performance

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by geo, Jan 20, 2006.

  1. geo

    geo Guest

    Question:

    I have a situation where a web site that is hosted by a ISP off-site seems
    slow (this is our production environment). I have the same web site
    on-site (use it for testing) which seems faster than the live site.

    I have a developer that is not connected to our network or the ISP's
    network. They have their own connection. Off hours when no one is using
    the systems. He is saying that the test site is faster than the live site.

    I'm trying to figure out where the problem is. Hosting ISP says it isn't
    them, their systems are functioning normally. Our ISP connection out to the
    internet is a fractional t-1 768k (different ISP than the ISP hosting the
    web site) .

    This ISP the one that has our t-1 says everything looks okay on their end
    that we are not saturating our line. If you look at our Percent Utilization
    using Solarwinds it is under 10% on both receive and transmit.

    I guess my question is how do I see what is happening to traffic between me
    and the ISP hosting our web site?

    Our ISP that provides our T-1 mentioned something that doing a trace route
    from us to our web site before it gets
    to the company hosting the web site it goes through Williams Communication
    (WCG) they say they know that there is a problem with latency there. I
    believe WCG is the service provider for our ISP hosting the web site.


    I know this is all a bit confusing but it is a difficult thing to
    troubleshoot. I guess I don't know where to begin? The site does work just
    seems to perform slow and our developer says that the pages aren't that big.

    ANY HELP IS GREATLY APPRECIATED or pointing me in a direction to better
    troubleshoot.

    Thanks,
    Geo
     
    geo, Jan 20, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. geo

    Donnie Guest

    "geo" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Question:
    >
    > I have a situation where a web site that is hosted by a ISP off-site seems
    > slow (this is our production environment). I have the same web site
    > on-site (use it for testing) which seems faster than the live site.
    >
    > I have a developer that is not connected to our network or the ISP's
    > network. They have their own connection. Off hours when no one is using
    > the systems. He is saying that the test site is faster than the live

    site.
    >
    > I'm trying to figure out where the problem is. Hosting ISP says it isn't
    > them, their systems are functioning normally. Our ISP connection out to

    the
    > internet is a fractional t-1 768k (different ISP than the ISP hosting the
    > web site) .
    >
    > This ISP the one that has our t-1 says everything looks okay on their end
    > that we are not saturating our line. If you look at our Percent

    Utilization
    > using Solarwinds it is under 10% on both receive and transmit.
    >
    > I guess my question is how do I see what is happening to traffic between

    me
    > and the ISP hosting our web site?
    >
    > Our ISP that provides our T-1 mentioned something that doing a trace route
    > from us to our web site before it gets
    > to the company hosting the web site it goes through Williams Communication
    > (WCG) they say they know that there is a problem with latency there. I
    > believe WCG is the service provider for our ISP hosting the web site.
    >
    >
    > I know this is all a bit confusing but it is a difficult thing to
    > troubleshoot. I guess I don't know where to begin? The site does work

    just
    > seems to perform slow and our developer says that the pages aren't that

    big.
    >
    > ANY HELP IS GREATLY APPRECIATED or pointing me in a direction to better
    > troubleshoot.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Geo
    >

    ##################################
    The trace route is going to show the time in milliseconds. You can compare
    it with the trace route from your developer's PC.
    There are also sites on the net that let you go from any number of places
    donnie
     
    Donnie, Jan 21, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. geo

    Moe Trin Guest

    On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, in the Usenet newsgroup alt.computer.security, in article
    <>, geo wrote:

    >I have a situation where a web site that is hosted by a ISP off-site seems
    >slow (this is our production environment). I have the same web site
    >on-site (use it for testing) which seems faster than the live site.


    One would hope so - though this isn't a security problem. You have a
    direct link to your local site. You are going to the "remote" site over
    the Internet, which is not a dedicated or direct link for you.

    >I have a developer that is not connected to our network or the ISP's
    >network. They have their own connection. Off hours when no one is using
    >the systems. He is saying that the test site is faster than the live site.


    That may be more relevant. Tell the developer to monitor the TCP Window
    value and TCP Ack numbers (16th and 9th through 12th byte in the TCP
    header) to detect connection stalls and packet drops. Received TCP sequence
    numbers (5th to 8th byte in the TCP header) and IP packet lengths (3rd and
    4th byte in the IP header) should step uniformly. Also look for indications
    of IP fragmentation (7th and 8th byte in IP header - the F flag).

    >Our ISP that provides our T-1 mentioned something that doing a trace route
    >from us to our web site before it gets to the company hosting the web site
    >it goes through Williams Communication (WCG) they say they know that there
    >is a problem with latency there.


    Not impossible. However, a traceroute (the original LBL version is using
    UDP packets - the piece of sh1t that microsoft calls TRACERT uses ICMP
    echos) is not representative of what is being used to carry the web page
    (TCP). ICMP and UDP packets are often prioritized down as they are not
    carrying "useful" data, and this may give false indications of transfer
    rates.

    >I believe WCG is the service provider for our ISP hosting the web site.


    Williams is a service provider. They have at least 7 /16s of IP space that
    they lease out to others. Searching for WCG, or 'Williams Communication'
    in the 'news.admin.net-abuse.* newsgroups will provide more details.

    >I know this is all a bit confusing but it is a difficult thing to
    >troubleshoot. I guess I don't know where to begin? The site does work just
    >seems to perform slow and our developer says that the pages aren't that big.


    "pages aren't that big" doesn't say anything useful. What is on the pages,
    and where is it being sourced from may be a lot more significant. Trying
    to troubleshoot it is not easy, as you are depending on multiple hops
    between your web page and those who wish to view it. You really don't
    have control on these intermediate hops. About all you can do it test
    the connection speed from various sites and graph the results. If you
    detect a problem (for example, excessive delay when using WCG IP space)
    your only solution may be to use a different provider that doesn't
    route over the problem provider.

    Old guy
     
    Moe Trin, Jan 21, 2006
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    HEXUS.review: Rockdirect XTI 3.8 Performance

    Silverstrand, Aug 8, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    636
    Silverstrand
    Aug 8, 2005
  2. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    655
    Silverstrand
    Aug 24, 2005
  3. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    624
    Silverstrand
    Sep 20, 2005
  4. Silverstrand

    Mushkin eXtreme Performance XP4000 2GB Review

    Silverstrand, Oct 3, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    629
    Silverstrand
    Oct 3, 2005
  5. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,322
    Silverstrand
    Oct 6, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page