Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Poll: ping to a VPS does not equal a looking glass.
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Poll: ping to a VPS does not equal a looking glass.

NoctNoct Member
edited January 15 in Help

After emerging from quite a bizarre thread, I'd like to see opinions on this.

Does anyone here find it odd that a VPS provider claimed my enquiry for a looking glass was superfluous since (a) they already provided an IP address in their post which I could ping, (b) they only have one location, and (c) they didn't want to make the effort to supply a looking glass since I could instead go to the effort of signing up for something in the absence of this, to me, most important information on the VPS and then get a refund if it turns out it doesn't meet my needs?

Seriously
  1. Ping to a VPS does not equal a looking glass.95 votes
    1. Ping most certainly does not equal a looking glass.
      73.68%
    2. Ping is equivalent to looking glass.
      26.32%

Comments

  • suyadi92suyadi92 Member
    edited January 15

    Where is the poll?

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • NoctNoct Member

    @suyadi92 said:
    Where is the poll?

    Back now.

  • I mean it's also possible your performance doesn't match that of the looking glass anyway

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • donlidonli Member
    edited January 15

    Ping to your actual VPS is the important info not ping to a looking glass.
    Ping to the looking glass is to give you a general idea as to how good their Internet connection is latency-wise.
    If the provider only has one physical computer their looking-glass could be an IP address on the actual computer your VPS might be on and good give you some very relevant information. If a provider has hundreds of physical computers the looking glass IP could even be on a computer in a different physical rack or even different local network in the data center your VPS would be. Take a looking glass ping as a bad=avoid, good=go on to next step indicator.

    Thanked by 4vicaya ralf Noct anakara
  • I see it as max performance

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • NoctNoct Member

    @hostnoob said:
    I mean it's also possible your performance doesn't match that of the looking glass anyway

    Possible. In this special case of one location, not terribly likely. Better than nothing, though.

  • If a looking glass was the same as a ping, it would be called a ping.

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • I think you wanted to say traceroute from your IP to ISP IP.is not the same as a looking glass (that is tha traceroute from ISP IP to you or any other IP you want to check)

  • If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

  • NoctNoct Member

    @donli said:
    Ping to your actual VPS is the important info not ping to a looking glass.
    Ping to the looking glass is to give you a general idea as to how good their Internet connection is latency-wise.
    If the provider only has one physical computer their looking-glass could be an IP address on the actual computer your VPS might be on and good give you some very relevant information. If a provider has hundreds of physical computers the looking glass IP could even be on a computer in a different physical rack or even different local network in the data center your VPS would be. Take a looking glass ping as a bad=avoid, good=go on to next step indicator.

    Your point is totally valid. On top of that, for my purposes, what is even more important than ping to the actual VPS is ping from the actual VPS to particular third partys. Without a world-leading figure there, I have nearly no use for it.

    Having the looking glass is at least an approximate estimate and far better than taking the gamble.

    Thanked by 3sh97 arnoldz yoursunny
  • @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    looking glass is good and all, just not make sure the provider didn't put it behind cloudflare like ihos tart

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • MannDudeMannDude Patron Provider, Veteran

    @ScreenReader said:

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    looking glass is good and all, just not make sure the provider didn't put it behind cloudflare like ihos tart

    Ping the IPs, not the hostname.

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • @MannDude said:

    @ScreenReader said:

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    looking glass is good and all, just not make sure the provider didn't put it behind cloudflare like ihos tart

    Ping the IPs, not the hostname.

    It caches speed test files though.

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • gksgks Member

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    This seems enlightenment, but is this true and proven?

    Yeah, looking glass provide option for knowing network speed, a possible disk io over network compared to ping, that only network route. Also ping may get faster response but if the network was limited, it take long time to download, same time ping may be longer but network allow higher volume transfer, download large content fast.

    Thanked by 1Noct
  • jsgjsg Member, Resident Benchmarker
    edited January 17

    For a start the poll is nonsensical because ping usually is just a part of what a looking glass can do.

    At the same time a looking glass typically uses an optimized system and typically is part of marketing and/or sales that is, it rarely shows what you can expect on your dedi or VM.
    That's why, if at all, I use a LG only for a "first rough idea", for a crude ballpark number.

    Side note: quite similar (and often even worse) with Iperf and the like. Usually what you get there is, frankly, worthless BS, financed from the advertisement budget I guess and of bloody course showing a picture that IMO is only very very loosely related to reality.

    Thanked by 1zed
  • zedzed Member

    @jsg said: That's why, if at all, I use a LG only for a "first rough idea", for a crude ballpark number.

    How I look it as well.

    @fluffernutter said: If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    And I agree, it's just one more thing that weighs my opinion of provider (like idiotic ip6 assignments, outdated os templates etc).

    Thanked by 3jsg yoursunny arnoldz
  • NoctNoct Member

    @eb1995 said:
    I see it as max performance

    I partially agree, but you're only partially addressing the question here.

  • NoctNoct Member

    @wadhah said:
    If a looking glass was the same as a ping, it would be called a ping.

    Precisely! Well put.

  • NoctNoct Member
    edited January 19

    @SirNeo said:
    I think you wanted to say traceroute from your IP to ISP IP.is not the same as a looking glass (that is tha traceroute from ISP IP to you or any other IP you want to check)

    I think you've misread. I also think you shouldn't attempt to think you know more about what I think when I've stated what I think quite clearly.

  • NoctNoct Member

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    Exactly! In fact, I said what effectively amounts to the same thing to the VPS provider in response.

    By the way, hilarious username and picture combination. :D

    Thanked by 1fluffernutter
  • NoctNoct Member
    edited January 19

    @ScreenReader said:

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    looking glass is good and all, just not make sure the provider didn't put it behind cloudflare like ihos tart

    I did not realize this, so thanks for that.

    @MannDude said:

    @ScreenReader said:

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    looking glass is good and all, just not make sure the provider didn't put it behind cloudflare like ihos tart

    Ping the IPs, not the hostname.

    Again, I did not know this, so thanks for that excellent workaround!

    @fluffernutter said:

    @MannDude said:

    @ScreenReader said:

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    looking glass is good and all, just not make sure the provider didn't put it behind cloudflare like ihos tart

    Ping the IPs, not the hostname.

    It caches speed test files though.

    Will bear that in mind, too.

  • NoctNoct Member

    @gks said:

    @fluffernutter said:
    If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    This seems enlightenment, but is this true and proven?

    Yeah, looking glass provide option for knowing network speed, a possible disk io over network compared to ping, that only network route. Also ping may get faster response but if the network was limited, it take long time to download, same time ping may be longer but network allow higher volume transfer, download large content fast.

    Your point, tangentially related to the poll in question, supports @fluffernutter's point.

  • NoctNoct Member

    @jsg said:
    For a start the poll is nonsensical because ping usually is just a part of what a looking glass can do.

    At the same time a looking glass typically uses an optimized system and typically is part of marketing and/or sales that is, it rarely shows what you can expect on your dedi or VM.
    That's why, if at all, I use a LG only for a "first rough idea", for a crude ballpark number.

    Side note: quite similar (and often even worse) with Iperf and the like. Usually what you get there is, frankly, worthless BS, financed from the advertisement budget I guess and of bloody course showing a picture that IMO is only very very loosely related to reality.

    For a finish, your reply is nonsensical because, if you read and understood the poll and other participants' responses, you would likely not have made it (your sidenote excepted).

  • NoctNoct Member

    @zed said:

    @jsg said: That's why, if at all, I use a LG only for a "first rough idea", for a crude ballpark number.

    How I look it as well.

    @fluffernutter said: If a provider doesn't want to go through the effort of making a looking glass, imagine all the other things they didn't want to put the effort into.

    And I agree, it's just one more thing that weighs my opinion of provider (like idiotic ip6 assignments, outdated os templates etc).

    Myself and many of the other poll participants use it as a rough estimate and one of many factors to evaluate a provider, too.

Sign In or Register to comment.