- Welcome to Hurricane Electric's IPv6 Tunnel Broker Forums.
News:
Welcome to Hurricane Electric's Tunnelbroker.net forums!
Recent posts
#61
Questions & Answers / Re: Problems on fra1? (216.66....
Last post by eutampieri - May 29, 2025, 05:21:48 AMWas going to open this exact discussion... here's some data from inside the tunnel
From outside to the tunnel
Code Select
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 2001:470:etc 0.0% 97 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.1
2. tunneletc.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net 32.0% 97 24.3 27.3 16.0 46.0 8.8
3. ve118.core2.fra1.he.net 27.1% 97 16.1 32.4 15.1 85.3 14.8
4. (waiting for reply)
5. de-cix-frankfurt.as13335.net 58.3% 97 51.0 43.2 21.2 141.1 21.6
6. 2400:cb00:933:3:: 32.3% 97 36.2 41.0 14.9 139.3 27.3
7. one.one.one.one 42.7% 96 34.8 37.9 20.2 102.5 16.7
Code Select
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 2001:470:etc 0.0% 39 0.7 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.1
2. tunneletc.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net 28.9% 38 27.7 28.2 16.6 80.8 13.4
3. ve118.core2.fra1.he.net 51.4% 38 27.0 28.2 15.5 47.2 10.5
4. (waiting for reply)
5. ipv6.de-cix.fra.de.as15169.google.com 36.8% 38 29.2 25.4 15.8 60.0 9.3
6. 2001:4860:0:1::88d1 36.8% 38 55.0 59.3 39.1 128.6 24.7
7. 2001:4860:0:1::88d6 89.2% 38 43.8 56.3 43.8 76.1 13.9
8. 2001:4860::c:4003:364e 31.6% 38 25.0 29.1 15.0 112.5 20.9
9. 2001:4860::c:4001:5638 56.8% 38 20.4 48.9 20.4 97.3 21.8
10. 2001:4860::9:4001:5634 43.2% 38 44.8 45.5 22.3 157.7 29.2
11. 2001:4860:0:1::834d 48.6% 38 23.5 33.0 20.5 63.4 10.8
12. 2001:4860:0:1::3e89 35.1% 38 104.2 36.5 22.0 104.2 17.3
13. muc11s22-in-x0e.1e100.net 55.3% 38 30.4 36.5 20.5 110.5 20.9
Code Select
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. 2001:470:etc 0.0% 72 0.9 0.7 0.5 1.3 0.1
2. tunneletc.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net 19.4% 72 45.0 135.8 15.4 2126. 420.6
3. ve118.core2.fra1.he.net 31.0% 72 16.1 174.2 15.6 2086. 420.9
4. (waiting for reply)
5. (waiting for reply)
6. (waiting for reply)
7. (waiting for reply)
8. (waiting for reply)
9. (waiting for reply)
10. (waiting for reply)
11. (waiting for reply)
12. (waiting for reply)
13. he.net 40.8% 72 161.4 587.5 153.6 3245. 926.6
From outside to the tunnel
Code Select
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. gw.lan 0.0% 15 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.1
2. (waiting for reply)
3. 172.17.89.180 0.0% 15 3.2 3.3 1.9 4.0 0.6
4. 172.17.89.66 0.0% 15 3.3 4.0 3.1 4.4 0.4
5. 172.19.177.18 13.3% 15 2248. 183.0 9.2 2248. 620.6
6. 195.22.196.170 0.0% 15 7.7 8.3 6.9 9.5 0.6
7. 195.22.196.137 0.0% 15 19.6 21.6 19.1 31.6 3.9
8. port-channel6.core1.fra1.he.net 0.0% 14 16.0 16.8 16.0 17.6 0.6
9. port-channel16.core3.fra1.he.net 76.9% 14 31.2 26.5 19.2 31.2 6.4
10. port-channel12.core2.fra1.he.net 0.0% 14 18.8 18.0 17.0 19.1 0.6
11. tserv1.fra1.he.net 23.1% 14 17.0 25.4 16.0 80.6 19.7
Code Select
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. AS16276 2001:41d0:xxx:xxxx::1 0.0% 83 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.1
2. AS??? fd00::ffe 0.0% 83 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.1
3. AS16276 2001:41d0:0:1:3::4a3f 0.0% 83 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.1
4. AS16276 2001:41d0:0:1:3::48a2 0.0% 83 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.1
5. AS16276 2001:41d0:0:1:3::4b58 2.4% 83 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.1
6. AS16276 2001:41d0:0:50::5:3904 1.2% 83 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.1
7. AS??? fdff:f003:18::c 58.5% 83 2.1 2.7 1.1 4.2 0.8
8. AS16276 2001:41d0:20a:600::39 37.8% 83 1.7 1.9 1.7 2.4 0.1
9. AS16276 be300.fra-fr5-pb4-nc5.de.eu 24.1% 83 1.7 2.0 1.7 12.7 1.4
10. (waiting for reply)
11. (waiting for reply)
12. AS6939 e0-33.core2.muc1.he.net 22.0% 83 26.6 26.6 26.2 29.3 0.4
13. (waiting for reply)
14. (waiting for reply)
15. AS6939 port-channel12.core2.fra1.he.net 3.6% 83 26.4 26.9 26.2 33.5 1.1
16. AS6939 tserv1.fra1.he.net 30.5% 83 31.1 38.1 26.5 93.7 16.4
17. AS6939 tunnel800784-pt.tunnel.tserv6.fra1.ipv6.he.net 48.1% 82 44.0 55.0 41.0 103.1 13.1
18. AS6939 2001:470:xxxx:xxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx 51.9% 82 42.5 55.4 40.6 132.1 20.0
This is not interesting, I think, but I have no loss to he.net from thereCode Select
Packets Pings
Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
1. (waiting for reply)
2. 2001:b00:5:10::88 95.5% 90 14.2 14.1 13.5 14.3 0.4
3. 2001:b00:1:1:1::5f 0.0% 90 12.9 12.8 12.3 15.6 0.4
4. 2001:b00:1:1:1::1a6 74.2% 90 13.5 64.0 13.3 299.8 79.8
5. (waiting for reply)
6. (waiting for reply)
7. (waiting for reply)
8. (waiting for reply)
9. tserv1.fra1.he.net 26.7% 90 32.7 37.8 29.4 136.3 15.0
10. (waiting for reply)
11. 2001:470:xxxx:xxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx 48.9% 89 61.0 58.8 42.3 160.4 22.8
#62
Questions & Answers / Re: Problems on fra1? (216.66....
Last post by 4920441 - May 29, 2025, 04:47:56 AMHey there,
thanks of a bank holiday I could narrow down the problem to hurricane electrics - either a saturation problem or something else where HE should take a look at:
This is from COLT Network to FRA 25% loss or more, when it runs longer times:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=6.78 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=21.7 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=6.70 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=12.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=9.72 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=9.34 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=45.1 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=6.76 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=10 ttl=58 time=12.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=11 ttl=58 time=15.5 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=13 ttl=58 time=12.5 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=14 ttl=58 time=10.5 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=15 ttl=58 time=14.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=16 ttl=58 time=75.3 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=18 ttl=58 time=6.83 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 15 received, 25% packet loss, time 19068ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.704/17.699/75.315/17.987 ms
This is from Hetzner 37% Packet loss and counting:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=11.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=5.04 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=54.6 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=5.01 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=11.0 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=8.60 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=18.7 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=14 ttl=59 time=9.37 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=15 ttl=59 time=5.02 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=17 ttl=59 time=4.99 ms
^C^V64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=20 ttl=59 time=7.24 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=21 ttl=59 time=5.01 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=22 ttl=59 time=17.7 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=23 ttl=59 time=47.4 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=24 ttl=59 time=24.2 ms
^C^
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
24 packets transmitted, 15 received, 37% packet loss, time 23177ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.999/15.702/54.692/15.028 ms
This is from Orcacle Cloud Ashburn 56% Packet loss:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=84.0 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=89.4 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=84.8 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=88.2 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 4 received, 55.5556% packet loss, time 8142ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 84.008/86.600/89.374/2.248 ms
This one is from "Hostpapa USA" with about 15% going also up after a while...
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=45 time=106 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=45 time=107 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=45 time=102 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=45 time=106 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=9 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=10 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=11 ttl=45 time=104 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=12 ttl=45 time=120 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=13 ttl=45 time=109 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
13 packets transmitted, 11 received, 15% packet loss, time 12011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 101.439/105.760/120.070/5.339 ms
This one is Manitu Germany (near Frankfurt) - also the same wit around 33% Packet Loss:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=8.10 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=5.43 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=5.13 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=5.20 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=9.09 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=18.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=11 ttl=58 time=8.89 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
12 packets transmitted, 8 received, 33.3333% packet loss, time 11102ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 5.126/8.751/18.171/3.994 ms
As far as traceroute resolves the hops, it seems only the port-channel12.core2.fra1.he.net and tserv1.fra1.he.net seems to be the same at all routes from all above providers....
traceroute 216.66.80.30
traceroute to 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 1.82.238.89.in-addr.arpa.manitu.net (89.238.82.1) 0.271 ms 0.255 ms 0.241 ms
2 vsenetip.gw.network.manitu.net (89.238.127.30) 1.225 ms 1.240 ms 1.223 ms
3 et-2-0-5.0.vs-core-r1.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.181) 1.537 ms et-5-0-2.0.vs-dis-r2.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.190) 1.330 ms et-2-0-5.0.vs-core-r1.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.181) 1.562 ms
4 et-2-0-2.0.vs-core-r2.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.178) 1.629 ms et-2-1-2.0.vs-core-r1.6898.ip-addr.vsenet.de (217.24.235.153) 2.444 ms et-2-0-5.0.vs-core-r2.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.185) 1.486 ms
5 et-2-1-2.0.vs-core-r2.6898.ip-addr.vsenet.de (217.24.235.157) 2.667 ms 2.684 ms 2.668 ms
6 * * *
7 * * port-channel12.core2.fra1.he.net (184.104.198.25) 5.785 ms
8 tserv1.fra1.he.net (216.66.80.30) 5.199 ms 4.852 ms 5.121 ms
So... it seems the culprit IS fra1 from hurricane electric.
Are you going to mitigate this problem or is fra1 simply overloaded?
Thanks alot for your answer.
Cheers
thanks of a bank holiday I could narrow down the problem to hurricane electrics - either a saturation problem or something else where HE should take a look at:
This is from COLT Network to FRA 25% loss or more, when it runs longer times:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=6.78 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=21.7 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=6.70 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=12.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=9.72 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=9.34 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=45.1 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=6.76 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=10 ttl=58 time=12.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=11 ttl=58 time=15.5 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=13 ttl=58 time=12.5 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=14 ttl=58 time=10.5 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=15 ttl=58 time=14.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=16 ttl=58 time=75.3 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=18 ttl=58 time=6.83 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
20 packets transmitted, 15 received, 25% packet loss, time 19068ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.704/17.699/75.315/17.987 ms
This is from Hetzner 37% Packet loss and counting:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=11.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=5.04 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=54.6 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=5.01 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=11.0 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=59 time=8.60 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=59 time=18.7 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=14 ttl=59 time=9.37 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=15 ttl=59 time=5.02 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=17 ttl=59 time=4.99 ms
^C^V64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=20 ttl=59 time=7.24 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=21 ttl=59 time=5.01 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=22 ttl=59 time=17.7 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=23 ttl=59 time=47.4 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=24 ttl=59 time=24.2 ms
^C^
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
24 packets transmitted, 15 received, 37% packet loss, time 23177ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.999/15.702/54.692/15.028 ms
This is from Orcacle Cloud Ashburn 56% Packet loss:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=84.0 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=89.4 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=84.8 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=88.2 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 4 received, 55.5556% packet loss, time 8142ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 84.008/86.600/89.374/2.248 ms
This one is from "Hostpapa USA" with about 15% going also up after a while...
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=2 ttl=45 time=106 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=45 time=107 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=45 time=102 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=45 time=106 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=9 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=10 ttl=45 time=101 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=11 ttl=45 time=104 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=12 ttl=45 time=120 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=13 ttl=45 time=109 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
13 packets transmitted, 11 received, 15% packet loss, time 12011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 101.439/105.760/120.070/5.339 ms
This one is Manitu Germany (near Frankfurt) - also the same wit around 33% Packet Loss:
ping 216.66.80.30
PING 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=8.10 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=5.43 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=5.13 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=5.20 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=9.09 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=18.2 ms
64 bytes from 216.66.80.30: icmp_seq=11 ttl=58 time=8.89 ms
^C
--- 216.66.80.30 ping statistics ---
12 packets transmitted, 8 received, 33.3333% packet loss, time 11102ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 5.126/8.751/18.171/3.994 ms
As far as traceroute resolves the hops, it seems only the port-channel12.core2.fra1.he.net and tserv1.fra1.he.net seems to be the same at all routes from all above providers....
traceroute 216.66.80.30
traceroute to 216.66.80.30 (216.66.80.30), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 1.82.238.89.in-addr.arpa.manitu.net (89.238.82.1) 0.271 ms 0.255 ms 0.241 ms
2 vsenetip.gw.network.manitu.net (89.238.127.30) 1.225 ms 1.240 ms 1.223 ms
3 et-2-0-5.0.vs-core-r1.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.181) 1.537 ms et-5-0-2.0.vs-dis-r2.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.190) 1.330 ms et-2-0-5.0.vs-core-r1.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.181) 1.562 ms
4 et-2-0-2.0.vs-core-r2.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.178) 1.629 ms et-2-1-2.0.vs-core-r1.6898.ip-addr.vsenet.de (217.24.235.153) 2.444 ms et-2-0-5.0.vs-core-r2.6838.ip.vsenet.de (217.24.235.185) 1.486 ms
5 et-2-1-2.0.vs-core-r2.6898.ip-addr.vsenet.de (217.24.235.157) 2.667 ms 2.684 ms 2.668 ms
6 * * *
7 * * port-channel12.core2.fra1.he.net (184.104.198.25) 5.785 ms
8 tserv1.fra1.he.net (216.66.80.30) 5.199 ms 4.852 ms 5.121 ms
So... it seems the culprit IS fra1 from hurricane electric.
Are you going to mitigate this problem or is fra1 simply overloaded?
Thanks alot for your answer.
Cheers
#63
Questions & Answers / Problems on fra1? (216.66.80.3...
Last post by 4920441 - May 28, 2025, 12:35:27 PMHi,
are there any load problems on the fra1 server currently known? I use the tunnel since more than only a couple of years and in the last days I am getting serios packet loss (about 20-50%) and it does not seem to get any better (my local Provider is T-Com).
Another tunnel to Prague works fine, but its certainly another routed network from there, so that does not really help without some work :-/
Any thoughts?
Thank you very much for your help!
And HE is *VERY* appreciated, I like using ist :-)
Cheers
are there any load problems on the fra1 server currently known? I use the tunnel since more than only a couple of years and in the last days I am getting serios packet loss (about 20-50%) and it does not seem to get any better (my local Provider is T-Com).
Another tunnel to Prague works fine, but its certainly another routed network from there, so that does not really help without some work :-/
Any thoughts?
Thank you very much for your help!
And HE is *VERY* appreciated, I like using ist :-)
Cheers
#64
Questions & Answers / Any chance to use HE with DSLI...
Last post by holgermarzen - May 01, 2025, 02:42:51 AMAt the moment I can buy a temporary public ipv4 address and use my ipv6 tunnel without problems.
Since providers tend more and more to offer private ipv4 addresses I am afraid that I cannot get a public ipv4 address anymore when I get my FTTH connection and have to use a new contract.
Is there any chance getting my ipv6 /48 with DSLITE? Maybe by using ipv6 for the tunnel?
Since providers tend more and more to offer private ipv4 addresses I am afraid that I cannot get a public ipv4 address anymore when I get my FTTH connection and have to use a new contract.
Is there any chance getting my ipv6 /48 with DSLITE? Maybe by using ipv6 for the tunnel?
#65
General Questions & Suggestions / Re: how to add subdomain for a...
Last post by OoCookieNinja - April 10, 2025, 12:45:47 AMAny news on how to do it? having the same issue, i want to add DNS records for a subdomain that my dad gave me access to, he already has records iirc in the DNS server, not finding anything yet
#66
General Questions & Suggestions / badauth on every attempt to up...
Last post by numanoids - April 09, 2025, 09:30:22 AMI'm trying to set up caddy using the dns provider and getting badauth however when i try to manually update the same record using a curl, i'm also getting badauth. I've validated i'm using the correct ddns key but still getting badauth.
Can someone shed any light on why this might be the case?
Can someone shed any light on why this might be the case?
#67
General Questions & Suggestions / Re: ns1,ns2 and ns4 out of syn...
Last post by ethanquebec - March 26, 2025, 11:35:29 PMi have the same problem. i cant even request my dns records for my secondary slave dns server. i had to purge my bind config and also remove the config for txt at my internet registrar. very frustrated here :(. i might take a break a few days and try from the very start.
#68
Questions & Answers / Re: fra1 down?
Last post by jue - March 22, 2025, 06:08:05 AMI reached out to ipv6@he.net and my ISP (server4you).
It looks like packets are dropped within my ISPs infrastructure.
It looks like packets are dropped within my ISPs infrastructure.
#69
Questions & Answers / fra1 down?
Last post by jue - March 19, 2025, 11:01:27 AMMy tunnel to fra1 stopped working. (Tunnel ID: 381699)
I checked my configuration and it looks fine and hasn't been modified recently. I see packets outgoing to 216.66.80.30, but I'm not receiving any packets from that endpoint. Also using the IPv6 Portscan tool scanning my IPv6 endpoint doesn't show any packets coming from 216.66.80.30.
Is anyone else experiencing issues?
I checked my configuration and it looks fine and hasn't been modified recently. I see packets outgoing to 216.66.80.30, but I'm not receiving any packets from that endpoint. Also using the IPv6 Portscan tool scanning my IPv6 endpoint doesn't show any packets coming from 216.66.80.30.
Is anyone else experiencing issues?
#70
IPv6 on Windows / Re: What if I wanna delete the...
Last post by seeno - March 13, 2025, 02:42:58 PMThanks