Remove Advertisements

Tunnelling

Anything, including off-topic posts

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Tunnelling

Postby Levantine » Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:00 pm

So I used to use Smoothping, way back in the day and it was pretty good I spose. It's been a looooong time since I cared enough about my ping to bother with one though, but lately with my new internet connection it's been worse than I remember, which brings me to this. Anyway, I'm so far out of the loop it's kinda funny and I was wondering if someone could point me in a good direction.

Tunnelling services. What's good, what's not. Playing from Australia sucks ass.

<3
User avatar
Levantine
 
Posts: 10817
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: NQ, Aus

Re: Tunnelling

Postby rodos » Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:37 pm

I'm still yet to be convinced that these tunnel services are not complete malarkey.

When I read utter bullshit like this, it makes me very skeptical. Perhaps some ISPs are de-prioritising game traffic, or have really crappy routes that you can get around it with a tunnel, I don't know, but it sounds suspect to me.

My physical ping from Sydney to Saurfang US (LA Datacentre) on Internode ADSL2+, measured using tcptraceroute on the actual WoW port (1119) is about 200 ms. That's really about as good as you're going to get for trans-pacific packet transit. My in-game ping measures 300-350ms usually. This does seem like an large difference. Maybe it's just that real WoW packets are much larger than trace packets, maybe the in-game meter is broken. There has even been some speculation that server-side delays are larger for connections originating outside the USA - i.e. they have some kind of priority queue inside their servers or network. This could be "justified" in that a 100ms delay on a 20ms ping is a 500% performance degradation, but 100ms on a 200ms ping is only a 50% degradation.

Personally I would do this:

1. Find a spamable (but on GCD) ability that generates a combat log entry, and bind it to your mouse wheel
2. Log yourself spamming this ability
3. Get trial accounts from a number of tunnel providers
4. Repeat step 2 for each
5. Compare combat logs

I'd actually do this myself but all the tunnel providers use Windows software, and don't work so good with the Linux.
User avatar
rodos
 
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:20 pm

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Levantine » Thu Nov 25, 2010 9:50 pm

You're allowed to be skeptical, just like I'm allowed to know from experience the last tunnel service I used halved my WoW ping and was mandatory to even log into Aion when I played. Anyway, I'm already searching around again, but I just wanna know what kinds of experiences people have had with different services.
User avatar
Levantine
 
Posts: 10817
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: NQ, Aus

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Exogen » Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:54 am

I too am an fellow Aussie and use WoWTunnels to reduce my ping from 500-600ms to 190-230 ms usually.
Exogen
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Tunnelling

Postby rodos » Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:03 pm

Levantine wrote:You're allowed to be skeptical, just like I'm allowed to know from experience the last tunnel service I used halved my WoW ping and was mandatory to even log into Aion when I played. Anyway, I'm already searching around again, but I just wanna know what kinds of experiences people have had with different services.

Don't mistake my skepticism for dogmatism. I'd truly love to see some combat logs showing real reduced latency using a tunnel service. Then the curious guy-who-has-done-some-network-engineering-but-not-for-a-long-time in me could derive some enjoyment from figuring out exactly why it works.

Out of curiosity, what physical locations, ISPs and tech (ADSL/ADSL2/Cable) are you guys running through to see such bad latency? Internode ADSL2+ (Agile DSLAM) in Sydney is working pretty well for me. Are you using the leatrix latency fix (TCPAckFrequency=1)?
User avatar
rodos
 
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:20 pm

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Esilence » Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:47 pm

rodos wrote:
Levantine wrote:You're allowed to be skeptical, just like I'm allowed to know from experience the last tunnel service I used halved my WoW ping and was mandatory to even log into Aion when I played. Anyway, I'm already searching around again, but I just wanna know what kinds of experiences people have had with different services.

Don't mistake my skepticism for dogmatism. I'd truly love to see some combat logs showing real reduced latency using a tunnel service. Then the curious guy-who-has-done-some-network-engineering-but-not-for-a-long-time in me could derive some enjoyment from figuring out exactly why it works.

Out of curiosity, what physical locations, ISPs and tech (ADSL/ADSL2/Cable) are you guys running through to see such bad latency? Internode ADSL2+ (Agile DSLAM) in Sydney is working pretty well for me. Are you using the leatrix latency fix (TCPAckFrequency=1)?


I was totally skeptical, but now I'm completely sold on tunneling.

Been working in Angola (Africa) since october, and when I got here I was putting up with pings easily between 7-10k (EU Servers), making any kind of dungeons or raids a total right off, all I could do was some dailies, and although it was slow continue to play the AH.

But I got told about tunneling, and tried out a trial, and holy crap it was unreal, ping dropped to 200ish, 400max on a bad day, and now can do things in game again.

I know the situation may be different for you guys in Australia with more reliable internet connections to start with, but for me I've gone from god awful ping, to playable. It's not just a "feels faster" before anyone asks, im talking ive gone from way over 1 sec delay to almost none. Ive also no clue how it works, but for me it just does, so i dont complain. :D
Eteyin - Resto Shaman
Esilence - Prot Pally
EU-Wildhammer
Esilence
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:03 am

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Steve » Mon Nov 29, 2010 12:11 am

It's like the difference between taking public transportation and driving to work. Public transportation only goes out every so often and take a bunch of people to their destination at the same time. You often have to switch trains because a single train can't get you from home to work. Driving your car is faster since you start driving the second you are ready to go and there's no need to switch trains. You can take a more direct route to work.

The normal internet is like public transportation. Tunneling is like taking your car.
Steve
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:04 am

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Exogen » Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:46 am

Exogen wrote:I too am an fellow Aussie and use WoWTunnels to reduce my ping from 500-600ms to 190-230 ms usually.

Im on an Internode NakedUltra plan which uses Optus DSLAMs in Shepparton, Victoria, 250Kms north of Melbourne.
All my Traffic routes through Melbourne to get to the node network and this is where most of my ping occurs, upwards of 50ms some nights, although if I use my Laptop on our Telstra ADSL2+ syncing at 23.5Mpbs @ work, i see about a 100ms improvement without using tunnels but then you get the whole account lockout thing if you sign in from a different IP range.
Exogen
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Levantine » Mon Nov 29, 2010 6:36 am

I'm using an Internode ADSL1-Fast Reach connection that routes through Telstra... or something like that. I'd have to look it up and it's late and I'm lazy. Suffice to say that living in Townsville isn't the best when it comes to decent internet.
User avatar
Levantine
 
Posts: 10817
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: NQ, Aus

Re: Tunnelling

Postby rodos » Mon Nov 29, 2010 3:58 pm

Steve wrote:It's like the difference between taking public transportation and driving to work. Public transportation only goes out every so often and take a bunch of people to their destination at the same time. You often have to switch trains because a single train can't get you from home to work. Driving your car is faster since you start driving the second you are ready to go and there's no need to switch trains. You can take a more direct route to work.

The normal internet is like public transportation. Tunneling is like taking your car.


But your tunnel goes over the public internet. Thus, you're putting your car on the bus. How does this help?

I suspect you may actually have your description the wrong way around. Interactive traffic like a game is lots of little packets going back and forth like cars on the road. Like a car, it's the fastest way to get places if the traffic is good. However, when things get congested you can get stuck. The bus takes the bus lane, and people keep moving. I think there must be something about the way WoW servers and/or client are coded that doesn't handle bad (slow/unreliable) links very well -- perhaps a really long retry timeout. The tunnel server can establish a fast, reliable connection with WoW server, then use a different protocol to talk to you that is more robust. If packets go missing because your DSL or ISP is flaky, the tunnel server does a better job of re-transmitting in a timely fashion.

Levantine wrote:I'm using an Internode ADSL1-Fast Reach connection that routes through Telstra... or something like that. I'd have to look it up and it's late and I'm lazy. Suffice to say that living in Townsville isn't the best when it comes to decent internet.

Ugh. That sucks. Reach means you're subjected to the worst of Telstra's BS. As I understand it, backbone connectivity to North Queensland is bad too (at full capacity and congested). Pack a jumper and move south :mrgreen:

Have you guys on Internode tried their free tunnel service? http://games.on.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=122&t=172179
User avatar
rodos
 
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:20 pm

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Sabindeus » Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:18 pm

rodos wrote:
Steve wrote:It's like the difference between taking public transportation and driving to work. Public transportation only goes out every so often and take a bunch of people to their destination at the same time. You often have to switch trains because a single train can't get you from home to work. Driving your car is faster since you start driving the second you are ready to go and there's no need to switch trains. You can take a more direct route to work.

The normal internet is like public transportation. Tunneling is like taking your car.


But your tunnel goes over the public internet. Thus, you're putting your car on the bus. How does this help?

I suspect you may actually have your description the wrong way around. Interactive traffic like a game is lots of little packets going back and forth like cars on the road. Like a car, it's the fastest way to get places if the traffic is good. However, when things get congested you can get stuck. The bus takes the bus lane, and people keep moving. I think there must be something about the way WoW servers and/or client are coded that doesn't handle bad (slow/unreliable) links very well -- perhaps a really long retry timeout. The tunnel server can establish a fast, reliable connection with WoW server, then use a different protocol to talk to you that is more robust. If packets go missing because your DSL or ISP is flaky, the tunnel server does a better job of re-transmitting in a timely fashion.


what

No look, the reason your tunnels make your WoW ping better is because they are choosing better routes to the servers. It's really simple.

Say your ISP's routers decide to take Route A to WoW server, which has a RTT of X ms

Your ISP's routers take Route B to the tunnel service which takes Y ms RTT

Your tunnel service's routers make different choices from your ISP, and take Route C to the WoW Server, which has a RTT of Z ms

If Y + Z < X then your ping is better!

easy
Image
Turn In, an NPC interaction automator - http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addo ... rn-in.aspx
User avatar
Sabindeus
Moderator
 
Posts: 10470
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Steve » Mon Nov 29, 2010 7:13 pm

Sabindeus wrote:No look, the reason your tunnels make your WoW ping better is because they are choosing better routes to the servers. It's really simple.

Say your ISP's routers decide to take Route A to WoW server, which has a RTT of X ms

Your ISP's routers take Route B to the tunnel service which takes Y ms RTT

Your tunnel service's routers make different choices from your ISP, and take Route C to the WoW Server, which has a RTT of Z ms

If Y + Z < X then your ping is better!

easy


The packets follow different rules by virtue of being packaged differently as well. So there are differences in both the physical cable the packet travels along and how the packet is actually treated by the routers by virtue of its packaging.
Steve
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:04 am

Re: Tunnelling

Postby rodos » Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:12 pm

Steve wrote:
Sabindeus wrote:No look, the reason your tunnels make your WoW ping better is because they are choosing better routes to the servers. It's really simple.

Say your ISP's routers decide to take Route A to WoW server, which has a RTT of X ms

Your ISP's routers take Route B to the tunnel service which takes Y ms RTT

Your tunnel service's routers make different choices from your ISP, and take Route C to the WoW Server, which has a RTT of Z ms

If Y + Z < X then your ping is better!

easy


The packets follow different rules by virtue of being packaged differently as well. So there are differences in both the physical cable the packet travels along and how the packet is actually treated by the routers by virtue of its packaging.


Empahsis added. That is the only part that is possible. Lev, Exo and I are all running via the same ISP. Our packets are almost certainly all traversing the Pacific on the same piece of cable (that's the ~180ms hard floor on Australian ping times), and thus taking the same route once they reach California. They're both a lot further from the near end point of the cable in Sydney than I am, hence they should have somewhat higher ping, but not 2-3x higher. Now, the tunnel servers are in LA, at the far end, so there will be at best trivial differences between the routes taken by tunneled and raw packets, yet they see a big difference in reported ping and gameplay. Why?

The tunnel providers say that encrypted traffic gets a special pass. I don't believe it. Encrypted data is indistinguishable from random data. What might happen is that routers are configured to see the SSH port as carrying an "interactive" protocol, and use low-latency algorithms in preference to high-throughput ones. Since the biggest users of SSH are the sysadmins that operate the routers, this is not unlikely. :)

However, I still think that the root cause of the latency problem is in Blizzard's servers. Before they added the configurable latency tolerance knob to the UI, Blizz said they were setting it for you based on your ping. So the server is capable of making decisions based on your perceived latency. I think it's making bad decisions. Blizz proved they're not good at network optimisation when they admitted to having Nagle's algorithm enabled for years (a very bad idea for an interactive app). If the proxy fools the server into seeing a lower ping (e.g. the short hop between the proxy server and the wow server), and makes it behave more sensibly, then you win.

tl;dr - Proxy works because Blizz sucks.
User avatar
rodos
 
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:20 pm

Re: Tunnelling

Postby Sabindeus » Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:56 pm

Steve wrote:The packets follow different rules by virtue of being packaged differently as well. So there are differences in both the physical cable the packet travels along and how the packet is actually treated by the routers by virtue of its packaging.


So backhaul ISPs in Australia are doing DPI or something based QoS? :/

It's not that I don't *believe* that per se, I just find it hard to swallow that that is the major speed up. Why would an ISP throttle game packets harder than SSL? They usually care about the P2P and BT stuff.

rodos wrote:Our packets are almost certainly all traversing the Pacific on the same piece of cable (that's the ~180ms hard floor on Australian ping times), and thus taking the same route once they reach California.

Your conclusion doesn't follow from your predicate.
They're both a lot further from the near end point of the cable in Sydney than I am, hence they should have somewhat higher ping, but not 2-3x higher. Now, the tunnel servers are in LA, at the far end, so there will be at best trivial differences between the routes taken by tunneled and raw packets, yet they see a big difference in reported ping and gameplay. Why?

Bolded part makes no sense.

Just because you're going over underwater fiber makes exactly zero guarantees about what route your packet will take before and after that hop. There could even be multiple routers sharing the same physical layer that would account for it.
Image
Turn In, an NPC interaction automator - http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addo ... rn-in.aspx
User avatar
Sabindeus
Moderator
 
Posts: 10470
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Tunnelling

Postby rodos » Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:38 pm

Sabindeus wrote:
Steve wrote:The packets follow different rules by virtue of being packaged differently as well. So there are differences in both the physical cable the packet travels along and how the packet is actually treated by the routers by virtue of its packaging.


So backhaul ISPs in Australia are doing DPI or something based QoS? :/

It's not that I don't *believe* that per se, I just find it hard to swallow that that is the major speed up. Why would an ISP throttle game packets harder than SSL? They usually care about the P2P and BT stuff.

I think QoS is the only possibility, DPI is too expensive for little gain (outside BT as you suggest). SSH, on port 22, could be flagged as "interactive" and given dedicated bandwidth, or a queuing algorithm that puts a ceiling on the amount of time packets can be queued.
Sabindeus wrote:Your conclusion doesn't follow from your predicate.
They're both a lot further from the near end point of the cable in Sydney than I am, hence they should have somewhat higher ping, but not 2-3x higher. Now, the tunnel servers are in LA, at the far end, so there will be at best trivial differences between the routes taken by tunneled and raw packets, yet they see a big difference in reported ping and gameplay. Why?

Bolded part makes no sense.

Just because you're going over underwater fiber makes exactly zero guarantees about what route your packet will take before and after that hop. There could even be multiple routers sharing the same physical layer that would account for it.

We're on the same ISP in Australia, and that ISP has trans-pacific capacity on 2 cables, both leaving from Sydney. One to San Jose, and one to LA. My traffic to Blizz and Smoothping, both in LA, goes via San Jose, so I'm assuming this cable is the "preferred" one. There's no sensible reason for Lev's packets from Queensland to take a different route to Sydney based on a small difference in destination. Internode's routing tables are just going to say "Packet for North America - route to PPC-1 cable".

You're right that once the packet lands in California the paths can diverge, and they do, due to the different transits and peering arrangements Internode have in their Exquinix San Jose PoP. I get a couple less hops and about 18ms better ping to Smoothping's endpoint than to Saurfang-US -- a difference of less than 10% of my ping, and less than 5% of Exo's.

If the tunnel service has an endpoint in Australia, there could be a big routing difference. They could use a Pacific crossing that might be less-congested (e.g. going via Telstra's Endeavour cable). I don't know if there are any such providers.

Physical round-trip-time Syd-Townsville is around 70ms. Lev has crappy Telstra ADSL, so add a few more ms. That his ping blows out to unplayable levels, and that a tunnel service improves it substantially, means there's something mis-configured somewhere.
User avatar
rodos
 
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:20 pm

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest


Remove Advertisements

Who is online

In total there are 3 users online :: 2 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest