Concrete proof finally provided that the 2002 error has NOTHING is server side issue

[technole]

The same corporation that authorized setting up one single datacenter to service multiple countries both in the Americas and the EU then thought, this will end well.

Meanwhile nearly every other publisher including EA has the common sense to understand that a minimum of three geographical regions should be covered for NA. Western (Cali), Central (Texas), Eastern (Chicago). I try not to get sassy with these posts but some things just boggle the mind.

It's not much an issue, EU used to actually be in the same data center as NA back when they were in Montreal with their previous provider before they went to Frankfurt.

Would help latency, but it's not so much about traffic as NTT has the infrastructure being a Tier 1 provider, they had been mostly fault-free since SE relocated to their Sacramento facility, it was said it takes 20 racks to run just one world. So having 500+ in one data center allows flexibility, saves on costs. If they use say the NTT Dallas, Texas hub, then if there was any problems routing to Sacramento, every player in those worlds would feel the faults. They would have to substantially outgrow the data center to consider the additional cost of a new location.

[MiaShino]

It's not much an issue, EU used to actually be in the same data center as NA back when they were in Montreal with their previous provider before they went to Frankfurt.

This is still issue. See;
https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...-REPLY-HERE%21
https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...NTT-Failure%29
Or simply browse the tech support section, you will see numerous 90006 related threads appearing especially during prime time. Me and my partner cannot play without a vpn anymore because of this.

Would help latency, but it's not so much about traffic as NTT has the infrastructure being a Tier 1 provider, they had been mostly fault-free since SE relocated to their Sacramento facility,

There have been many documented issues between Comcast/Charter i-bone and NTT interconnection. Many of these are result in oversaturated junction nodes loading into the NTT network.

it was said it takes 20 racks to run just one world. So having 500+ in one data center allows flexibility, saves on costs.

This is correct. It does save costs in short term.

If they use say the NTT Dallas, Texas hub, then if there was any problems routing to Sacramento, every player in those worlds would feel the faults. They would have to substantially outgrow the data center to consider the additional cost of a new location.

English is not the native language so I am having some trouble interpreting this, many apologies! There should never be routing for the player between regional datacenters. That is purpose of regional distribution. If Sacramento is experiencing issues then players connected to the Dallas data centers will not experience connectivity issues.

I cannot say for the certainty but it appears they have indeed long outgrown their Cali datacenter. I have no metrics though for this so who knows? Perhaps there is still room there for more racks or expansion of number of connections between Comcast and NTT.