SULDR Forums Supported Printers Printing Questions Scanning Questions General Questions Samsung Installer

Networking issues connecting to website & repository

Started by pink, May 27, 2013, 16:43:12

Previous topic - Next topic

pink

Hi,

apt-get times out connecting to www.bchemnet.com since at least yesterday. Nor can I open the website and "ping 173.236.28.2" is unhappy as well.
There seems to be at least one other guy having the same issue: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2148919

Could be related to your recent move - it is quite possible that I haven't run a manual 'apt-get update' in the past two weeks.

The problem seems to be specific to my connection, ISP, whatever - I can get to the website via my work's network just fine (that's how I'm able to post this...).
This could be some weird routing issue and I could file a ticket with my provider and hope that somebody bothers to dig into it...
Or I could go for the lower hanging fruit and ask, if you possibly have blocked some ips/netblocks on your server.
My IP is 77.58.171.212, my ISP is UPC Cablecom, Switzerland.

-Ben

bchemnet

It's not something I'm blocking.  However, your IP address (presumably within a larger block) shows up on the SBL Spamhaus block list (as well as a few others), so it is possible that either my provider or someone between you and my provider is blocking your address based on that list.

You can see the blocklists using this site: http://whatismyipaddress.com/

I will check with my new provider to see what lists they use to block, but the long-term fix is for you to contact your ISP to have them start the process of getting off the blacklists.

pink

Thanks for looking into that.
AFAICT all blocklist entries that show up on http://whatismyipaddress.com/blacklist-check are just for "this is a dynamic IP" lists. Specifically it doesn't show up (now) in Spamhaus SBL - only PBL. If PBL is actually used to block traffic on port 80, then that would be really bad...

-Ben

bchemnet

I have confirmed that there are no blocks by IP address or using any block lists by either my particular setup or my host provider.

ZgaR

Hi,

Since recently, when I perform an apt-get update I get


Err http://www.bchemnet.com debian/extra Translation-en_US
  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:
Err http://www.bchemnet.com debian/extra Translation-en
  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:
Err http://www.bchemnet.com debian/extra Sources
  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:
Err http://www.bchemnet.com debian/extra amd64 Packages
  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:
Err http://www.bchemnet.com debian/extra i386 Packages
  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:
Fetched 1,712 kB in 1min 3s (27.0 kB/s)
W: Failed to fetch http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/dists/debian/Release.gpg  Could not connect to www.bchemnet.com:80 (173.236.28.2). - connect (110: Connection timed out)

W: Failed to fetch http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/dists/debian/extra/i18n/Translation-en_US  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:

W: Failed to fetch http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/dists/debian/extra/i18n/Translation-en  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:

W: Failed to fetch http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/dists/debian/extra/source/Sources  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:

W: Failed to fetch http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/dists/debian/extra/binary-amd64/Packages  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:

W: Failed to fetch http://www.bchemnet.com/suldr/dists/debian/extra/binary-i386/Packages  Unable to connect to www.bchemnet.com:http:


Any idea where that could come from ? Should I update something on my end ?

bchemnet

I suspect I have tracked down why a few people are having connection issues since I switched hosts.  My IP address is listed on the APEWS blocklist, and a small number of ISPs use this list to block all traffic to those IP addresses.  A few also block only mail (I suspect a number of users are having this problem, but don't realize it).  Theoretically everyone on the APEWS blocklist is a spammer.  This blocklist is terrible, because it is far too broad and there is no mechanism to appeal.  APEWS lists all IP addresses ultimately associated with singlehop, which is a major server provider and reseller to smaller host providers.  My particular host provider does not host any spammers, but this overly broad block encompasses all sites associated with my provider because they happen to use servers that reside in the same building as someone else who may be spamming.  This is the only blocklist that is so all-encompassing and includes my IP address.

Please check with your ISP as to whether they use the APEWS blocklist, and encourage them to stop doing so if they are.  Because the timeout errors are not due to anything controllable at my end of the connection, there is nothing that I can do to resolve the issue (except for me to attempt yet another host shift, a fairly serious expense in terms of both money and time that I'm not particularly interested in).

ZgaR

You're probably right, I'm using a proxy on my browser and therefore can access your site, but if I disable it, I can't.

That's really problematic if whole IP blocks are blacklisted due to a few spammers...

ZgaR

So, knowing that, and while it's unlikely you get whitelisted quickly, here is how I got around it :

Note: I'm running ubuntu 12.10

I installed proxychains $ sudo apt-get install proxychains
then edit the configuration file to add my SOCKS proxy (SSH tunnel to one of my server)
$ sudo nano /etc/proxychains.conf
and add a the bottom : socks5 127.0.0.1 9999

Obviously, change the configuration to match your setup.

Then, instead of the usual sudo apt-get update/upgrade you need to run

$ sudo proxychains apt-get update
$ sudo proxychains apt-get upgrade


Hope this helps.

Some more info in case you're wondering :
my ISP is Free (french provider) and the server is hosted by OVH (Kimsufi).

reetp

I would suggest that this is definitely the problem :

Oooops 173.236.28.2 is currently listed in APEWS :-(
Entry matching your Query: E-505191
173.236.0.0/18CASE: C-17
Spambots, zombies, contaminated CIDR, bad reputation providerHistory:
Entry created 2012-01-09

It would therefore appear that my UK provider (but not my Spanish one) uses this list.

Unfortunately I very much doubt that my provider is going to remove the IP from their list.

I hate to say it, but it really is up to the web site owner to get it resolved, just the same as if you have a mail server that is blocked.

Proxy chains is OK, IF you have another server :-)

bchemnet

Quote from: reetp on June 04, 2013, 08:57:08
It would therefore appear that my UK provider (but not my Spanish one) uses this list.

Unfortunately I very much doubt that my provider is going to remove the IP from their list.

You should encourage your provide to stop using the APEWS list at all, as the majority of all IP addresses on the web have at one time or another appeared on the list.  This list has received considerable criticism from the community since shortly after it was first launched, see for example:
http://www.dnsbl.com/2007/08/apews-news-and-commentary-roundup.html
http://www.dnsbl.com/2007/08/what-to-do-if-you-are-listed-on-apews.html

(Although almost 6 years old, it appears that these are still the references that most administrators point to when having issues with the list.)

Quote from: reetp on June 04, 2013, 08:57:08
I hate to say it, but it really is up to the web site owner to get it resolved, just the same as if you have a mail server that is blocked.

Yes, but which website?  The list is blocking over 65,000 addresses with that single entry, affecting up to a million websites.  Which one is the problem?  The list doesn't say, and elsewhere explicitly states that they do not reply to inquiries.  How is it possible to resolve the issue with such a ridiculously broad block?

Moreover, why are ISPs blocking access to the website based on a blocklist related to spam?  Blocking email using this list would be one thing (although still a bad idea in my opinion), but the inability to access the site at all is absurd.  Very few ISPs appear to be using the list (I have not noticed a significant drop in total site visits or downloads since switching my host - and I have confirmed that my previous IP address was not on the list), so it is something that should be pointed out to those ISPs that do appear to be using it.

I have no doubt that someone in that block of IP addresses is a spammer, based on simple odds.  However, it is telling that no other blacklist includes my particular IP address, nor in fact any IP address in the same range that belongs to my hosting provider.  (As I indicated above, the block is actually applied to the entire server company that my provider is using.)

ZgaR

Your IP is also listed on MIPSpace.

I also found this : http://www.blacklistmaster.com/
Which give me this result.

Listings of 173.236.28.2

list.blogspambl.com Blog Spam Blacklist
opm.tornevall.org TornevallNET Proxy and Abuse-filtering Project
IP.v4BL.org         v4BL.org (D. D. N. S. B. L.)


But this are all SPAM list, there are no reason for your IP to be blacklisted like this based on SPAM list, they usually just bounce your mail, nothing more.

I've also tested several website hosted on the 173.236.0.0/18 range
virtual.webhostingworld.net ( 173.236.29.170 )
host.ocogroup.com ( 173.236.27.106 )

Which I can reach without problem (with and without my proxy)

It seems therefore that the problem is not with the APEWS list.

Moreover, it seems my ISP is not blocking your IP from sending mail to it's domain, why would it block everything else ? ( You can test for your self: http://postmaster.free.fr/ )

What I mean by everything else is :
From my server

$ nmap 173.236.28.2

Starting Nmap 6.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2013-06-05 12:50 CEST
Nmap scan report for server22.websitehostserver.net (173.236.28.2)
Host is up (0.10s latency).
Not shown: 978 filtered ports
PORT      STATE  SERVICE
20/tcp    closed ftp-data
21/tcp    open   ftp
22/tcp    open   ssh
25/tcp    open   smtp
26/tcp    open   rsftp
53/tcp    closed domain
80/tcp    open   http
110/tcp   open   pop3
143/tcp   open   imap
443/tcp   open   https
465/tcp   open   smtps
587/tcp   open   submission
993/tcp   open   imaps
995/tcp   open   pop3s
3306/tcp  open   mysql
5666/tcp  open   nrpe
8888/tcp  open   sun-answerbook
12000/tcp closed cce4x
12174/tcp closed unknown
30000/tcp closed unknown
30718/tcp closed unknown
30951/tcp closed unknown

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 4.76 seconds


From my computer added -Pn because it didn't answered to ping

$ nmap -Pn 173.236.28.2

Starting Nmap 6.00 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2013-06-05 12:44 CEST
Nmap scan report for server22.websitehostserver.net (173.236.28.2)
Host is up.
All 1000 scanned ports on server22.websitehostserver.net (173.236.28.2) are filtered

Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 201.46 seconds


I'm not sure about how to pursue this investigation, but AFAIC, the problem seems to be with your hosting provider, be it on it's end or in it's relation with ISP around the globe.

bchemnet

ISPs are free to do anything they choose with blocklists, and some do choose to use spam lists to block all connections.  I make no claim to understand why they would do so.  Similarly, if an ISP is filtering all ports to a particular IP address, there would be no reason for it to be listed in the postmaster system you linked to.  The real test for the mail is whether or not you receive new post notifications from this forum when subscribed to do so, and whether or not you can attempt to send to a random address @bchemnet.com (which should result in a failure notice due to invalid address).  That explicitly tests both directions of the connection, at least via that particular mechanism.

Your nmap scan is inconclusive.  If my provider were blocking your connections entirely, you would not receive open port notices.  Therefore, some sort of more specific filtering is going on, but nmap would be unable to resolve the source of that filter.  Both my provider and their server host maintain that they do absolutely no filtering of any kind based on IP and domains (I have exchanged several messages with them recently), and my particular server is also not configured to do so.

At this point, the only thing I can do is to suggest that those having trouble connecting bring it up to their providers, to at least find out if they claim to be doing any blocking.  I have already investigated the issue as far as I am able to at my end, and the conclusion is that there should not be any connection issues.  As I already stated, overall traffic to the site has not significantly changed since I moved providers, so this is affecting only a small number of people and I don't see any obvious pattern (admittedly, the sample size of known people affected is very small).  If connection issues persist, there are public proxies that can be used to work around the problem - which I concede is annoying, but also not my fault.

reetp

To follow up with this I decided to try and contact my UK ISP (BT) and have just had a long long chat with them.

They totally deny any sort of blocking even though it is common knowledge that they do (they were ordered by a judge to block certain file sharing sites for a start, not that I use them)

I fortunately have two lines in my office. It appears that I cannot connect by the main one which we use just for data, but I can via the other which I only usually use for VOIP.

My ISP is looking at the problem with my main IP and I have managed to set a static route to the updates via the VOIP line.

So what the particular problem is in my particular case I don't know, but they have passed it to their faults department where I daresay it will get lost......

Suffice to say I have managed to get the updates.

I do believe in general that it isn't per se a problem at the server/website end, and it is almost certainly with the ISPs, but if they are blocking sites using block lists then there is precious little a user can do.

I'll post back if I hear anything from my ISP.

B. Rgds
John

ZgaR

Quote from: bchemnet on June 05, 2013, 07:34:14
ISPs are free to do anything they choose with blocklists, and some do choose to use spam lists to block all connections.  I make no claim to understand why they would do so.  Similarly, if an ISP is filtering all ports to a particular IP address, there would be no reason for it to be listed in the postmaster system you linked to.  The real test for the mail is whether or not you receive new post notifications from this forum when subscribed to do so, and whether or not you can attempt to send to a random address @bchemnet.com (which should result in a failure notice due to invalid address).  That explicitly tests both directions of the connection, at least via that particular mechanism.

I receive email from the forum every time someone post in this thread, though, I'm not using my ISP mailbox, so that's not really relevant


<toto@bchemnet.com>: host bchemnet.com[173.236.28.2] said: 550 No Such User
    Here" (in reply to RCPT TO command)

This, on the other hand is the answer I get when I send a mail from my ISP mailbox to a random address of your domain, which shows that it goes through and back. (I get the same when I send a mail using gmail).
So I can send email to your domain through my ISP and I can receive them as well.

The link I gave you is for you to see that your IP is not in the list used by my ISP to filter out emails (which is the purpose of the APEWS list you claimed to be the source of the problem).

You insist on saying that the fault is not yours, and I'm not arguing with that, I'm not even arguing at all, just trying to find out where could that problem come from.

Quote from: bchemnet on June 05, 2013, 07:34:14
Your nmap scan is inconclusive.  If my provider were blocking your connections entirely, you would not receive open port notices.  Therefore, some sort of more specific filtering is going on, but nmap would be unable to resolve the source of that filter.  Both my provider and their server host maintain that they do absolutely no filtering of any kind based on IP and domains (I have exchanged several messages with them recently), and my particular server is also not configured to do so.

What the nmap shows is that there a no traffic whatsoever that can go from my particular IP to your particular IP. When I use another IP, it works (it's the expected result).

Quote from: bchemnet on June 05, 2013, 07:34:14
At this point, the only thing I can do is to suggest that those having trouble connecting bring it up to their providers, to at least find out if they claim to be doing any blocking.  I have already investigated the issue as far as I am able to at my end, and the conclusion is that there should not be any connection issues.  As I already stated, overall traffic to the site has not significantly changed since I moved providers, so this is affecting only a small number of people and I don't see any obvious pattern (admittedly, the sample size of known people affected is very small).  If connection issues persist, there are public proxies that can be used to work around the problem - which I concede is annoying, but also not my fault.

I have the same provider for my mobile phone, I can access your site just fine from my mobile phone.

I really doubt my ISP is filtering your IP but I'll have friends using the same ISP and other ISP do some test tonight to confirm. And if it shows the contrary I'll contact my ISP for information.

ZgaR

Quote from: ZgaR on June 05, 2013, 10:43:59
I really doubt my ISP is filtering your IP but I'll have friends using the same ISP and other ISP do some test tonight to confirm. And if it shows the contrary I'll contact my ISP for information.

A friend of mine that is using the same ISP as I do, leaving in the city next to mine, is able to access your server and make a full traceroute from his IP to yours.

We have almost the same the only difference is he has two more hops :

asw-ed120.ord03.singlehop.net [173.236.1.142]
server22.websitehostserver.net [173.236.28.2]


Mine stops here :
64.124.146.110.allocated.above.net (64.124.146.110)
But it's probably not the issue since my proxy server stops there two and I can reach your server from there.

Hopefully this give you some proof that it may come from something else than our ISPs.

bchemnet

Quote from: ZgaR on June 05, 2013, 12:46:07
Hopefully this give you some proof that it may come from something else than our ISPs.

Some.  (To be clear - since I have no problems connecting, all my above statements should be treated as hypotheses based on available information, and ones that I am unable to test myself.  I am glad that you have been able to test at least some aspects.)  Assuming for the moment that I can accept the statements I have received that no filtering or blocking is occuring at my end, the implication is still that somewhere along the route there is a problem.  While not necessarily directly the problem of the ISP, it is still something that only an ISP could resolve.  Of course an ISP does not pre-determine the route, but the route is a variable that they do have some control over and nobody else does.

If the information I have received is incorrect and there is filtering at my end, there is still nothing I can do without explicit evidence showing that.  Which no test has yet indicated, but is still theoretically possible.  If something clearly does emerge to indicate a problem with my provider, I will certainly take it to them.

If it really is just a route issue, then the issue may also resolve itself over time.

If I were in your position at this point, I would take the information you have shared to my ISP and point out that something odd is occuring on a server through which some of their traffic is passing, and they should investigate it.  (Not that I would necessarily expect that they would do so, based on past customer service experience.)  Particularly since AboveNet, now owned by Zayo, has a long history of blocking websites, and has been a user of many blacklists.  Again, just a hypothesis, but it does seem like a suspicious difference given the traceroute output.  It would be interesting, if rather non-trivial, to see if you could reach this site by routing around that server.  The data so far is consistent with (although not conclusive) the possibility that the AboveNet server is blocking your IP address, but not your friend's or proxy server's.  Do you know if any sites that you can reach have a route that passes through that server?

It might also be useful if other users who are having trouble (or trouble sometimes) could perform a traceroute (apt-get traceroute, traceroute -T 173.236.28.2) to see if there is a common point at which the packet stalls.

bchemnet

Another obvious and potentially useful traceroute comparison would be to the previous server, which is 206.188.192.118.

ZgaR

From my computer to the new server


$ sudo traceroute -T 173.236.28.2
traceroute to 173.236.28.2 (173.236.28.2), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  freebox-server.local (192.168.1.254)  4.400 ms  4.371 ms  4.366 ms
2  82.226.225.254 (82.226.225.254)  26.489 ms  26.517 ms *
3  * * *
4  * * *
5  * * *
6  * * *
7  * if-13-5.thar1.PVU-Paris.as6453.net (80.231.153.178)  27.585 ms  27.417 ms
8  ge-11-2-1.mpr1.cdg11.fr.above.net (64.125.14.57)  27.402 ms  30.060 ms  30.060 ms
9  xe-0-2-0.mpr1.fra3.de.above.net (64.125.24.89)  41.694 ms  41.701 ms  41.698 ms
10  ge-2-0-0.mpr2.ams5.nl.above.net (64.125.27.1)  50.049 ms  50.054 ms  50.051 ms
11  so-2-1-0.mpr2.lga5.us.above.net (64.125.31.182)  150.694 ms  150.705 ms  150.695 ms
12  xe-2-3-0.cr2.ord2.us.above.net (64.125.24.30)  158.476 ms  158.475 ms  143.606 ms
13  xe-0-0-0.cr1.ord2.us.above.net (64.125.28.233)  181.595 ms  177.116 ms  177.066 ms
14  xe-3-1-0.mpr1.ord6.us.above.net (64.125.24.229)  154.286 ms  148.820 ms  149.148 ms
15  64.124.146.114.allocated.above.net (64.124.146.114)  148.685 ms  153.195 ms  156.250 ms
16  asw-ed120.ord03.singlehop.net (173.236.1.146)  169.213 ms  151.265 ms  153.533 ms
17  * * *
18  * * *
19  * * *
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *


To the old one

$ sudo traceroute -T 206.188.192.118
traceroute to 206.188.192.118 (206.188.192.118), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  freebox-server.local (192.168.1.254)  3.645 ms  3.626 ms  3.624 ms
2  82.226.225.254 (82.226.225.254)  26.683 ms  26.697 ms *
3  * * *
4  * * *
5  * * *
6  * * *
7  * if-12-2.tcore1.PYE-Paris.as6453.net (80.231.154.69)  105.553 ms if-2-2.tcore1.PYE-Paris.as6453.net (80.231.154.18)  108.886 ms
8  if-3-6.tcore1.L78-London.as6453.net (80.231.130.85)  108.838 ms if-5-2.tcore1.L78-London.as6453.net (80.231.130.1)  105.358 ms  108.829 ms
9  if-4-2.tcore1.NJY-Newark.as6453.net (80.231.130.34)  110.387 ms  113.944 ms if-7-2.tcore1.NJY-Newark.as6453.net (66.198.70.25)  113.973 ms
10  if-2-2.tcore2.NJY-Newark.as6453.net (66.198.70.2)  113.950 ms  131.660 ms  113.945 ms
11  if-14-14.tcore2.NTO-NewYork.as6453.net (66.198.111.126)  113.890 ms  113.887 ms  113.910 ms
12  63.243.128.69 (63.243.128.69)  118.064 ms  118.068 ms *
13  63.243.128.54 (63.243.128.54)  107.670 ms * *
14  * * *
15  * * *
16  * * *
17  * * *
18  edg-r-01-vlan10.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.2)  113.870 ms edg-r-01-vlan11.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.10)  113.870 ms edg-r-01-vlan10.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.2)  113.845 ms
19  * * *
20  205.178.182.40 (205.178.182.40)  117.592 ms  117.589 ms  117.550 ms
21  vux.netsolhost.com (206.188.192.118)  122.943 ms  122.990 ms  119.915 ms


From the proxy server to the new server

$ sudo traceroute -T 173.236.28.2
traceroute to 173.236.28.2 (173.236.28.2), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  vss-5b-6k.fr.eu (176.31.240.252)  1.506 ms * *
2  rbx-g1-a9.fr.eu (178.33.100.29)  1.167 ms  1.179 ms  1.451 ms
3  * * ldn-1-6.uk.eu (91.121.215.140)  4.173 ms
4  * * *
5  ge-2-1-0.mpr1.lhr2.uk.above.net (195.66.224.76)  9.736 ms  9.750 ms  9.980 ms
6  xe-0-1-1.mpr2.lhr2.uk.above.net (64.125.21.33)  4.439 ms  4.600 ms  4.596 ms
7  ge-3-3-0.mpr1.la5.us.above.net (64.125.26.37)  72.957 ms  72.959 ms  72.924 ms
8  xe-3-2-0.cr1.ord2.us.above.net (64.125.24.34)  96.652 ms  96.675 ms  96.646 ms
9  xe-5-1-0.mpr1.ord6.us.above.net (64.125.24.233)  107.393 ms  107.394 ms  107.200 ms
10  64.124.146.114.allocated.above.net (64.124.146.114)  98.683 ms  98.626 ms  98.589 ms
11  asw-ed120.ord03.singlehop.net (173.236.1.146)  101.919 ms  102.816 ms  103.097 ms
12  server22.websitehostserver.net (173.236.28.2)  98.918 ms  101.855 ms  101.871 ms


To the old one

$ sudo traceroute -T 206.188.192.118
traceroute to 206.188.192.118 (206.188.192.118), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  vss-5b-6k.fr.eu (176.31.240.252)  2.477 ms * *
2  rbx-g1-a9.fr.eu (178.33.100.29)  1.168 ms  1.450 ms  1.449 ms
3  ldn-1-6.uk.eu (91.121.215.144)  33.066 ms * ldn-1-6.uk.eu (91.121.215.142)  33.069 ms
4  * * *
5  ae3-20G.scr3.LON3.gblx.net (67.17.73.94)  4.172 ms  4.179 ms  4.177 ms
6  lag1.ar9.LON3.gblx.net (67.17.72.21)  14.990 ms  14.118 ms  4.245 ms
7  4.68.110.157 (4.68.110.157)  4.250 ms  4.270 ms  4.086 ms
8  vl-3501-ve-115.csw1.London1.Level3.net (4.69.166.129)  4.311 ms vl-3604-ve-228.csw2.London1.Level3.net (4.69.166.157)  4.293 ms vl-3502-ve-116.csw1.London1.Level3.net (4.69.166.133)  4.267 ms
9  ae-22-52.car2.London1.Level3.net (4.69.139.99)  8.143 ms  5.575 ms ae-12-51.car2.London1.Level3.net (4.69.139.67)  5.556 ms
10  * * *
11  cr1-te-0-0-5-0.uk1.savvis.net (204.70.206.61)  16.111 ms  16.101 ms  12.609 ms
12  cr1-tengig-0-15-0-0.Washington.savvis.net (204.70.196.101)  81.449 ms  81.206 ms  80.603 ms
13  * * *
14  64.58.94.114 (64.58.94.114)  84.281 ms  87.837 ms  87.831 ms
15  edg-r-01-vlan11.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.10)  84.267 ms edg-r-01-vlan10.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.2)  80.359 ms  80.337 ms
16  * * *
17  205.178.182.40 (205.178.182.40)  81.354 ms  81.257 ms  81.611 ms
18  vux.netsolhost.com (206.188.192.118)  84.939 ms  84.766 ms  84.806 ms


Interestingly, the use of -T allow to get one hop further from my IP.

berduchwal

ISP: Virgin Media
Country: UK


marcin@OptiPlex-745-Dell:~$ sudo traceroute -T 173.236.28.2
traceroute to 173.236.28.2 (173.236.28.2), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  * * *
winn-core-2a-ae7-1197.network.virginmedia.net (62.253.123.97)  13.176 ms  13.207 ms  13.235 ms
brnt-bb-1c-ae2-0.network.virginmedia.net (62.253.96.169)  14.649 ms  14.740 ms  14.674 ms
brhm-bb-1c-ae8-0.network.virginmedia.net (62.253.174.126)  17.161 ms  17.196 ms  17.087 ms
0.ae1.mpr1.lhr1.uk.above.net (213.161.65.149)  22.038 ms  21.976 ms  27.369 ms
xe-0-2-1.mpr2.lhr2.uk.above.net (64.125.21.37)  27.951 ms  19.997 ms  19.889 ms
ge-3-3-0.mpr1.la5.us.above.net (64.125.26.37)  94.487 ms  93.061 ms  92.968 ms
xe-4-1-0.cr1.ord2.us.above.net (64.125.31.237)  142.142 ms  139.788 ms  139.821 ms
xe-5-1-0.mpr1.ord6.us.above.net (64.125.24.233)  116.573 ms  116.495 ms  116.499 ms
10  64.124.146.110.allocated.above.net (64.124.146.110)  110.117 ms  109.463 ms  108.328 ms
11  asw-ed120.ord03.singlehop.net (173.236.1.142)  116.621 ms  116.641 ms  118.267 ms
12  * * *
13  * * *
14  * * *
15  * * *
16  * * *
17  * * *
18  * * *
19  * * *
20  * * *
21  * * *
22  * * *
23  * * *
24  * * *
25  * * *
26  * * *
27  * * *
28  * * *
29  * * *
30  * * *




marcin@OptiPlex-745-Dell:~$ sudo traceroute -T 206.188.192.118
traceroute to 206.188.192.118 (206.188.192.118), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  * * *
winn-core-2a-ae7-1051.network.virginmedia.net (62.253.121.245)  11.705 ms  11.736 ms  11.764 ms
brnt-bb-1c-ae2-0.network.virginmedia.net (62.253.96.169)  13.242 ms  13.273 ms  13.304 ms
so-10-3-0-xcr1.lnd.cw.net (195.2.9.149)  13.334 ms  13.408 ms  13.344 ms
ae15-xcr1.lns.cw.net (195.2.30.114)  16.118 ms  13.411 ms  17.452 ms
ae0-xcr1.lnt.cw.net (195.2.30.6)  17.350 ms  10.380 ms  12.757 ms
7  * * *
8  204.70.206.65 (204.70.206.65)  60.237 ms  60.282 ms  60.201 ms
cr1-te-0-13-3-0.dck.savvis.net (204.70.192.1)  91.141 ms  91.104 ms  88.230 ms
10  * * *
11  64.58.94.114 (64.58.94.114)  261.351 ms  212.344 ms  212.338 ms
12  edg-r-01-vlan11.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.10)  93.794 ms edg-r-01-vlan10.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.2)  87.785 ms edg-r-01-vlan11.net.dc2.netsol.com (205.178.191.10)  92.803 ms
13  * * *
14  205.178.182.40 (205.178.182.40)  90.817 ms  88.568 ms  92.598 ms
15  vux.netsolhost.com (206.188.192.118)  91.956 ms  89.530 ms  89.705 ms

ZgaR

Seems fixed for me. I don't need to proxy my requests anymore.

$ sudo traceroute -T 173.236.28.2
traceroute to 173.236.28.2 (173.236.28.2), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1  freebox-server.local (192.168.1.254)  4.302 ms  4.278 ms  4.265 ms
2  82.226.225.254 (82.226.225.254)  28.451 ms  28.459 ms *
3  * * *
4  * * *
5  * * *
6  * * *
7  * if-13-5.thar1.PVU-Paris.as6453.net (80.231.153.178)  32.072 ms  27.615 ms
8  ge-11-2-1.mpr1.cdg11.fr.above.net (64.125.14.57)  110.592 ms  110.615 ms  110.618 ms
9  xe-0-2-0.mpr1.fra3.de.above.net (64.125.24.89)  39.989 ms  40.016 ms  42.388 ms
10  ge-2-0-0.mpr2.ams5.nl.above.net (64.125.27.1)  49.726 ms  53.624 ms  53.642 ms
11  so-2-1-0.mpr2.lga5.us.above.net (64.125.31.182)  139.314 ms  139.324 ms  139.324 ms
12  xe-0-0-0.cr1.lga5.us.above.net (64.125.29.41)  137.046 ms  142.814 ms  129.039 ms
13  xe-3-2-0.cr1.ord2.us.above.net (64.125.24.34)  135.745 ms  135.715 ms  135.697 ms
14  xe-0-1-0.mpr1.ord6.us.above.net (64.125.22.125)  151.321 ms  151.288 ms  151.257 ms
15  64.124.146.114.allocated.above.net (64.124.146.114)  151.175 ms  145.044 ms  148.478 ms
16  asw-ed120.ord03.singlehop.net (173.236.1.146)  151.470 ms  151.430 ms  148.351 ms
17  server22.websitehostserver.net (173.236.28.2)  145.249 ms  148.081 ms  148.071 ms

bchemnet

Looks like something in the route to me, not sure what.  Hopefully it will continue to clear up for everyone, but feel free to post again if problems persist.

Repository Information Legal Contact Alternative Drivers