[outages] Twelve99 / AWS usw2 significant loss

[Andras Toth]

Seems like the destination is in Hetzner, they could also raise it with
Twelve99 or prepend routes to use an alternate path.


On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 7:46 PM Phil Lavin via Outages <outages at outages.org>
wrote:

> Thanks, ytti. I have raised a case with AWS but I expect it to be as
> unproductive as usual. In this type of issue, there is often a friendly
> Engineer keeping an eye on NANOG list or IRC channel who can mitigate it.
> Hoping that to be the case this time, also.
>
>
> > On 26 Jan 2024, at 08:40, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 10:23, Phil Lavin via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> 88.99.88.67 to 216.147.3.209:
> >> Host                                               Loss%   Snt   Last
>  Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
> >> 1. 10.88.10.254                                     0.0%   176    0.2
>  0.1   0.1   0.3   0.1
> >> 7. nug-b1-link.ip.twelve99.net                      0.0%   176    3.3
>  3.5   3.1  24.1   1.6
> >> 8. hbg-bb2-link.ip.twelve99.net                    86.9%   175   18.9
> 18.9  18.7  19.2   0.1
> >> 9. ldn-bb2-link.ip.twelve99.net                    92.0%   175   30.5
> 30.6  30.4  30.8   0.1
> >> 10. nyk-bb1-link.ip.twelve99.net                     4.6%   175
>  99.5  99.5  99.3 100.1   0.2
> >> 11. sjo-b23-link.ip.twelve99.net                    56.3%   175  296.8
> 306.0 289.7 315.0   5.5
> >> 12. amazon-ic-366608.ip.twelve99-cust.net           80.5%   175  510.0
> 513.5 500.7 539.7   8.4
> >
> > This implies the problem is not on this path, because #10 is not
> > experiencing it, possibly because it happens to return a packet via
> > another option, but certainly shows the problem didn't happen in this
> > direction yet at #10, but because #8 and #9 saw it, they already saw
> > it on the other direction.
> >
> >
> >> 44.236.47.236 to 178.63.26.145:
> >> Host                                             Loss%   Snt   Last
>  Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
> >> 1. ip-10-96-50-153.us-west-2.compute.internal     0.0%   267    0.2
>  0.2   0.2   0.4   0.0
> >> 11. port-b3-link.ip.twelve99.net                   0.0%   267    5.8
>  5.9   5.6  11.8   0.5
> >> 12. palo-b24-link.ip.twelve99.net                  4.9%   267   21.1
> 21.5  21.0  58.4   3.1
> >> 13. sjo-b23-link.ip.twelve99.net                   0.0%   266   21.4
> 22.7  21.3  86.2   6.5
> >> 14. nyk-bb1-link.ip.twelve99.net                  58.1%   266  432.7
> 422.7 407.2 438.5   6.5
> >> 15. ldn-bb2-link.ip.twelve99.net                  98.1%   266  485.6
> 485.4 481.6 491.1   3.9
> >> 16. hbg-bb2-link.ip.twelve99.net                  92.5%   266  504.1
> 499.8 489.8 510.1   5.9
> >> 17. nug-b1-link.ip.twelve99.net                   55.5%   266  523.5
> 519.6 504.4 561.7   7.6
> >> 18. hetzner-ic-340780.ip.twelve99-cust.net        53.6%   266  524.4
> 519.2 506.0 545.5   6.9
> >> 19. core22.fsn1.hetzner.com                       70.2%   266  521.7
> 519.2 498.5 531.7   6.6
> >> 20. static.213-239-254-150.clients.your-server.de 33.2%   266  382.4
> 375.4 364.9 396.5   4.1
> >> 21. static.145.26.63.178.clients.your-server.de   62.0%   266  529.9
> 518.4 506.9 531.3   6.1
> >
> > This suggests the congestion point is from sjo to nyk, in 1299, not AWS
> at all.
> >
> > You could try to fix SPORT/DPORT, and do several SPORT options, to see
> > if loss goes away with some, to determine if all LAG members are full
> > or just one.
> >
> >
> > At any rate, this seems business as usual, sometimes internet is very
> > lossy, you should contact your service provider, which I guess is AWS
> > here, so they can contact their service provider or 1299.
> >
> > --
> >  ++ytti
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages mailing list
> Outages at outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/attachments/20240127/72650e05/attachment.htm>