Continuing Earthlink/Covad IP routing issue
m...@calweb.com
for anyone else who might have run into this issue, and
crossposted it here, but it turns out Earthlink doesn't
forward articles crossposted between Earthlink groups
and non-Earthlink groups, so I'm re-posting it here.
Is anyone from the old Netcom crowd still following this
group, and using Earthlink DSL? If so, are you seeing
this problem?
John wrote:
> Mike you're not alone. I'm an old Netcom user with Earthlink and have
> had this problem with Covad and Earthlink for over a year. It's
> exactly the same subnet problem you are seeing. Too bad there isn't a
> few more of us to get this problem escalated. I'm about ready to
> switch to Comcast and I don't particularly like them either but cable
> has to be better than this DSL hassle. The other day it took pressing
> the reset button on the modem to get out of the 68.165.2.X subnet.
Now that's interesting... I wonder if anyone else of the old Netcom
crowd is still following alt.netcom.emeritus? I'll try crossposting
this over there and see if I get any bites.
It would sure be nice if there was some way to get the attention
of someone, anyone, at Earthlink who might possibly have the
technical knowledge to understand the problem, and who cared enough
about their customers to make some attempt to fix this very long-
standing problem.
Assuming any such person still works at Earthlink, for which I see,
as of yet, no evidence whatsoever.
(Conversation included below for the benefit of the groups I'm adding to the crosspost.)
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:23:10 GMT, Mike Van Pelt
> <mvan...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>> It happened again this morning...
>>
>> I'll get a tracert this time.
>>
>>
>>
>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping keenspace.com
>>>
>>> Pinging keenspace.com [66.220.2.7] with 32 bytes of data:
>>>
>>> Request timed out.
>>>
>>> Ping statistics for 66.220.2.7:
>>> Packets: Sent = 1, Received = 0, Lost = 1 (100% loss),
>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
>>> Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
>>> Control-C
>>>
>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>tracert keenspace.com
>>>
>>> Tracing route to keenspace.com [66.220.2.7]
>>> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>>>
>>> 1 1 ms 1 ms 2 ms
>>
>> h-68-165-2-133.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net [68.165.2.133]
>>
>>
>>> 2 31 ms 30 ms 30 ms 172.31.255.251
>>> 3 31 ms 28 ms 30 ms 192.168.21.57
>>> 4 29 ms 30 ms 28 ms unknown.Level3.net [209.247.202.225]
>>> 5 * * * Request timed out.
>>> 6 * * * Request timed out.
>>> 7
>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>
>>>
>>
>> Now, I go to my router, disconnect, reconnect with a new PPPoE login, get a new IP address in a different class C block, and now everything's working perfectly.
>>
>>
>>
>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping keenspace.com
>>>
>>> Pinging keenspace.com [66.220.2.7] with 32 bytes of data:
>>>
>>> Reply from 66.220.2.7: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=52
>>> Reply from 66.220.2.7: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=52
>>>
>>> Ping statistics for 66.220.2.7:
>>> Packets: Sent = 2, Received = 2, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
>>> Minimum = 53ms, Maximum = 54ms, Average = 53ms
>>> Control-C
>>>
>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>tracert keenspace.com
>>>
>>> Tracing route to keenspace.com [66.220.2.7]
>>> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>>>
>>> 1 1 ms 2 ms 1 ms
>>
>> h-68-166-188-203.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net [68.166.188.203]
>>
>>
>>> 2 31 ms 31 ms 31 ms 172.31.255.251
>>> 3 30 ms 29 ms 29 ms 192.168.21.57
>>> 4 31 ms 219 ms 89 ms unknown.Level3.net [209.247.202.225]
>>> 5 30 ms 28 ms 30 ms ae-2-54.bbr2.SanJose1.Level3.net
>>
>> [4.68.123.97]
>>
>>
>>> 6 41 ms 55 ms 44 ms as-2-0.bbr2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net
>>
>> [4.68.128.158]
>>
>>
>>> 7 41 ms 40 ms 40 ms ae-13-51.car3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net
>>
>> [4.68.102.14]
>>
>>
>>> 8 39 ms 38 ms 41 ms las-bb1-link.telia.net [213.248.94.57]
>>> 9 40 ms 40 ms 39 ms hurricane-108839-las-bb1.c.telia.net
>>
>> [213.248.94.42]
>>
>>
>>> 10 52 ms 53 ms 55 ms pos3-2.gsr12416.pao.he.net [65.19.129.1]
>>> 11 55 ms 53 ms 53 ms pos5-0.gsr12416.fmt.he.net
>>
>> [216.218.229.33]
>>
>>
>>> 12 53 ms 49 ms 51 ms pos10-0.gsr12012.fmt.he.net
>>
>> [66.220.20.138]
>>
>>
>>> 13 54 ms 55 ms 53 ms keenspace.com [66.220.2.7]
>>>
>>> Trace complete.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike Van Pelt wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I've been fairly happy with Eartlhink for years, but this is driving me away -- My continuing Eartlhink problem:
>>>
>>> A couple of times a week, apparantly at random, some IP addresses become inaccessible. Over time, more and more IP addresses become inaccessible. One of the first to go is generally support.earthlink.net, so I can't do the online support thing; I can only contact support when it's working again, then support can't help because "there's nothing wrong with it now." The few times I have been able to connect to support.earthlink.net while the problem is happening, they have not been able to come up with anything other than "turn off your modem, reboot your PC, don't use a router". Whatever this problem is, it's quite beyond the ability of script-following tech support to deal with.
>>>
>>> And I am not about to hook my PC up direct to the Internet without a router/firewall in between. Ain't gonna happen, period. Ever.
>>>
>>> It is not a DNS issue. I get DNS resolution (except in those fairly rare cases where Earthlink's DNS servers are among the affected IP addresses), and it doesn't matter if I use the host.domain name or the raw IP address.
>>>
>>> I have replaced the router and the DSL modem with absolutely no change in this behavior, and I've used different computers, running both Windows 98 and Windows XP. No difference.
>>>
>>> The only help is to log in to my router's admin screen and disconnect and reconnect, repeatedly, until I get a different DHCP IP address. This is the only reason "turn off the modem, reboot the PC" sometimes seems to work. It didn't "work", DHCP just happened to give me a working IP address after all that fooling around.
>>>
>>> Generally, when I'm having a problem, the DHCP address I've been given by Earthlink is in the 68.165.2.x class C block, though I have seen the problem with other blocks. Here's an example:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping yahoo.com
>>>>
>>>> Pinging yahoo.com [66.94.234.13] with 32 bytes of data:
>>>>
>>>> Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=56
>>>> Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=56
>>>>
>>>> Ping statistics for 66.94.234.13:
>>>> Packets: Sent = 2, Received = 2, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
>>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
>>>> Minimum = 33ms, Maximum = 36ms, Average = 34ms
>>>> Control-C
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo's OK; it's rarely affected. (I'm including this because someone keeps insisting to me that Earthlink blocks outgoing pings. This demonstrates that it does not..)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping forums.comicgenesis.com
>>>>
>>>> Pinging forums.comicgenesis.com [66.220.2.9] with 32 bytes of data:
>>>>
>>>> Request timed out.
>>>>
>>>> Ping statistics for 66.220.2.9:
>>>> Packets: Sent = 1, Received = 0, Lost = 1 (100% loss),
>>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
>>>> Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
>>>> Control-C
>>>>
>>>
>>> 66.220.2.9 is inaccessable. My DHCP IP address is in the 68.165.2.x block.
>>>
>>> I forgot to do a tracert this time, but in the past, I have done tracert, and the packets are definitely getting past my router and several hops into Covad's and/or Earthlink's nework before getting lost.
>>>
>>> Now, I log into my router, and repeatedly disconnect/connect, until DHCP gives me an address in some other block. Any other block. This takes a few dozen attemtps, but finally, I get a 68.165.6.x address.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> C:\WINDOWS\Desktop>ping forums.comicgenesis.com
>>>>
>>>> Pinging forums.comicgenesis.com [66.220.2.9] with 32 bytes of data:
>>>>
>>>> Reply from 66.220.2.9: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=51
>>>> Reply from 66.220.2.9: bytes=32 time=53ms TTL=51
>>>>
>>>> Ping statistics for 66.220.2.9:
>>>> Packets: Sent = 2, Received = 2, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
>>>> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
>>>> Minimum = 53ms, Maximum = 54ms, Average = 53ms
>>>> Control-C
>>>>
>>>
>>> Now I'm in the 68.165.6.x block, and everything's fine.
>>>
>>> I would like to keep my old netcom email address that Earthlink still continues to support, but not at the cost of putting up with this continuing headache. It's a colossal pain to have to do this every few days, and this is the only reason I am beginning to seriously look for other DSL providers.
>>>
>
>
> Mike you're not alone. I'm an old Netcom user with Earthlink and have
> had this problem with Covad and Earthlink for over a year. It's
> exactly the same subnet problem you are seeing. Too bad there isn't a
> few more of us to get this problem escalated. I'm about ready to
> switch to Comcast and I don't particularly like them either but cable
> has to be better than this DSL hassle. The other day it took pressing
> the reset button on the modem to get out of the 68.165.2.X subnet.
>
> John
>
>
>
--
Mike Van Pelt | Wikipedia. The roulette wheel of knowledge.
mvp at calweb.com | --Blair P. Houghton
KE6BVH
Aahz Maruch
>
>Is anyone from the old Netcom crowd still following this
>group,
Yeeeessss....?
>...and using Earthlink DSL?
Fuck, no.
--
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
<*> <*> <*>
Disciple of Mama Morton's relationship philosophy
Ron Peterson
domain. I couldn't even reply to emails from domains that weren't Earthlink.
Tech support *cough* said I needed to type in the correct email address.
Thank God that was in the free 6 month trial period.
Dallman Ross
<aa...@pobox.com> spake thusly:
> In article <4521a476$0$84249$d36...@news.calweb.com>,
> <m...@calweb.com> wrote:
>
> >Is anyone from the old Netcom crowd still following this group,
>
> Yeeeessss....?
>
> >...and using Earthlink DSL?
>
> Fuck, no.
Ditto.
However, at a quick glance, that looked to me like a Level3
problem. They are also known to suck rocks.
Dallman
Rich Greenberg
>Is anyone from the old Netcom crowd still following this
>group, and using Earthlink DSL? If so, are you seeing
>this problem?
Yes and yes and I don't think so.
I am getting elk dsl from Embarq (ne Sprint local) and I am seeing the
same problem that I had for years with elk dsl from elk in Atlanta (now
in SW Florida).
This problem is that periodically I will lose the connection between the
elk network and me. Existing connections die and attempts to establish
a new connection fail with "unknown host". This lasts for a minute or
three up to hours. It will come back and return to normal with no
action on my part. Calling tech non-support is useless.
It may have finally been fixed. Haven't seen the problem the last month
or so now that I think of it.
--
Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 239 543 1353
Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val, Red, Shasta & Casey (RIP), Red & Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L
Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L
Dallman Ross
Rich Greenberg <ric...@panix.com> spake thusly:
> In article <4521a476$0$84249$d36...@news.calweb.com>,
> <m...@calweb.com> wrote:
>
> >Is anyone from the old Netcom crowd still following this group,
> >and using Earthlink DSL? If so, are you seeing this problem?
>
> Yes and yes and I don't think so.
>
> I am getting elk dsl from Embarq (ne Sprint local) and I am
> seeing the same problem that I had for years with elk dsl from
> elk in Atlanta (now in SW Florida).
Have you guys tried using another DNS host instead of the EL
one?
> It may have finally been fixed. Haven't seen the problem the
> last month or so now that I think of it.
Here's hoping.
--
Price action in the stock market is not an ordered
procession. It's an unmitigated circle-jerk.
Rich Greenberg
Dallman Ross <dman@localhost.> wrote:
Hi Dallman.
>On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 00:42:52 +0000 (UTC) in alt.netcom.emeritus,
>Rich Greenberg <ric...@panix.com> spake thusly:
>
>> In article <4521a476$0$84249$d36...@news.calweb.com>,
>> <m...@calweb.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Is anyone from the old Netcom crowd still following this group,
>> >and using Earthlink DSL? If so, are you seeing this problem?
>>
>> Yes and yes and I don't think so.
>>
>> I am getting elk dsl from Embarq (ne Sprint local) and I am
>> seeing the same problem that I had for years with elk dsl from
>> elk in Atlanta (now in SW Florida).
>
>Have you guys tried using another DNS host instead of the EL
>one?
I haven't, but if it were a DNS problem, wouldn't an existing connection
stay up? In my case the existing connection (usually an rlogin to
panix) also failed.
Aahz Maruch
In article <eg0dca$eu4$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
Rich Greenberg <ric...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>I haven't, but if it were a DNS problem, wouldn't an existing connection
>stay up? In my case the existing connection (usually an rlogin to
>panix) also failed.
Why are you using rlogin instead of ssh?
Rich Greenberg
>[newsgroups trimmed]
>
>In article <eg0dca$eu4$1...@reader1.panix.com>,
>Rich Greenberg <ric...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>I haven't, but if it were a DNS problem, wouldn't an existing connection
>>stay up? In my case the existing connection (usually an rlogin to
>>panix) also failed.
>
>Why are you using rlogin instead of ssh?
Because I have been too lazy to set up ssh.
Mike Van Pelt
>the EL one?
I'm getting DNS resolution. (Unless EL's DNS server
happens to be in one of the IP address blocks that
I can't get to, which has happened a time or two.)
With this problem, it doesn't matter if I use the
DNS name, or the raw numerical IP address.