On Wed, 25 Feb 1998, Space Case wrote:

> On Feb 25, 11:34am, "Henry B. Hotz" wrote:
> "Henry B. Hotz" <Henry.B.Hotz@jpl.nasa.gov>, port-mac68k@NetBSD.ORG
> >From: "Henry B. Hotz" <hotz@jpl.nasa.gov>
> >Subject: Re: snapshot
> >
> >At 5:01 PM -0800 2/24/98, Space Case wrote:
> >> 8  * sl-gw8-stk-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.228.40.14)  70.097 ms *
> >> 9  sl-eskimo-2-0-T1.sprintlink.net (144.228.144.186)  122.088 ms  93.836
> >>
> >> 8  * sl-bb7-stk-4-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.4.26)  72.449 ms  56.411 ms
> >> 9  sl-bb6-dc-1-1-0-T3.sprintlink.net (144.228.10.1)  156.824 ms  233.618
> >
> >I would interpret this as an internal sprintlink problem.  Going from 70 to
> >120+ms on a single hop (50 ms for that leg!) inside a backbone provider
> >like them looks pretty fishy.  That exceeds the delay you get from a modem.
> 
> That's why I said in my initial post that "Sprintlink routing sucks
> big hairy toads."  I have a nice clean path to netbsd.org but can't
> do anything with it yet, and the only two places I have to put my
> snapshots are behind sucky Sprintlink routing. :(

Amen to that.  Sprintlink's Atlanta hub is obnoxious about the delays it
adds, too... the route from here to www.netbsd.org is sprintlink all the
way and I'm seeing times in traceroute as high as....

20  ldc-gw-cs.cs.wwu.EDU (140.160.140.251)  888.835 ms  1075.75 ms  830.13
ms

varying widely, but mostly up there....


FWIW,
David

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/CC/FA/H/L/MC/M/MU/PA/TW d-@ s:>- a-- C++++>$ UBLAS*++++>$
P+?>$ L+++>$ !E--- W+++>$ N++(+++)>+++$ !o? K-? !w--- !O
M++>$ !V-- PS+>$ !PE- Y+>$ PGP+>$ t+++>$ 5+>++++$ !X- !R tv+>$
b++>$ !DI !D- G++(+++)>$ e>++++ h--! r--- !y-
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------