<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>All I have to say is WOW. That is one awesome
explination bro. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I just don't like the fact of my trace routes from
my customers being "blown off" because of packet priority or
whatever.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm probably gonna lose one of my customers over
this and it really hax me off. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Anyways thanx again for the explination man.
This explination makes me wanna open a ticket and paste it, but it would
probably blow their mind as much as it did mine haha.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You will like RHEL4 - it's nice and
smooth.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Have a nice day Dr. D.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>--</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>NateDog</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=defilm@acm.org href="mailto:defilm@acm.org">Mark J. DeFilippis</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=cod@icculus.org
href="mailto:cod@icculus.org">cod@icculus.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 24, 2005 8:38
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cod] RHE4 new 2.6
Kernel</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Thanks Nate, and Jay as always! I have put the order in
for the ES4 upgrade.<BR>I prey every time I put in a change ticket with
support. Lately, it has been<BR>very poor. I hope they can get it right
100%. There is always something<BR>missing when they make a wholesale
change...<BR><BR>Nate, I noticed that for the period that they were migrating
in the new data center<BR>they had major BGP convergence issues, and it would
clear my servers.<BR><BR>At first they blamed it on my location. Yea
sure. Everyone around the USA, west coast,<BR>east, central, and it is
the whole Internet not you.<BR><BR>Glad I have access to certain info at a
carrier that happens to feed the majority<BR>of servermatrix and
theplanet. The peer showed loss of BGP adjacency. I understand<BR>they
had to make changes and re groom fiber, but it was clear from the flapping
that they<BR>don't have BGP dampening configured on their border
routers.<BR><BR>I have experience with CRisco 65xx, but on the carrier side
for larger customers I design<BR>for I use Juniper M-20's and M-40's, as well
as Laurel Networks 120's. These are pretty big boys.<BR>Smallest line card on
a Laurel is the 13 port DS3 card. But these are big boys, with 8 port<BR>gig
cards wire speed, etc. In their design, they are likely using the Crisco
6509's are layer<BR>two aggregation devices. While the design is a
simple classic design, it relies on default<BR>load balancing provided by
these switching/routers.<BR><BR>I just have to wonder if they know what they
are doing. I have noticed that<BR>my pings run anywhere from 60ms from
NY direct Level3 to 92ms. I have the ability to test<BR>from many area's
from around the US from work. From each location, the variation in
delay<BR>is past the local loop in to servermatrix/theplanet. This means
they are highly likely using<BR>load balancing on the Multi-link trunks that
are inter-switch and/or switch/router uplinks.<BR><BR>The above switches I
have recently been working with in building Int-serv RSVP cores for
service<BR>provider rfc2547bis MPBGP MPLS networks, where LSP's maintain MPLS
based traffic engineering<BR>to provider QOS to IP based QOS CE devices.
We found that that MLT load balancing is not<BR>a strong point in these
switches. Adding in the additional distribution layers of inexpensive
Crisco 650x<BR>switches for aggregation, and you have the poor network design
they have.<BR><BR>One of my guys designed something like this, with internal
MLT load balancing in the core<BR>through the distribution layer, he would be
unemployed. Maybe they have all CCIE's. there? ;-))<BR><BR>You are not
imagining it. I have a server over at EV1 as well, and my ping times to
that<BR>server is rock solid at 52-66ms. This is reasonable considering much
of the long haul is<BR>DWDM photonic, (plus local loops, and ISP), but note
you are going ISP, to loop to loop<BR>to IXC to loop to LEC to loop to
Datacenter. The bulk of the loops are phototonic SONET<BR>with little
latency. If you are generous, add 10ms latency. NY to London on TAT14 I
peaked<BR>at today is running steady at 74ms RTD (Round Trip Delay). (That is
our Add/Drop Multiplexor directly<BR>off the light-wave mux driving the TAT
cable. (It is not speed of light as this is<BR>not speed of light in a
vacuum, it is speed of light through glass, which we estimate
the<BR>refraction index (to be a liberal of 1.32), hence the higher delay...
In a perfect vacuum we should<BR>get a RTD of about 53ms. So 74ms is
pretty good).<BR><BR>Their core is built differently, hence why their servers
are more expensive. ;-) I have not made up my mind about Theplanet, but
if my users keep getting dumped, saving $100/mo on a server that is nearly
worthless, is throwing $225/mo a way, not saving $100/mo. I consider
their networks vs EV1 as hamburger is to steak.<BR><BR>Don't get me wrong.
They are nice, growing, but their CEO had a "less expensive" model<BR>in place
for their core than EV1 does, and it shows in ping times. I think I
would<BR>rather a sustained 70ms ping time than a ping time that has 20+ms of
jitter in it and jumps<BR>from 52ms to 70ms like a yo yo. I won't say I
have never seen a network do this. I have been in the business for 18
years. I have. But we fixed it, as we consider that "badly
broken".<BR><BR><BR>Dr D<BR><BR><BR>At 12:16 AM 3/21/2005, you wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite"><FONT face=arial size=2>Yeah I've
got RHEL 4 also. BTW, I was the one that posted about the teamspeak /
mysql issue. You need the compat package for mysql - has the old
libraries and such so that you can use them instead of the new ones that
come with the new version of mysql on RHEL4:</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>Snipet from the teamspeak server.ini:</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>VendorLib=/usr/lib/libmysqlclient.so.10.0.0</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT
face=arial size=2>The package you need:</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>MySQL-shared-compat-4.0.23-0.i386.rpm<BR>It may be a different set of
numbers now but that's the name:
MySQL-shared-compat</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial size=2>After that
teamspeak will work with mysql.</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>I too ran into problems when I turned on journaling. The main
reason is because on a heavy loaded system because of the journal update
time being 5 seconds it can cause' some lag - there is a setting you can
pass that lowers this - used to work great with the 2.4 kernel but really
the 2.6 doesn't need the journal setting from what I've tested - hurts it
more than helps as Jay mentioned.</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>But you can do one performance trick that seems to have helped
some. You can set this in your fstab:</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>Example:</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial size=2>ext3
defaults,noatime 1 2<BR>Add
noatime after defaults on the hard drive your running your game servers off
of. Basic explination:</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial size=2>"The noatime
setting eliminates the need by the system to make writes to the file system
for files which are simply being read....."</FONT><BR><FONT
face=arial><BR></FONT><FONT face=arial size=2>Use at your own risk :) I just
thought I'd mention it.</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial size=2>I
recently got upgraded to a dual 73gig SCSI server. ThePlanet stuck me
in the new datacenter at infomart in Dallas. Has anyone been put in
that datacenter yet? I've been receiving complaints of ping spikes
from one of my customers that is from California. I gathered trace
routes from everyone and it seems to be the link between datacenter 3 and 5
(the new one - infomart).</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial size=2>Anyone
else ran into anything yet? From what I can tell it seems to be only
from the western side of the US because of the trace routes I've received -
the ones that had the problem were in like Arizona and California
etc:</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial size=2>13 246
ms 200 ms 199 ms
dist-vlan32.dsr3-2.dllstx3.theplanet.com
[70.85.127.62]<BR>14 75 ms 57
ms 57 ms po32.dsr1-2.dllstx5.theplanet.com
[70.85.127.110]<BR>15 58 ms 61
ms 58 ms po2.tp-car3.dllstx5.theplanet.com
[70.84.160.165]<BR>16 57 ms 56
ms 56 ms 39.70-84-187.reverse.theplanet.com
[70.84.187.39]</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial size=2>And yes I've
opened a support ticket but I'm not getting anywhere with that :( I
realize that trace route packets are low priority blah blah but when it's
consistent between a whole bunch of different people and the ping is that
high - I don't buy into that.</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>Anyways.......</FONT><BR> <BR><FONT face=arial
size=2>--</FONT><BR><FONT face=arial size=2>NateDog</FONT><BR><FONT
face=arial size=2> <BR></FONT>
<DL>
<DD>----- Original Message ----- <BR>
<DD>From:</B> <A href="mailto:jayco1@charter.net">Jay Vasallo</A> <BR>
<DD>To:</B> <A href="mailto:cod@icculus.org">cod@icculus.org</A> <BR>
<DD>Sent:</B> Sunday, March 20, 2005 9:41 PM<BR>
<DD>Subject:</B> Re: [cod] RHE4 new 2.6 Kernel<BR><BR>
<DD><FONT face=arial size=2>Hey Mark,</FONT><BR>
<DD><BR>
<DD><FONT face=arial size=2>I rented a few servers from the planet last
month and have the same setup you do to the t. Works great. I also noticed
that it deals with swap mem a little different than the rhe3. But other
than that, runs fine. Did some research on the new file journaling but
noticed a decrease in productivity and increase in ping when i set the
journaling to on so that was a waste of time. But other than that, if you
use it exactly the way the planet gives it to you, the server
rocks.</FONT><BR>
<DD>----- Original Message ----- <BR>
<DD>From:</B> <A href="mailto:defilm@acm.org">Mark J. DeFilippis</A> <BR>
<DD>To:</B> <A href="mailto:cod@icculus.org">cod@icculus.org</A> <BR>
<DD>Sent:</B> Sunday, March 20, 2005 9:23 PM<BR>
<DD>Subject:</B> [cod] RHE4 new 2.6 Kernel<BR><BR><BR><BR>
<DD>Anyone had experience with running the COD binaries on the new RedHat
Enterprise Server 4.0 with 2.6 SMP and threading enhancements?<BR><BR>
<DD>On theplanet.com, and servermatrix.com, there are a few quotes here
and there about "nice performance increase". (Actually I would be happy if
it is better than the existing ES3 SMP kernel which will often run a cpu
up to 100% while the other sits idle at 0%, after the major lag, it kicks
in. (yea! isn't that proactive!)<BR><BR>
<DD>I am hoping 2.6 enhancements to RHE4 does the trick.<BR><BR>
<DD>Anyone?<BR><BR>
<DD>I did see some issues with Teamspeak and issues with mysql. At
the time of posting, the admins recommended solution was to rev back
up2date for the mysql package to 4.0, and Teamspeak is a happy camper
again.<BR><BR>
<DD>Any input from someone doing this already would be
appreciated.<BR><BR>
<DD>Thanks<BR><BR>
<DD>Md<BR><BR>
<DD><TT>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<DD>S1,Mark J. DeFilippis, Ph. D EE
defilm@acm.org<BR>
<DD>
defilm@ieee.org<BR><BR></DD></DL></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DL></DL>S1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>Mark
J. DeFilippis, Ph. D EE
defilm@acm.org<BR>
defilm@ieee.org<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></TT></BODY></HTML>