Keep getting D/C symbol

[Raist]

It looks to be the same as most everyone else that has taken a closer look at their route. Issues persist in the way you are being routed. Changing ISP's doesn't automatically prevent you from getting sent to the same exchange point--nor even the same routing partner...it could just send you through a different exchange point but you wind up with the same ISP that is having problems.

In the pic you posted of a Windows Tracert, you have signs of trouble right there in Tampa, before you get handed off into Level3--which is also showing signs of trouble. The later spike could be due to the earlier spike though...but with Level3's history, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss them either.

We frequently see Level3 having issues with various ISP's---more frequently with Verizon in the north east, Texas, and a few other places...but other ISP's have had issues with them as well. Every time I get put on their routes, they usually last about a week before we have to get it switched back to either TATA or Cogent.

And yes... it is an issue your ISP can and SHOULD address for you. If they can't/aren't willing to work things out with their peering partner (in that case Level3) to clean things up, then they should be able to arrange for you to use someone else for the peering. Mine gets changed often...was changed just before this weekend in fact--TATA was having issues in the Ashburn/DC area and TWC flipped me to Cogent and I'm going through Atlanta now. As a result, I no longer slingshot Toronto on the way to Montreal either--knocking two hops off my route.

Edit: Just did a quick lookup on your gateway...Bright House Networks. Close ties to Time Warner. They also peer with TWC, Qwest, XO, and Verizon. Not the greatest options...but through some of them they should be able to get to either TATA or Cogent. Perhaps if they took advantage of their peering with Time Warner it may pan out better for you in the long run, even though it may mean a few more hops (could go BHN -> TWC/RR -> TATA -> Ormuco). It will likely involve pushing for someone higher up the chain to escalate the issue to Tier3/Engineering though. You may find you fair better going through the online contacts than the phone. DSL Reports has forums set up with more direct access to the higher support tiers that may help you move things along. Here is a link to their Bright House forum:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/bhousedirect

[Rydis]

It looks to be the same as most everyone else that has taken a closer look at their route. Issues persist in the way you are being routed. Changing ISP's doesn't automatically prevent you from getting sent to the same exchange point--nor even the same routing partner...it could just send you through a different exchange point but you wind up with the same ISP that is having problems.

In the pic you posted of a Windows Tracert, you have signs of trouble right there in Tampa, before you get handed off into Level3--which is also showing signs of trouble. The later spike could be due to the earlier spike though...but with Level3's history, I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss them either.

We frequently see Level3 having issues with various ISP's---more frequently with Verizon in the north east, Texas, and a few other places...but other ISP's have had issues with them as well. Every time I get put on their routes, they usually last about a week before we have to get it switched back to either TATA or Cogent.

And yes... it is an issue your ISP can and SHOULD address for you. If they can't/aren't willing to work things out with their peering partner (in that case Level3) to clean things up, then they should be able to arrange for you to use someone else for the peering. Mine gets changed often...was changed just before this weekend in fact--TATA was having issues in the Ashburn/DC area and TWC flipped me to Cogent and I'm going through Atlanta now. As a result, I no longer slingshot Toronto on the way to Montreal either--knocking two hops off my route.

Edit: Just did a quick lookup on your gateway...Bright House Networks. Close ties to Time Warner. They also peer with TWC, Qwest, XO, and Verizon. Not the greatest options...but through some of them they should be able to get to either TATA or Cogent. Perhaps if they took advantage of their peering with Time Warner it may pan out better for you in the long run, even though it may mean a few more hops (could go BHN -> TWC/RR -> TATA -> Ormuco). It will likely involve pushing for someone higher up the chain to escalate the issue to Tier3/Engineering though. You may find you fair better going through the online contacts than the phone. DSL Reports has forums set up with more direct access to the higher support tiers that may help you move things along. Here is a link to their Bright House forum:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/bhousedirect

is basically what I was told

"The route you showed actually had no loss. That is called ICMP deprioritization and is non-impactful and completely normal. It simply means the router you were pinging was too busy doing real things to be bothered with your pings. Based on what I see at the moment there is nothing wrong on our end. If you have more I'm more than happy to look at it."

[Raist]

is basically what I was told

"The route you showed actually had no loss. That is called ICMP deprioritization and is non-impactful and completely normal. It simply means the router you were pinging was too busy doing real things to be bothered with your pings. Based on what I see at the moment there is nothing wrong on our end. If you have more I'm more than happy to look at it."

Oh wow...you do realize they just admitted there is a problem with over-utilization, right?

They admitted that the load has ramped up to the point that it has to enforce prioritization rules. In other words it is intentionally ignoring/delaying/discarding what they consider lower priority traffic in order to preserve bandwidth for what they deem is higher priority traffic. Basically it is overloaded and they are throttling the traffic. If traffic was in the normal range (below 80%), there would be no need to enforce such rules.

Ties in quite well with some of the Level3 blog posts we've often linked to in these threads over the last year or so...especially the two I quoted from recently in one of the Verizon threads:

http://blog.level3.com/open-internet...tal-mea-culpa/

So let’s look at what that means in one of those locations. The one Verizon picked in its diagram: Los Angeles. All of the Verizon FiOS customers in Southern California likely get some of their content through this interconnection location. It is in a single building. And boils down to a router Level 3 owns, a router Verizon owns and four 10Gbps Ethernet ports on each router. A small cable runs between each of those ports to connect them together. This diagram is far simpler than the Verizon diagram and shows exactly where the congestion exists.

Verizon has confirmed that everything between that router in their network and their subscribers is uncongested – in fact has plenty of capacity sitting there waiting to be used. Above, I confirmed exactly the same thing for the Level 3 network. So in fact, we could fix this congestion in about five minutes simply by connecting up more 10Gbps ports on those routers. Simple. Something we’ve been asking Verizon to do for many, many months, and something other providers regularly do in similar circumstances. But Verizon has refused. So Verizon, not Level 3 or Netflix, causes the congestion. Why is that? Maybe they can’t afford a new port card because they’ve run out – even though these cards are very cheap, just a few thousand dollars for each 10 Gbps card which could support 5,000 streams or more. If that’s the case, we’ll buy one for them. Maybe they can’t afford the small piece of cable between our two ports. If that’s the case, we’ll provide it. Heck, we’ll even install it.

http://blog.level3.com/open-internet/not-neutrality/

But it is now late September. So what has changed? Well, let us look at three large Local Exchange Carriers (LECs) in the United States. These LECs are telephone companies that built broadband networks on the back of monopoly-funded telephone infrastructure. Over the past six months, the utilization of each interconnection location between their networks and Level 3’s has changed as shown in the following diagram.

Each number shows utilization at one of the interconnection locations in various cities throughout the United States between Level 3 and the LECs. Utilization above 85% indicates the LEC is causing congestion in that city by refusing to add interconnection capacity

This shows a dramatic improvement for LEC1 and LEC3, but a continued degradation for LEC2. You might say that it’s good news overall. But if you value an open Internet underpinned by a dynamic competitive environment, you may have a different opinion.

And that’s because the reason the interconnect utilization between Level 3 and LEC1 and LEC3 improved is that these LECs forced Netflix to pay them to interconnect directly with them. And as Netflix CEO Reed Hastings has pointed out several times, Netflix didn’t do that because they were taking advantage of a highly competitive Internet marketplace. They did it because they had no choice: all third-party content that LEC broadband users want to see eventually has to go through LEC interconnection points. When the LEC tries to turn these interconnection points into Internet tollbooths there is no alternate path for the content to take to reach the consumers.