Cisco

Hoping for viggen on blue and then a carrier for red for that sweet su-33 action. Tankers would also be sweet!

At least now i see that the VPN reaches us directly in Amsterdam. Ofcource i dont know the route to the VPN server, so i cant be completely sure, but it looks to me that the reason you get higher latency over non vpn is because it goes up to London and back again. I will try to see if i can establish peering with your ISP.

Can i get a traceroute with the VPN on to http://www.blix.com?

Err.. How? Even if they integrate it into the game GPLv3 one requires you to give the source of the module, not the entire exe.

They already can, Simple Radio is GPLv3, there is nothing stopping them. https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-general-public-license-v3-(gpl-3)

I dont get why SRS would be better than TS other than immersion. If we where to just password the server and then put the password in teamspeak it would fix alot of issues. Having mods than kick players that are not in teamspeak?

Ok, im just going to say it to you right now that the VPN will not give you a ping under 50 MS to indonesia as it would be against the laws of physics (speed of light). I also highly doubt that your VPN gives you any performance increase at all, there is no congestion in the networks leading up to the server, from both transit providers and the network hosting the server. The only think i can blame if you are having NETWORK lag (i even have lag and im directly connected to the server) is your own router or your ISP. Again, everyone is having lagg when the server reaches a certain number of players, its ED's fault.

Where are you located and what is your ISP?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.arpa ;)

The route we have today looks pretty efficient, we meet them over Portlane in London today, however we could in theory meet them as a peer in Amsterdam. I will look into this as it will probably shave off 6ms (not much i know). Here is the current path today: Could you do a mtr / tracert to http://www.blix.com? I would like to see if you pick the same path on your side and if there are any congestion.

What is your rough location and ISP?

very nice, big boss is very happy!

After the latest patch the F-15 tires are like paper. They dont break but they go flat. For some reason the repair script does not work on flat tires, need to have a friendly huey strafe me because i have a flat tire is a litte annoying.

Formation flying :)

Man, blue needs to do a better job at finishing me off, flew like this all the way from Tbilisi to Beslan.

22:55 GMT+1, no loss.

I dont work for cogent (lol) but i know for a fact that Cogent is in no interest in having congestion. DTAG is having congestion issues with everyone, and from what i have heard it because dtag wants cogent to buy transit from them at stupid prices.

Just talked to someone from "INSERT BIG CDN NETWORK HERE" and the said that everyone on the globe is having congestion issues with dtag, not just Cogent. If the congestion isse is dtag - cogent its dtags fault, not cogent. This is now shown in the traceroutes that was posted tho.

There is no congestion between grnet and cogent and there never have been, without knowing microvax'es IP i cannot say what route the traffic takes on the way out. https://mon.grnet.gr/rg/281645/details/#tabs=overview Access port to that the server uses. No congestion. https://mon.grnet.gr/rg/282069/details/ GRNET to GEANT cogent, 20gbit link 10% used, no congestion (MPLS? Peering or partial transit?) Having hard time finding graphs between Cogent and GEANT but i think the chance of it being congested between a Tier 1 and a Tier 2 is VERY VERY low. There is no network issues

Yes but you see, its dropping the ICMP ping packets when it is entering the box to be responded to. There is a huge diffrence between forwarding the packet and responding to it, its handled by 2 complete separate chips. The loss you see has NOTHING to do with the traffic going to the server. UDP and TCP can go just fine trough the box but when the box itself responds to the ping it shits the bed. A traceroute is simply a ping with an incrementing hop counter, thats how you can see the trace because when the hop counter reaches 0 the router will not route the packet any more and will return the ping. There are no packetloss on this connection, the second picture proves it. It was tested at 11:00-11:30 GMT+1, i agree not the best time to test but i will do more tests later today. Im 100% certain that the problem is not network related, i am after all a Network Engineer and i do that for a living. VPN is not a solution at all because the problem is not related to the network, i cant speak for the hardware side of things but its deff not the network.

Listen, the ICMP is forwarding just fine, NONE of the cogent equipment is dropping packets so stop blaming cogent, the address "geant.demarc.cogentco.com" means that the IP address is terminated in customer eqipment (where cogent is the transit provider and therefor supplying the IPs on the linknet for the BGP session). There are no loss on ICMP on other than the one hop everyone is reporting loss on, for the last time: This is not packetloss, the only reason this hop is dropping ICMP is because the hardware running there is old or overworked, this is completely normal for network equipment older than 10 years. I did the test using Hibernia networks ring server, Hibernia is a level 2 provider and buys transit from Cogent, the routes for the DCS server goes completely over cogent as you can see. When looking at an mtr you have to see at the loss after the initial loss, as you can see there is no loss after pop 17. and there is 0% loss on the box itself, this means there are no packet loss. If we ignore the traceroute for a while we also see that there is no packetloss to the server itself (even tho this is shown in the traceroute above i feel its better to simplify it with this picture) This number here, its all you have to care about, a traceroute will show you where there is congestion or the problem is down the line but the ping as you see here is the absolute truth. There it is, clear as crystal that there is 0% packetloss to the server over cogent. For the sake of argument i have included the stats from my server in Norway. The conclusion is that the addition of a VPN will only make it worse (because of MTU issues) and any perceived benefit gained by using is nothing but placebo. This test was taken at roughly 11:00-11:30 GMT+1 2016-10-18, i will repeat this test at 21:00 GMT+1 which is where the internet is at its peak in terms of bandwidth to rule out any suspected link congestion.

I explained this earlier, they are not dropping packets, the traceroutes shows that they are forwarding the ICMP correctly, they are only dropped or high latency when they enter the equipment itself, this is very normal on enterprise routers that does not have alot of CPU power left.

I never flied the Mig-29A but i read that it does not have external fuel tanks, keep the Mig-29S and remove the 29A, the S is better in every way with better radar and such.

This does not fix anything, there are no latency and loss issues on the cogent link.

The AWACS could be static array radar and would then cover 180 degrees with constant updates.