2009/3/19 Tru Huynh <tru@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 02:07:15PM -0500, Lanny Marcus wrote:
>> Russ: Same problem with the centos.org web site again from my end. I
>> did go to IRC, as you suggested, and sent a message to #centos-web
>> several minutes ago. Didn't see anyone else there. I hope someone will
>> reopen the Trouble Ticket at Layered Tech. Lanny
>
> <quoting LT support on re-opened ticket>
> From the traceroute you provided, the only sign of a potential problem appears
> to be on Level3's network in Dallas. I should also clarify that we did not fix
> the issue your user was experiencing a few days ago, as we were unable to
> duplicate the problem.
Tru: Thank you for reopening the trouble ticket at Layered Tech and
posting their reply! John Pierce found there was a problem, in Dallas,
when he did a lot of ping tests to centos.org the night of the 16th.
There is a problem and if it isn't within Layered Tech, it must be at
Level3 or where they connect. The other day, everyone else was able to
load the web site, when I couldn't, so there must be something about
our connection that makes the problem visible to me, but not to
others. Or, that it involves something on the Level3 route from Miami
to Dallas. However, John Pierce was also going in on Level3, from San
Jose to Dallas, and he discovered a problem. I would assume, if I
assume, that Layered Tech is the one who can report the problem to
Level3. Possibly the problem is where Level3 does the interconnection
to Layered Tech? This is what John Pierce posted the night of the
16th:
"I did some more pinging later on from one of my servers in San Jose,
California, and saw some signs of route instability at layeredwhazza
where the next hop after what should have been the next-to-last one was
coming from various routers all going 'no route to destination' "
and John Stanley wrote on the 17th:
"But doing another trace to layeredtech
and ltdomains shows bad hops also from my end just like John Pierces
shows. But still I can access it by WWW."
>
> I just ran a test from just-ping.com to your web server, and it looks very good
> from over 30 locations worldwide.
He's right about that. I just pinged centos.org but the web pages are
not available to me, but are available to others on the list. Below is
a traceroute I just did. Notice hops 8 and 9 are not shown. Lanny
[lanny@dell2400 ~]$ traceroute centos.org
traceroute to centos.org (72.232.194.162), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 ipcop233 (192.168.10.1) 0.516 ms 0.513 ms 0.513 ms
2 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.397 ms 1.816 ms 1.592 ms
3 dsl-emcali-190.1.248.1.emcali.net.co (190.1.248.1) 16.909 ms
19.273 ms 21.105 ms
4 172.16.1.3 (172.16.1.3) 23.123 ms 14.492 ms *
5 190.90.2.25 (190.90.2.25) 55.225 ms 60.168 ms 60.299 ms
6 so-4-2-1-nmi-core01.nwnnetwork.net (63.245.40.149) 97.314 ms
99.549 ms 109.844 ms
7 ge-1-1-0-nmi-core02.columbus-networks.com (63.245.5.0) 105.428 ms
106.990 ms 109.280 ms
8 * * *
9 * * *
10 ae-2.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.140.133) 118.310 ms 115.144
ms 117.366 ms
11 ae-61-61.csw1.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.136.122) 119.042 ms
ae-81-81.csw3.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.136.130) 120.057 ms
ae-71-71.csw2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.69.136.126) 129.584 ms
12 * ae-42-99.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.68.19.196) 120.725 ms 123.532 ms
13 DATABANK-HO.car2.Dallas1.Level3.net (4.71.170.2) 115.159 ms
115.091 ms 117.425 ms
14 aw_cw_10g.databank.com (63.164.96.54) 118.347 ms 116.937 ms 117.710 ms
15 pod22c_ae.layeredtech.com (63.164.96.202) 117.607 ms 117.466 ms
pod22a_aw.layeredtech.com (63.164.96.242) 115.099 ms
16 162.194.232.72.static.reverse.ltdomains.com (72.232.194.162)
118.377 ms !X 115.107 ms !X 117.395 ms !X
[lanny@dell2400 ~]$
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
