Packet Loss to NA servers only

[Raist]

[edit] Nevermind. Dude, just go pound sand. I don't want your faux help. Just suck start a chocobo. Seriously. I've read your whole post history. You are cancer.

http://nlworks.com/2013/06/final-fan...ver-locations/

Really... people who have been investigating the source of these problems, discussing it, finding/testing/proving methods to either work around them or get them resolved, sharing all this information, directing them to documentation/sources, etc--all in an effort to help people actually get some relief are a CANCER??!! Then, pray tell... what is your cure?

And what about your tracerts that clearly showed that the path to your game servers was actually considerably different than the ones to the EIDOS web server the OP was originally tracing--think it was like 22 hops to the game servers and only 15 to eidos.com, and if I remember right there was even a slight variance in the path to the border as well. Did you post them here and then edit those trace results out...will see if I can find them later. And why the venomous insulting? Why am I the problem when this same information has been posted out there by many others saying the same thing? A little curious as to what you edited out in that last post... oh well, you're already pushing the limits for censorship from the admins already as is.

Oh, and by the way.. that nlworks site doesn't list the eidos.com IP (184.107.107.176) as a data server. It's also information that was gathered in June, and some of that data may have changed since we moved through more beta phases and have gone into full launch now. Even the numbers you get off the arrstatus pages may not be entirely accurate--go through the list and you will see the same IP assigned to the same servers. I've already noted several times in other threads that it shows a different IP than what my client actually uses. Have you followed the advice and looked up the IP your client is using for your own investigating? I am guessing you did since you have previously posted traces to both the 199.91.189.28 and 199.91.189.74 IP addresses which have been identified as currently in use for the game servers. That is the BEST way to make sure you are getting the proper IP--to check what your client is actually using.

That is, after all what needs to be diagnosed--your specific route to the server you are actually having communication issues with, and not a web server. Which is why I pointed that detail out to the OP. Sorry if someone correcting somebody offends you (that IP routinely gets passed around as a data server IP for XIV, started back around original Beta I think), but facts are facts. Your game is NOT having trouble connecting to a web server housed in a building about 14 blocks away and maintained on someone elses network (i-web segments, XIV is maintained on Ormuco segments). Your own trace results have clearly shown there is potentially a substantial difference in the routes being taken between those servers.

This is important not only because it means you are hitting different routers along the way. It is also important because those endpoints are designed and used for different purposes, and thus have different tolerance levels for acceptable levels of QoS. A webserver can get by with a heck of a lot more jitter/loss than these game servers. Most web site content is static--you download most of it and that's it for the most part until you need to pull more down (unless there's streaming or other active content, of course). Typically, your connection goes into an idle state far more frequently on a generic website than it will when compared to an online game that is constantly streaming dynamic content in both directions in realtime, and that is very dependent on reliable, ordered, timely delivery of that data to function properly.

If you have an ISP's technician actually offering to look at your route to try to find what is going on, it is imperative that they be told the right place to look. They could very easily look at that eidos.com IP, see a slight jitter, then realize it's a webserver and take the stance of nothing being wrong because the jitter is within acceptable limits for the content being served. However, if they are looking at an actual game server, the same level of jitter may raise enough concern for them to take it more seriously.

Edit
hmm... interesting... Since you claimed to have read all my 500 some-odd posts (which I find questionable considering your attitude and response to me in this thread), I decided to glance at your 30-ish posts as well. Interesting how many were copy/pasted reposts. And guess what I found posted a few times? Your traces:

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.3.9600]
(c) 2013 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Windows\System32>tracert 184.107.107.176

Tracing route to 184.107.107.176 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms READYSHARE [192.168.1.1]
2 43 ms 32 ms 34 ms cpe-75-85-32-1.socal.res.rr.com [75.85.32.1]
3 28 ms 18 ms 18 ms tge7-2.covncafi01h.socal.rr.com [76.166.2.193]
4 24 ms 23 ms 24 ms tge0-9-0-9.ontrcacp01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.6.162]
5 29 ms 22 ms 25 ms agg21.lsancarc01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.5.0]
6 20 ms 28 ms 18 ms bu-ether16.lsancarc0yw-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.102]
7 23 ms 28 ms 28 ms ae-0-0.pr0.lax00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.135]
8 34 ms * 34 ms ix-9-0-1-0.tcore2.LVW-LosAngeles.as6453.net [64.86.252.169]
9 119 ms 118 ms * if-22-2.tcore2.PDI-PaloAlto.as6453.net [66.198.144.73]
10 174 ms 140 ms 118 ms if-11-3.tcore2.CT8-Chicago.as6453.net [66.198.144.58]
11 133 ms 135 ms 130 ms if-3-2.tcore1.W6C-Montreal.as6453.net [66.198.96.45]
12 120 ms 128 ms * 66.198.96.58
13 133 ms 158 ms 131 ms te7-4.dr9.mtl.iweb.com [184.107.1.110]
14 134 ms 129 ms 149 ms 72.55.128.44
15 121 ms 138 ms 118 ms 184.107.107.176

Trace complete.

C:\Windows\System32>tracert 199.91.189.28

Tracing route to 199.91.189.28 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 6 ms 4 ms 2 ms READYSHARE [192.168.1.1]
2 37 ms 37 ms 30 ms cpe-75-85-32-1.socal.res.rr.com [75.85.32.1]
3 16 ms 18 ms 18 ms tge7-2.covncafi01h.socal.rr.com [76.166.2.193]
4 24 ms 19 ms 28 ms tge0-9-0-9.ontrcacp01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.6.162]
5 19 ms 24 ms 28 ms agg21.lsancarc01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.5.0]
6 24 ms 28 ms 28 ms 107.14.17.132
7 22 ms 24 ms 23 ms ae-0-0.pr0.lax00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.135]
8 68 ms 29 ms 38 ms 66.109.9.122
9 98 ms 108 ms 98 ms vlan60.csw1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.144.62]
10 92 ms 108 ms 98 ms ae-62-62.ebr2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.137.17]
11 95 ms 97 ms 88 ms ae-3-3.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.132.78]
12 88 ms 92 ms 99 ms ae-63-63.csw1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.151.133]
13 95 ms 98 ms 97 ms ae-61-61.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.151.126]
14 92 ms 98 ms 116 ms ae-14-14.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.151.117]
15 94 ms 119 ms 102 ms ae-1-100.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.132.113]
16 96 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-6-6.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net [4.69.140.189]
17 94 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-10-10.car2.Montreal2.Level3.net [4.69.153.86]
18 91 ms 128 ms 98 ms ORMUCO-COMM.car2.Montreal2.Level3.net [4.59.178.74]
19 141 ms 131 ms 126 ms 10.2.2.1
20 129 ms 171 ms 126 ms 192.34.76.2
21 112 ms 118 ms 119 ms 199.91.189.234
22 127 ms 138 ms 122 ms 199.91.189.28

Trace complete.

C:\Windows\System32>tracert 199.91.189.28

Tracing route to 199.91.189.28 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 2 ms 9 ms 8 ms READYSHARE [192.168.1.1]
2 42 ms 38 ms 39 ms cpe-75-85-32-1.socal.res.rr.com [75.85.32.1]
3 12 ms 17 ms 19 ms tge7-2.covncafi01h.socal.rr.com [76.166.2.193]
4 14 ms 18 ms 20 ms tge0-9-0-9.ontrcacp01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.6.162]
5 22 ms 23 ms 18 ms agg21.lsancarc01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.5.0]
6 27 ms 26 ms 14 ms 107.14.17.132
7 18 ms 14 ms 25 ms ae-0-0.pr0.lax00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.135]
8 31 ms 39 ms 32 ms 66.109.9.122
9 96 ms 98 ms 98 ms vlan60.csw1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.144.62]
10 91 ms 91 ms 95 ms ae-62-62.ebr2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.137.17]
11 91 ms 100 ms 97 ms ae-3-3.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.132.78]
12 102 ms 99 ms 98 ms ae-63-63.csw1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.151.133]
13 91 ms 99 ms 99 ms ae-61-61.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.151.126]
14 91 ms 96 ms 88 ms ae-14-14.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.151.117]
15 93 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-1-100.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.132.113]
16 94 ms 134 ms 94 ms ae-6-6.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net [4.69.140.189]
17 99 ms * 89 ms ae-10-10.car2.Montreal2.Level3.net [4.69.153.86]
18 95 ms 86 ms 93 ms ORMUCO-COMM.car2.Montreal2.Level3.net [4.59.178.74]
19 127 ms 128 ms 128 ms 10.2.2.1
20 121 ms 128 ms 129 ms 192.34.76.2
21 123 ms 128 ms 126 ms 199.91.189.234
22 128 ms 129 ms 128 ms 199.91.189.28

Trace complete.

C:\Windows\System32>tracert 199.91.189.74

Tracing route to 199.91.189.74 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 2 ms 7 ms <1 ms READYSHARE [192.168.1.1]
2 35 ms 39 ms 48 ms cpe-75-85-32-1.socal.res.rr.com [75.85.32.1]
3 14 ms 18 ms 8 ms tge7-2.covncafi01h.socal.rr.com [76.166.2.193]
4 20 ms 23 ms 28 ms tge0-9-0-8.ontrcacp01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.6.160]
5 18 ms 31 ms 25 ms agg21.lsancarc01r.socal.rr.com [72.129.5.0]
6 20 ms 29 ms 18 ms bu-ether26.lsancarc0yw-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.212]
7 23 ms 28 ms 19 ms 107.14.19.86
8 34 ms 28 ms 55 ms 66.109.9.122
9 97 ms 98 ms 87 ms vlan90.csw4.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.144.254]
10 91 ms 99 ms 118 ms ae-92-92.ebr2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net [4.69.137.29]
11 89 ms 92 ms 95 ms ae-3-3.ebr3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.132.78]
12 93 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-83-83.csw3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.151.157]
13 98 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-81-81.ebr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.69.151.150]
14 93 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-14-14.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.151.117]
15 93 ms 98 ms 108 ms ae-1-100.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.132.113]
16 93 ms 93 ms 89 ms ae-6-6.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net [4.69.140.189]
17 108 ms 98 ms 98 ms ae-10-10.car2.Montreal2.Level3.net [4.69.153.86]
18 93 ms 118 ms 98 ms ORMUCO-COMM.car2.Montreal2.Level3.net [4.59.178.74]
19 * 125 ms 128 ms 10.2.2.1
20 124 ms 128 ms 128 ms 192.34.76.2
21 112 ms 118 ms 128 ms 199.91.189.234
22 111 ms 115 ms 108 ms 199.91.189.74

Trace complete.

C:\Windows\System32>

Just thought I'd put that in there for the record to further emphasize the potential differences in routing to the eidos.com IP in question and an actual game server IP.
<note I cleaned up the quote a bit, but it's the original data that was posted by you yesterday in another thread. Just corrected formatting to make it easier to read>