#686 closed defect (fixed)
Network flakyness in buckingham?
Reported by: | Owned by: | ||
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | ietf-089 |
Component: | incoming | Keywords: | |
Cc: | My Current Location: | ||
My MAC Address: | My OS: |
Description
Hello, I'm sitting in the back corner of the room. When joining ietf-a I see: kistel@RobertAir:~$ ping kadarka PING kadarka (85.10.198.82): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=0 ttl=54 time=153.909 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=159.405 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=97.130 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=219.586 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=167.830 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 5 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=86.900 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=113.720 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 8 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=9 ttl=54 time=63.952 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=10 ttl=54 time=44.816 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 11 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=12 ttl=54 time=65.718 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 13 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=14 ttl=54 time=104.946 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=15 ttl=54 time=77.118 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=16 ttl=54 time=132.206 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=17 ttl=54 time=61.168 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=18 ttl=54 time=38.962 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=19 ttl=54 time=105.556 ms Request timeout for icmp_seq 20 Request timeout for icmp_seq 21 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=22 ttl=54 time=104.052 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=23 ttl=54 time=81.718 ms ^C --- kadarka ping statistics --- 24 packets transmitted, 18 packets received, 25.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 38.962/104.372/219.586/45.996 ms When joining ietf, I see: kistel@RobertAir:~$ ping kadarka PING kadarka (85.10.198.82): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=0 ttl=54 time=35.931 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=17.814 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=22.425 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=18.513 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=22.593 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=17.869 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=26.069 ms 64 bytes from 85.10.198.82: icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=21.362 ms ^C --- kadarka ping statistics --- 8 packets transmitted, 8 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 17.814/22.822/35.931/5.623 ms (destination is in Germany, ~20ms is not bad.) I'm using a Mac Air, OSX 10.9.2, ifconfig at the moment is: en0: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 ether 84:38:35:4c:60:0e inet6 fe80::8638:35ff:fe4c:600e%en0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4 inet 31.133.166.198 netmask 0xfffff800 broadcast 31.133.167.255 inet6 2001:67c:370:160:8638:35ff:fe4c:600e prefixlen 64 autoconf inet6 2001:67c:370:160:c927:9f5a:3c69:ec55 prefixlen 64 autoconf temporary nd6 options=1<PERFORMNUD> media: autoselect status: active Regards, Robert
Change history (7)
comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by
Owner: | changed from llynch@… to cdoyle@… |
---|---|
Status: | new → assigned |
comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by
Priority: | tbd → major |
---|---|
Type: | request → defect |
comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by
We've augmented the number of APs and adjusted the power and believe that the rooms on -3 now should have decent IETF wifi. If you're going to be down there soon and can confirm this for us, please do so. If you're not expecting to be down there anytime soon, let us know and we'll close out this ticket.
Thanks!
- Jim
comment:4 Changed 7 years ago by
> Comment (by anonymous): > > We've augmented the number of APs and adjusted the power and believe that > the rooms on -3 now should have decent IETF wifi. If you're going to be > down there soon and can confirm this for us, please do so. If you're not > expecting to be down there anytime soon, let us know and we'll close out > this ticket. > > Thanks! > > - Jim Hi, I don't plan to go back there for a while, so I'll not be able to check/confirm. Regards, Robert
comment:5 Changed 7 years ago by
Ok, thanks ... we've sent folks down to test, and it's been good, so we'll close out this ticket.
Thanks for letting us know!
- JIm
comment:6 Changed 7 years ago by
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | assigned → closed |
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.
The meetings in Plaza C and Buckingham have far more attendees in them they we were prepared to support. We'll be deploying 3 additional WAP's in these rooms during the first break which should mitigate the issues you are having.
Apologies and thank you for your patience.