I'm currently testing a new system based on an Asterisk / Trixbox server we set up in London, except the 'Voice Over IP' system is currently lacking in 'Voice'. Once it's live I'll likely hire an Asterisk genius, but for now I just want to get a basic handle on the system myself.
The inbound and outbound trunks are all installed and work perfectly, so that's not the issue, I can make calls in and out, and I managed to make the PBX redirect an incoming DID to my mobile, that worked also.
The problem I'm having is with no sound being able to be heard calling between internal extensions, at the moment I'm just testing with the X-Lite softphone software, and every time I make a call I can answer the call, put it on hold (which works), etc, just no sound at all.
I have a problem with the traceroute for 220.127.116.11 . Some useres can reatch it, but not all.
I 've attaced 3 routes under that isn't working and 2 that work. Look at the routes that doesn't work, they all stop by gblx.net ( String 9 - 10) Working routes doesn't use gblex.net My question : What should i do, what can i do ? Is gblex.net the problem ?
Not working route : emil@egenhost:~$ ping 18.104.22.168 PING 22.214.171.124 (126.96.36.199) 56(84) bytes of data...
During these periods of inaccessibility, ping/traceroutes from multiple physical locations around the world show 50-100% packet loss.
During times when the server is accessible, ping times are anywhere from 100ms-700ms and the server does not remain accessible for very long.
I gave my provider traceroutes and pings for those times when it was inaccessible and accessible and they stated it was not on their side. It was on a hop in the middle between me (and apparently everyone else, since multiple locations around the world were used) and my server. They say it is not in their control and they cannot do anything about it.
I am reasonably sure this isn't just me or my VPS. I am on the phoenix node of PrimaryVPS.
The latest traceroute I did showed something new - a router advertisement claiming the TTL was exceeded....
I am still trying to diagnose a problem some members have on my forums, when they load a page it will load a grey screen (my background color) and stop, after 15-30 seconds+ it will finally load the page
i opened a ticket with my server co and they forwared it to the NOC, NOC said it was apache config problem, server co said it was fixed and was due to apache log reaching 2GB limit, logrotate installed
same problem still existed, opened tk with server management co, they tweaked httpd.conf and disabled logs, problem still exists
I asked 3rd management co about it, changed some settings in httpd, said it may be due to ads on the sites, i took out the ads and a stat script
problem still exists, the thing is the problem exists with some users and not others, doing speed tests to the server shows it is very quick, load is low, no i/o wait and i just installed the second GB of memory so memory is fine
this is happeneing to users on seperate forums, one using vB, one using IPB, so it is server/ hardware related, AMD barton 3000, with 2GB ram, nowehere reaching the bandwidth limit or 10mbps port speed limit
any ideas? doing tracerts to the server shows a timeout before the sites IP address, every time, but doing a tracert OUT of the server shows no time outs....
I run tracroutes to many IPs often, anyoone could whip up a script to run traceroutes by entering IP and hitting enter and ability to cancel the process (as it gets stuck sometimes) and enter another IP to trace to?
We're looking to bring in a T3 for our small startup hosting company and when we do traces from multiple location it always runs through a cox.net IP and it concerns me because I dont want our customers to believe they're being hosted on some kids cablemodem. What do you folks suggest, the IP is 188.8.131.52 to their outer router. Should it be a concern that we route through everyone through a cox.net IP?
I installed net query tool from this site http://virtech.org/tools/
They say in order for ping and trace to work, you must chmod those executables on the server itself to 755. Is this safe or a security risk? The odd thing is, ping and trace works fine from dnsstuff.com or any other network tool site.
I'm looking into knownhost and they offer twice the bandwidth in their California option for the same money. Jay from known host said I should pick the one with the best ping times. I'd like to put the information here so someone might perhaps tell me what my best choice is.
I'll put the stats here and then if you could tell me which one is better (Texas vs. California) that would be great.
But if you think that the times between the two are only marginal (both real good), then could you help me decide about getting double the bandwidth for the same price.
I know nothing of course, but the two data centers look like their both giving great speeds (Texas being better though). But perhaps both speeds are great. If that's the case, can anyone tell me why someone would not take the higher bandwidth offer?
Thanks, I really appreciate any help with this!
Here is the info...
PING 184.108.40.206 (220.127.116.11) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=1.26 ms 64 bytes from 22.214.171.124: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=1.35 ms 64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=1.41 ms 64 bytes from 188.8.131.52: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=1.22 ms 64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=1.51 ms .............
Yesterday, they reported that emails being sent through Simplelists are bouncing, so I figured the problem had to be the firewall. But I've checked that all of the appropriate IPs are whitelisted, then ran traceroute from the server. Traceroute fails right before connecting to the last IP (which is whitelisted).
But I can ping that IP with no error.
For testing, I disabled the firewall completely. It still fails.
I wasn't sure, so I disabled cPHulk, too. It still fails.
If I run traceroute -I example.com, it goes through. But it fails with traceroute -T or with the default UDP.
And running traceroute from my home PC completes without any problems.
This error just began yesterday, and they've been using this list for years. Nothing changed on my end, unless it was automated.
Sometimes there will be several IP addresses that spam my server, and it seems that most of them are coming from 1 source, but will slowly hit my server over time. Is there any way to block an IP coming from a traceroute?
For example, this morning I got some spam from this IP. I trace route it and find that it's coming once again from domain.co.uk They do not have a website where I can report these IPs, so can I just use iptables or some other command to block 64.79.xx.xxx (domain.co.uk)?
Code: >tracert 220.127.116.11 Tracing route to Chi.domaintoo.com [74.122.xxx.xx] over a maximum of 30 hops:
I was wondering if anyone out there knew of any programs out there that can monitor and record ping times to various server IP's and couple output say a simple graph. There used to be this website I used that you could simply go onto there site, and register, and put in your servers ip addresses and it would output a simple graph that showed latency, loss etc for any ip you put into there system and displayed a web based mrtg type graph. I am having some troubles at one of the datacenters that I have some co-located servers at, and would like to show them how much packet loss they are having at a given time, or over say a 24 hour period.