Gbps. Not knowing how many subscribers there are leaves the overloading question unanswered. The gateway servers are probably adequate. Satellites on the other hand have severe restrictions. Chiefly weight. Launching a server farm into space is not possible or at the least not feasible. So hardware is limited because of this and other variables.
I could be totally off base with the satellite. Maybe it’s the terrestrial based hardware. I’ve noticed long load times of Hughsnet webpages no matter the ISP network I’m connected to. Except for their business level site that is. Even the app is painfully slow to the point it gives empty data fields if that. Once again on any ISP to include mobile provider. The latency is so bad I use my mobile hotspot if I plan on loading many webpages. I save Hughsnet for streaming. I go through my data in short order resulting in being throttled down to a speed never more than 1.1 even though I was promised 1 to 3 Mbps. That is an issue for a separate post.
I realize I’m being long-winded. I just want this fixed. I had to go through several months of poor downloads. Often below 1 Mbps. Dish was out of alignment.You were given reasons for why to expect varying latency, sometimes closer to 550, often more.
The company has around 1.4 million subscribers total, distributed among several zones/beams around the country.
The Testmy latency measurement is not currently accurate; doesn't matter what they say or how stubbornly you want to believe it. Pinging (using the command line) is the most accurate tool to use for latency. Stick to this method and forget the latency tool at Testmy.
I have no issues connecting to HughesNet pages from several different ISPs. It's likely some people do and some people don't, due to issues unrelated to HughesNet, and probably also related to issues with CenturyLink, as MarkJFine has explained often.
The issues you are experiencing with ping are likely due to issues in the route from your site to the different websites you're trying to access. HughesNet has no control over the Internet's backbone.
Please run pings and traceroutes to different websites (especially the ones you have issues with), and post screenshots so we can see what you see.
Just to add to what maratsade said, those services will just show the apparent latency (however they determine it, which could also be affected by process caching) to just that site. Using a local ping will do the same without any of the processing effects.
A traceroute is even better, because it will show around three different values for each 'hop' in the route, and will allow you to determine which hops are creating the largest lags, thus allowing to pinpoint the problem.
Did a little reading. Hard to believe this in the screenshot about latency. Wow. Also seen where they hit 1 million subscribers. Earlier I figured out that if 16,000 subscribers all downloaded one half of the 25 Mbps (12.5 Mbps) the satellite could not handle the load at 200 Gbps. I can see then why there is a latency issue. The distance resulting in 500 ms instead of 250 ms only creates an additional 500 ms or so. I'm getting over 2000 ms!
Cblucas3 wrote:
Do my replies not show in the thread or did it simply not take? In case of the latter I'll paste it here:
First the latency is so bad it's noticeable without any tools. My web browsers agree with me with the multiple time outs
I have done the ping command from my Windows Command Prompt many times. They match what testmy.net produces on a whole.
All of my devices are wireless. However I have tested as protocol dictates with Ethernet wire connection and the radio off.
I'm not sure why you sent that link because it confirmed my introductory post on the "physics". They state they get 700ms where other providers 1700ms. That is what I get on a good night. Currently my ping showed 2245ms and testmy.net was a little higher. You say testmy.net is not accurate. I believe it to be "real world". From thier site:
TML runs on the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) (layer 4 - transport) where as normal ping runs on ICMP (layer 3 - network). ICMP is not used to exchange data between systems and has no way of interacting or detecting issues with the layers above it (layers 4 through 7). It simply can't give a full picture of what's happening on layer 4
It also read that other providers overbook If that is the case it solves the issue of late night latency improvement. I appreciate your edit you added because the paste of the latency topic is knowledge I possess.
I have done all the obvious and basic troubleshooting. However if you believe I've missed something I am open to any tips or diagnostic steps you have.
Would you know the data capacity throughput of the satellite? I believe it to be 200 Gbps. Not knowing how many subscribers there are leaves the overloading question unanswered. The gateway servers are probably adequate. Satellites on the other hand have severe restrictions. Chiefly weight. Launching a server farm into space is not possible or at the least not feasible. So hardware is limited because of this and other variables.
I could be totally off base with the satellite. Maybe it’s the terrestrial based hardware. I’ve noticed long load times of Hughsnet webpages no matter the ISP network I’m connected to. Except for their business level site that is. Even the app is painfully slow to the point it gives empty data fields if that. Once again on any ISP to include mobile provider. The latency is so bad I use my mobile hotspot if I plan on loading many webpages. I save Hughsnet for streaming. I go through my data in short order resulting in being throttled down to a speed never more than 1.1 even though I was promised 1 to 3 Mbps. That is an issue for a separate post.
I realize I’m being long-winded. I just want this fixed. I had to go through several months of poor downloads. Often below 1 Mbps. Dish was out of alignment.
Cblucas3 wrote:
You say testmy.net is not accurate. I believe it to be "real world".Testmy is extremely accurate, no matter how much the white knights here want to protect HughesNet. I've found it to be very reflective of the latency issues that I am having as well, and apparently you are having as well. I can't even get Facebook pages to load today without timing out.
Good luck getting HughesNet to acknowledge a problem. As you can see, they locked my thread where I was reporting it.
My guess is actually a data clog by CenturyLink. You may be able to see this yourself by running a traceroute. But then, that is just a guess. HughesNet would actually know, but they aren't talking.
Other possibilities are oversaturation (overselling) of a beam, but I don't think so. Bad traffic management or data shaping is also something to be considered. These options would be the best possibilites, because HughesNet could actually do somethng about it. If it really is CenturyLink, it becomes harder as HughesNet may or many not have options available. If they can route their data around CenturyLink, then the problem is fixable. If CenturyLink is their connection to terrestrial internet, they we are all in a hole.
Good luck. Hope it all works out for you.
They locked your threads because you keep blaming your issue on HughesNet and wanting them to fix it when it has been clearly demonstrated that the problem is with Century Link. They can't fix a problem with Century Link any more than someone's vehicle manufacturer can fix potholes in roads around their home.
And you can claim all you want, but facts are facts. Traceroutes are the most accurate demonstration of latency.
