Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Categories

In this Discussion

› › ColoCrossing's Buffalo, NY network is slowing down? Too many Spammers?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

ColoCrossing's Buffalo, NY network is slowing down? Too many Spammers?

XFS_DukeXFS_Duke Member
in General

I don't have anything with them in Buffalo, NY anymore, but I've been asked multiple times about the network in that location. I know a few people that have gotten servers lately from CC that has slow connections. Supposed to be 1gbps connections but are lucky to get 400mbps connection speeds. I'm not dissing ColoCrossing, just wondering if anyone else has been having these issues with their Buffalo, NY location. The server I do have with ColoCrossing in Dallas, TX is great, no issues.. So that's why I'm wondering...

Anyone got anything?

«13

Comments

  • TACServersTACServers Member

    @XFS_Duke - http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/

  • J1021J1021 Member
    edited February 2015

    Could be all the DDoS traffic they're attracting after deploying RioRey?

    Anyway, ColoCrossing are known to display a disregard for their network in many ways, so why anyone is still hosting with them is beyond me.

  • alexvolkalexvolk Member

    @kcaj said:
    Could be all the DDoS traffic they're attracting after deploying RioRey?

    Anyway, ColoCrossing are known to display a disregard for their network in many ways, so why anyone is still hosting with them is beyond me.

    Cheap servers and free zillions of ip

  • J1021J1021 Member

    alexvolk said: Cheap servers and free zillions of ip

    38% of their allocated IPs are in use. Multiple /19s completely untouched.

  • Caveman122Caveman122 Member

    From their looking glass:

    200Kbps from ramnode NY and 100Kbps down from BHS 1Gbps connection.

  • VikingLayerVikingLayer Member
    edited February 2015

    @cncking2000 said:
    XFS_Duke - http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/

    Well, that wasn't impressing, 50 KB/s from Sweden (http://puu.sh/fFhmP/43f5d58309.png) on a 500 Mbit/s conenction (http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4127751267)

  • XFS_DukeXFS_Duke Member
    edited February 2015

    Yea, some speed test issues on a clients server in Buffalo as well:

    CPU model : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C2758 @ 2.41GHz

    Number of cores : 8

    CPU frequency : 1162.000 MHz

    Total amount of ram : 15906 MB

    Total amount of swap : 0 MB

    System uptime : 6 days, 5:44,

    Download speed from CacheFly: 65.5MB/s

    Download speed from Coloat, Atlanta GA: 5.00MB/s

    The tests from that point don't complete and just timeout. Eh... Such is life I guess.

  • catalystiumcatalystium Member

    Dem routes doe

  • TrafficTraffic Member

    @VikingLayer said:
    Well, that wasn't impressing, 50 KB/s from Sweden (http://puu.sh/fFhmP/43f5d58309.png) on a 500 Mbit/s conenction (http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4127751267)

    My screenshot would be very similar a few minutes ago. It seems I can get a bit better speed now, but trying from my VPSs their network is really bad.

  • TACServersTACServers Member 
     0% [   Seattle                                                   ] 3,672,822    111K/s 
 0% [   NL                                                         ] 3,877,486    129K/s 
36% [  Atlanta                                                  ] 361,636,040 5.99M/s    
 0% [   Denver                                                  ] 1,294,254    146K/s
  • agoldenbergagoldenberg Member, Host Rep

    Exactly why I don't use colocrossing buffalo. Way too slow. Then when you ticket support they want an MTR and want you to teat for them..... Can they not run these tests on their own?

    Really frustrating. Their Chicago and NJ locations are pretty damn good though.

  • catalystiumcatalystium Member

    Here's a crazy route for you, NC to BUFF:

    Tracing route to lg.buf.colocrossing.com [172.245.211.61]

  3    23 ms    23 ms    12 ms  dtr01hckrnc-tge-0-2-0-0.hckr.nc.charter.com [96.34.66.193]
  4    41 ms    11 ms    34 ms  crr01hckrnc-bue-20.hckr.nc.charter.com [96.34.64.46]
  5    41 ms    12 ms    11 ms  crr02hckrnc-bue-11.hckr.nc.charter.com [96.34.64.41]
  6    21 ms    15 ms    31 ms  crr12spbgsc-bue-10.spbg.sc.charter.com [96.34.64.49]
  7    16 ms    22 ms    30 ms  bbr01spbgsc-bue-4.spbg.sc.charter.com [96.34.2.50]
  8    27 ms    24 ms    29 ms  bbr02atlnga-bue-4.atln.ga.charter.com [96.34.0.40]
  9    36 ms    39 ms    23 ms  bbr01atlnga-tge-0-0-0-2.atln.ga.charter.com [96.34.0.38]
 10    43 ms    47 ms    55 ms  bbr01blvlil-bue-5.blvl.il.charter.com [96.34.0.37]
 11    47 ms    46 ms    79 ms  bbr01olvemo-bue-3.olve.mo.charter.com [96.34.0.14]
 12    48 ms    72 ms    47 ms  bbr02chcgil-bue-2.chcg.il.charter.com [96.34.0.12]
 13    43 ms    48 ms    56 ms  prr01chcgil-bue-4.chcg.il.charter.com [96.34.3.1]
 14    59 ms    74 ms    65 ms  r1.chi1.us.as5580.net [78.152.63.161]
 15    63 ms    63 ms    78 ms  eth4-5.edge1.nyc4.us.as5580.net [78.152.34.130]
 16    62 ms    92 ms    72 ms  78.152.45.145
 17   102 ms    93 ms    96 ms  78.152.60.49
 18   122 ms   125 ms   145 ms  10ge-1-1-0.01-01.er2.buf1.colocrossing.com [192.3.154.102]
 19   124 ms   101 ms   100 ms  10ge-2.03-c66.aggr1.buf1.colocrossing.com [172.245.13.226]
 20     *        *        *     Request timed out.

    Typical 'New York' for me is low 40's.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator

    @catalystium said:
    Here's a crazy route for you, NC to BUFF:

    > Tracing route to lg.buf.colocrossing.com [172.245.211.61]
> 
>   3    23 ms    23 ms    12 ms  dtr01hckrnc-tge-0-2-0-0.hckr.nc.charter.com [96.34.66.193]
>   4    41 ms    11 ms    34 ms  crr01hckrnc-bue-20.hckr.nc.charter.com [96.34.64.46]
>   5    41 ms    12 ms    11 ms  crr02hckrnc-bue-11.hckr.nc.charter.com [96.34.64.41]
>   6    21 ms    15 ms    31 ms  crr12spbgsc-bue-10.spbg.sc.charter.com [96.34.64.49]
>   7    16 ms    22 ms    30 ms  bbr01spbgsc-bue-4.spbg.sc.charter.com [96.34.2.50]
>   8    27 ms    24 ms    29 ms  bbr02atlnga-bue-4.atln.ga.charter.com [96.34.0.40]
>   9    36 ms    39 ms    23 ms  bbr01atlnga-tge-0-0-0-2.atln.ga.charter.com [96.34.0.38]
>  10    43 ms    47 ms    55 ms  bbr01blvlil-bue-5.blvl.il.charter.com [96.34.0.37]
>  11    47 ms    46 ms    79 ms  bbr01olvemo-bue-3.olve.mo.charter.com [96.34.0.14]
>  12    48 ms    72 ms    47 ms  bbr02chcgil-bue-2.chcg.il.charter.com [96.34.0.12]
>  13    43 ms    48 ms    56 ms  prr01chcgil-bue-4.chcg.il.charter.com [96.34.3.1]
>  14    59 ms    74 ms    65 ms  r1.chi1.us.as5580.net [78.152.63.161]
>  15    63 ms    63 ms    78 ms  eth4-5.edge1.nyc4.us.as5580.net [78.152.34.130]
>  16    62 ms    92 ms    72 ms  78.152.45.145
>  17   102 ms    93 ms    96 ms  78.152.60.49
>  18   122 ms   125 ms   145 ms  10ge-1-1-0.01-01.er2.buf1.colocrossing.com [192.3.154.102]
>  19   124 ms   101 ms   100 ms  10ge-2.03-c66.aggr1.buf1.colocrossing.com [172.245.13.226]
>  20     *        *        *     Request timed out.
>

    Typical 'New York' for me is low 40's.

    We will take a look at this route for you though that looks like strange routing inside your isps network.

    That said we can optimize it so it doesn't go back to NYC and instead goes Chicago, Toronto, Buffalo.

    We're not aware of any network wide issue with slow speeds at this time.

  • MunMun Member 
     2. 208.110.88.125                    0.0%    16    0.3   0.3   0.2   0.7   0.1
 3. lag-2.edge-a.oak1.mci.us.wholesa  0.0%    16    6.0   3.0   0.4  11.5   3.8
 4. te0-7-0-23.ccr22.mci01.atlas.cog  0.0%    16    0.8   0.9   0.7   2.1   0.4
 5. be2157.ccr42.ord01.atlas.cogentc  0.0%    16   13.2  13.1  12.9  14.1   0.4
 6. be2003.ccr21.ord03.atlas.cogentc  0.0%    16   13.3  13.4  13.1  14.6   0.5
 7. 38.122.180.238                    0.0%    16   31.9  26.1  12.2  44.8  10.6
 8. eth4-5.edge1.nyc4.us.as5580.net   0.0%    16   30.4  32.5  28.8  41.3   4.3
 9. 78.152.45.145                     0.0%    16   28.9  30.6  28.8  37.6   2.7
10. 78.152.60.49                      0.0%    16   41.6  43.5  41.5  71.3   7.4
11. 10ge-1-2-0.01-01.er2.buf1.colocr  6.2%    16   69.1  54.0  40.6  69.3  14.7
12. 10ge-2.03-c65.aggr2.buf1.colocro  0.0%    16   64.3  66.9  64.3  73.8   2.3
13. 10.8.27.102                      12.5%    16   68.6  68.8  68.0  73.8   1.5
14. lg.buf.colocrossing.com          33.3%    15   65.7  65.0  64.5  65.7   0.3

    Da fuk?

  • MunMun Member 
     2. te1-1.core2.las1.fiberhub.net     0.0%    16   10.2   2.3   0.2  10.2   3.3
 3. 204.77.7.70                       0.0%    16    8.8   8.2   8.0  10.2   0.6
 4. 78.152.61.105                     0.0%    16    8.0  12.0   8.0  25.2   6.4
 5. eth1-3.r1.sjo2.us.as5580.net      6.2%    16   32.5  26.2  21.0  32.5   4.2
 6. eth3-5.r1.den1.us.as5580.net      0.0%    16   59.6  62.2  59.0  69.9   3.8
 7. eth1-2.edge1.kci1.us.as5580.net   0.0%    16   59.1  59.2  59.0  60.6   0.4
 8. eth2-8.r2.chi1.us.as5580.net      0.0%    16   72.7  75.9  72.7  84.1   4.2
 9. eth1-3.r1.chi1.us.as5580.net      0.0%    16   77.4  81.2  72.7  92.2   6.9
10. eth4-5.edge1.nyc4.us.as5580.net   0.0%    16   93.1  93.6  89.3 102.0   4.6
11. 78.152.45.145                     0.0%    16   89.4  91.0  89.4 102.1   3.7
12. 78.152.57.87                      0.0%    16   97.3  98.7  97.2 120.0   5.7
13. 10ge-1-2-0.01-01.er2.buf1.colocr  0.0%    16   99.6  99.3  97.6  99.7   0.7
14. 10ge-1.03-c66.aggr1.buf1.colocro  6.2%    16  125.2 125.5 125.1 126.2   0.3
15. 10.8.27.82                        0.0%    16   99.4  99.6  99.3 102.0   0.7
16. lg.buf.colocrossing.com           0.0%    16   99.3  99.3  99.2  99.8   0.2
  • catalystiumcatalystium Member

    @jbiloh said:

    Suppose so but those routes though, I can show you what a NY and NJ route looks like if you're interested.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator

    Please email me your ip so I can look at your return route. My email is [email protected]

  • agoldenbergagoldenberg Member, Host Rep

    @Jack they can run the freevps.us benchmark without my intervention was what I was eluding to. They definitely can not to MTRs on their own I get that. The issue is almost every one of the download tests on that benchmark script have abysmal results.

  • Nick_ANick_A Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    @jbiloh - From Linode ATL - http://pastie.org/pastes/9912712/text?key=qctcdct3s6jm1xmdldxw . Download is ~200KB/s.

    For comparison, to us in ATL is about 700K/s. Route goes NTT > Hibernia through Ashburn and NYC.

    Caveman122 said: 200Kbps from ramnode NY

    Hmm, I'm seeing between 1.5M and 15M/s right now, averaging 6M/s. 14ms latency.

  • GStanleyGStanley Member

    It's all the kids on HackForums reselling Hudson Valley Servers due to their ability to spoof. If you want to see 50% of the traffic on your network free up @jbiloh, implement BCP38.

    Your network is not only becoming a spam-haven, but due to the script kids who know HVH / GVH are ripe for cheap 1Gbps servers that spoof, you're powering most of the stressers on the internet.

    Incase one doesn't believe:

    So, your Atrato and XO lines are being utilzied by the s-kids of the internet. Get BCP38 to stop dat spoofing, if you care.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • GStanleyGStanley Member
    edited February 2015

    Doubt this guy is helping either... CC, GVH and HVH seem to be the flavor of the month there, even for people who sell rooted servers, just an actual heads up why your tiny XO and Atrato commits are eaten up :

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator

    We'll investigate that. About a year ago we implemented a system that monitors flow data and null routes servers performing such activity. We'll check to see if the system needs to be tweaked further.

    I do not have an account on HF but I will contact the administrators for more information.

    Thanked by 1GStanley
  • GStanleyGStanley Member

    jbiloh said: I do not have an account on HF but I will contact the administrators for more information.

    I only joined when I heard someone was reselling your servers as they had 'spoofing enabled'

    I found around 3-4 different sellers (it is easy to tell because C2758 lineups) as well as many simply selling your rooted servers.

    Netflow technology is your friend. To get you started, NfSen

    Not CC hating, just simply the truth of kids mucking up your network.

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator

    Yes flow data is amazing, really a very powerful tool. We've been using it for a few years network wide.

  • doughmanesdoughmanes Member

    alexvolk said: Cheap servers and free zillions of ip

    Don't try to email from these servers... I've got a box with a company who uses ColoCrossing and I'm cancelling due unable to send mail since basically their IPs are SBL'd

  • samblingsambling Member

    doughmanes said: Don't try to email from these servers... I've got a box with a company who uses ColoCrossing and I'm cancelling due unable to send mail since basically their IPs are SBL'd

    You should be able to request clean ips....

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator

    Anyone who was having some slowness today please re-test and let me know how it looks now.

  • doughmanesdoughmanes Member

    sambling said: You should be able to request clean ips....

    http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL221319

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator

    Put in a ticket we'll give you different ips. Sorry for the hassle.

  • ATHKATHK Member 
    [email protected]~# wget http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/100MB.test            
--2015-02-09 02:28:06--  http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/100MB.test           
Resolving lg.buf.colocrossing.com (lg.buf.colocrossing.com)... 172.245.211.61
Connecting to lg.buf.colocrossing.com (lg.buf.colocrossing.com)|172.245.211.6
1|:80... connected.                                                          
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK                               
Length: 100000000 (95M) [application/octet-stream]                           
Saving to: '100MB.test'                                                      

 1% [                                    ] 1,962,736    112KB/s  eta 15m 57s^
C

    It picked up a bit after

    [email protected]~# wget http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/100MB.test            
--2015-02-09 02:28:40--  http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/100MB.test           
Resolving lg.buf.colocrossing.com (lg.buf.colocrossing.com)... 172.245.211.61
Connecting to lg.buf.colocrossing.com (lg.buf.colocrossing.com)|172.245.211.6
1|:80... connected.                                                          
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK                               
Length: 100000000 (95M) [application/octet-stream]                           
Saving to: '100MB.test.1'                                                    

15% [====>                               ] 15,739,504  1.56MB/s  eta 48s    ^
C

    Then went to Shit on another try

    [email protected]:~# wget http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/100MB.test            
--2015-02-09 02:30:46--  http://lg.buf.colocrossing.com/100MB.test           
Resolving lg.buf.colocrossing.com (lg.buf.colocrossing.com)... 172.245.211.61
Connecting to lg.buf.colocrossing.com (lg.buf.colocrossing.com)|172.245.211.6
1|:80... connected.                                                          
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK                               
Length: 100000000 (95M) [application/octet-stream]                           
Saving to: '100MB.test.2'                                                    

 1% [                                    ] 1,640,328   52.8KB/s  eta 26m 55s^
C

    This VPS is with Urpad in Los Angeles I believe.

    ~# traceroute 172.245.211.61                                 
traceroute to 172.245.211.61 (172.245.211.61), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets  
 1  dns33.rootleveltech.com (209.148.93.33)  0.031 ms  0.011 ms  0.009 ms    
 2  104.148.23.90 (104.148.23.90)  0.190 ms  0.258 ms  0.243 ms              
 3  te0-2-0-22.br03.lax05.pccwbtn.net (63.218.212.153)  2.101 ms  2.087 ms  2
.071 ms                                                                      
 4  TenGE0-0-0-4.cr04.lax04.pccwbtn.net (63.218.50.165)  0.999 ms TenGE0-0-0-
6.cr04.lax04.pccwbtn.net (63.218.50.173)  1.037 ms  1.077 ms                 
 5  206.111.11.66.ptr.us.xo.net (206.111.11.66)  0.404 ms  0.497 ms  0.446 ms
 6  207.88.14.217.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.14.217)  64.932 ms  65.638 ms  65.659
 ms                                                                          
 7  te0-5-4-0.rar3.denver-co.us.xo.net (207.88.12.85)  64.154 ms  64.145 ms  
64.138 ms                                                                    
 8  te-4-1-0.rar3.chicago-il.us.xo.net (207.88.12.21)  65.023 ms  66.628 ms  
66.658 ms                                                                    
 9  216.156.0.254.ptr.us.xo.net (216.156.0.254)  63.676 ms  63.656 ms  63.718
 ms                                                                          
10  207.86.157.54 (207.86.157.54)  76.591 ms 207.86.157.50 (207.86.157.50)  7
8.969 ms  78.949 ms                                                          
11  10ge-1-2-0.01-02.er1.buf1.colocrossing.com (23.94.31.14)  91.906 ms *  79
.461 ms                                                                      
12  10ge-1.03-c66.aggr1.buf1.colocrossing.com (192.3.11.14)  79.769 ms 10ge-1
.03-c65.aggr2.buf1.colocrossing.com (192.3.11.10)  79.094 ms  78.811 ms      
13  10.8.27.102 (10.8.27.102)  92.251 ms 10.8.27.82 (10.8.27.82)  91.542 ms  
92.234 ms                                                                    
14  lg.buf.colocrossing.com (172.245.211.61)  79.601 ms !X  79.568 ms !X  79.
541 ms !X
Sign In or Register to comment.