Keep getting D/C symbol

[Rydis]

because some mod thought they be funny to move my previous thread to resolved..without being resolved

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...57#post3206057

I keep getting the D/C symbol and eventual 90k about 3-4 times an hour. And I can't figure out how to fix my issue.

I have tried:

2 different VPNs, 2 different ISPs, 2 different versions of windows, 2 different NIC cards with different drivers. I have my port triggers and virtual servers all set up. I have completely disabled firwall on PC and router and even attmpted DMZ..no fix to this issue.

[Raist]

Sounded like intermittent delays in your packets...may see intermittent spikes well over 50% along your route or intermittent timeouts if you run a series of tracerts to the server you use (can get the IP from Resource Monitor (resmon from search/run) once you are fully logged into the game).

This sometimes is a side effect of malware--back door transmissions, proxy locks, etc. can do all kinds of weird things. If you haven't done a thorough scan yet, may want to head to malwarebytes.com and try their free scanner. Usually does a pretty good job of catching stuff--many of the big names in security refer people to their site for assistance with the harder problems.

Could also be something locally consuming bandwidth to the point that it is intermittently delaying packet delivery--especially if on cable. Not sure how of the particulars on DSL/FiOs like how big the bursts are and such, but typically your data doesn't flow in a constant stream but is sent in a sort of store-and-forward routine. Modem gets data, requests a time slice to transmit, then burst it at high speed. Your bandwidth is gated basically by metering out the time slices. For example, a 15Mb cable plan may burst data in anywhere up to 5Mbit chunks at speeds higher than 16Mbit, but delays the bursts enough to maintain an average of 14-17Mbit transfer rate over time--but if you were to take a sort of "freeze-frame" image of one of the transfers it may actually be at a rate comparable to a 20-30 mbit transfer if it wasn't restricted to the smaller buffer size.

So if someone is streaming video or something on your line, it might be consuming upwards of 3Mb/sec or so and is interfering with the routine. Note that this can happen upstream as well if the neighborhood is saturating the nodes as well. And if there is a signaling issue that has degraded performance along the route, it becomes easier to cap out the usable bandwidth on that failing segment.

Looking at isolated segments of the path is likely to miss something (typically what happens when you start dealing with your ISP--they look at local segments, MAYBE a little further upstream--but rarely at the entire route). A proper analysis needs to be done over time across the run of your path to the servers to better narrow down potential problems. Then, if something is found, your ISP can either try to work with whoever manages the questionable segment--or work to route you away from it.

[Rydis]

Sounded like intermittent delays in your packets...may see intermittent spikes well over 50% along your route or intermittent timeouts if you run a series of tracerts to the server you use (can get the IP from Resource Monitor (resmon from search/run) once you are fully logged into the game).

This sometimes is a side effect of malware--back door transmissions, proxy locks, etc. can do all kinds of weird things. If you haven't done a thorough scan yet, may want to head to malwarebytes.com and try their free scanner. Usually does a pretty good job of catching stuff--many of the big names in security refer people to their site for assistance with the harder problems.

Could also be something locally consuming bandwidth to the point that it is intermittently delaying packet delivery--especially if on cable. Not sure how of the particulars on DSL/FiOs like how big the bursts are and such, but typically your data doesn't flow in a constant stream but is sent in a sort of store-and-forward routine. Modem gets data, requests a time slice to transmit, then burst it at high speed. Your bandwidth is gated basically by metering out the time slices. For example, a 15Mb cable plan may burst data in anywhere up to 5Mbit chunks at speeds higher than 16Mbit, but delays the bursts enough to maintain an average of 14-17Mbit transfer rate over time--but if you were to take a sort of "freeze-frame" image of one of the transfers it may actually be at a rate comparable to a 20-30 mbit transfer if it wasn't restricted to the smaller buffer size.

So if someone is streaming video or something on your line, it might be consuming upwards of 3Mb/sec or so and is interfering with the routine. Note that this can happen upstream as well if the neighborhood is saturating the nodes as well. And if there is a signaling issue that has degraded performance along the route, it becomes easier to cap out the usable bandwidth on that failing segment.

Looking at isolated segments of the path is likely to miss something (typically what happens when you start dealing with your ISP--they look at local segments, MAYBE a little further upstream--but rarely at the entire route). A proper analysis needs to be done over time across the run of your path to the servers to better narrow down potential problems. Then, if something is found, your ISP can either try to work with whoever manages the questionable segment--or work to route you away from it.

ive ran trace routes with WTFast and consulted with them, and forwarded that info along to my ISP, both who say there is nothing wrong. And if that was the case, changing ISPs should of solved it no? I have tried two different ISPs & USB tethering from my phone.

http://i.imgur.com/xFZHoz0.jpg

I understand there is a particular hop there that drops, but multiple people including ISP tell me it isnt an issue because all hops after it are perfect. 2nd hop 100% times out because it doesn't allow echos.

my connection, I live alone and I have wifi disabled. I can assure you nothing else is using my bandwidth

http://i.imgur.com/cvb3bAw.png

so knowing that, and ISP already telling me there are no issues, and same issue over 3 different possibles routes..what would be the next course of action?

Edit: Wanted to also add, this is the only game I have any issues whatsoever with. None with any other game I play/played, including LoL, Tera, Rift, Ark, Guild Wars 2, Wild Star.

[Raist]

Neither of those tests is to the ffxiv servers. You need to be looking at your specific path to Ormuco's 199.91.189.0/24 subnet that the game's servers are hosted on in Montreal Canada. And your bandwidth is not an issue with this game, generally speaking. About the only time you need more than a DSL-Lite level of bandwidth is for patching, heavily congested areas, and initial loading. And even then, you would be more then fine with a 15Mb bandwidth plan. What is of greater concern is latency---it needs to be consistent, and it needs to be low.

Any test to anywhere other than the network hosting the game is only going to show you issues on your localized networks at best. Looks like you are in or otherwise coming through the Florida area---you will NOT have a direct line to Montreal from there. You will be handed off to a third party network. Typically, we see a lot of issues either around that hand off, or between there and Ormuco (SE's ISP in Montreal). So the route taken specifically for your game client is what needs to be looked at.

Oh, and even though that trace is not to the game service in Montreal...it does show a lot of jitter in a few spots, which can cause problems. Even in your more local segments you have a swing just over 3x your average response times. Further down, you see the trend continue to 3x and 4x the average time (not to mention it is an even bigger jump from the best times). And that TWC hop with the intermittent dropped packets is a bad sign. Even though we are talking forwarding in the route, it is a clear indication that that hop has reached a high enough utilization point that it is ignoring lower priority traffic trying to preserve throughput. In other words--that hop is trying to prevent congestive failure---which is not good.

The game relies on timely, orderly delivery of the packets. If packets get too far out of order/delayed you're risking a retransmit which can get progressively worse when there are lag spikes kicking in. Overly congested nodes present a problem for this game. The packets aren't encrypted (like with a VPN), and aren't otherwise flagged to put them on a higher priority list. This makes them vulnerable to getting delayed during periods of high congestion....which is the problem more often than not. Since they cleaned up my routing earlier this year, EVERY time there has been any instability that was not announced to be an issue server-side, it was because either my local devices were flaking out (modem or router), or there was an overly congested segment along my route--which Time Warner would get me routed around and service would improve.

[Rydis]

so your saying its my ISP..and not really anything I can do about it?

So why does the same issue present over 3 different ISPs? TWC, Verizon & ATT 4g.

Or is the game just not playable in my location??

I showed WTF traceroute because it shows the drop on the hop, where as a normal tracert doesn't, but here you go. The 2nd image was just to show..bandwidth on my end really wasn't an issue.

http://i.imgur.com/Yx9vNIy.png

I must say today wasn't an issue day either, as I didn't encounter the issue. Usually late Saturdays and Sundays I dont. but I got the issue earlier in the day on both days.

[Raist]

no.. they can help. They just aren't willing to...perhaps you are still stuck in Tier1 or Tier2 support level. I worked directly with Time Warner's Tier3 people...and they have done WONDERS with cleaning things up. Here is a snapshot from tonight:

Tracing route to neolobby02.ffxiv.com [199.91.189.74]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms     1 ms  LPTSRV [10.10.100.1]
  2    27 ms    18 ms    28 ms  cpe-75-176-160-1.sc.res.rr.com [75.176.160.1]
  3    29 ms    24 ms    33 ms  cpe-024-031-198-009.sc.res.rr.com [24.31.198.9]
  4    20 ms    20 ms    18 ms  24.31.196.212
  5    24 ms    25 ms    25 ms  be33.chrcnctr01r.southeast.rr.com [24.93.64.182]
  6    30 ms    26 ms    31 ms  bu-ether14.atlngamq46w-bcr00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.82]
  7    24 ms    25 ms    40 ms  0.ae2.pr0.atl20.tbone.rr.com [107.14.19.11]
  8    26 ms    26 ms    27 ms  te0-0-0-10.ccr21.atl02.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.12.109]
  9    27 ms    25 ms    29 ms  be2050.ccr41.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.0.165]
 10    35 ms    34 ms    33 ms  be2168.ccr41.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.31.94]
 11    42 ms    39 ms    43 ms  be2148.ccr41.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.31.118]
 12    63 ms    60 ms    73 ms  be2106.ccr21.alb02.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.3.50]
 13    52 ms    49 ms    51 ms  be2088.ccr21.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.43.17]
 14    65 ms    68 ms    68 ms  38.122.42.34
 15    65 ms    64 ms    64 ms  192.34.76.10
 16    65 ms    67 ms    63 ms  199.91.189.242
 17    74 ms    68 ms    74 ms  199.91.189.74

Trace complete.

Believe it or not... that is actually kind of sluggish for a Cogent routing. Don't get me wrong---that is still very solid from here in South Carolina. It's just that I often see the responses around 60 or better at the end. TATA is usually on the order of 70-80, with Level3 pushing up near the 90's (until it hits 150-ish and have to get it changed again).

When I started with them on my issues, we had lag spikes breaking a full second (1000ms), intermittent timeouts, random modem rebooting... you name it. They started at one end and worked their way out. Modem, the DMARC out back, up on the pole.... got everything cleaned up locally and then went to the CMTS (which was bad---no longer use a gateway here in Florence because of it), and on up the route. They routinely change my peering trying to stay ahead of the congestion. It IS manageable to some extent by your ISP---just have to find someone willing to work on it.

[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.

[Rydis]

this is quite unfortunate news..as doesn't look like Ill be able to play, as ISP has already stated few times..not them..and they can't do anything.

appreciate your help.