EPTOn November 08 2010 15:55 MasterAsia wrote:
I know what they use, but I tried it and it doesn't help me.
I know what they use, but I tried it and it doesn't help me.
What is it, just curious?
You don't have to tell if it's private.
connection to Asian servers? - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Arco
United States2090 Posts
What is it, just curious? You don't have to tell if it's private. | ||
|
xAPOCALYPSEx
1418 Posts
www.BattlePing.com is the website | ||
|
mcneebs
Canada391 Posts
| ||
|
DTrain
Australia64 Posts
I used to do something similar when I played WOW, to get better Pings from Australia to the US. I used two programs called FreeCap and PuTTY. PuTTY did the SSH tunneling and FreeCap worked as a proxy server to forward WOW traffic to the tunnel. However I had (free) access to one of my works Linux servers in the US to do the SSH tunneling to. This dropped my Ping times from 350ms to about 250ms in game. If you wanted to do the same you would need access to a SSH server somewhere in Korea to forward your data. This is pretty much what the low ping services are providing. I'm not sure if there are any services out there that provide these servers in Korea, usually they try to get better ping times for people connecting to the US not the other way around. | ||
|
Legat0
United States318 Posts
On November 08 2010 16:23 mcneebs wrote: I've already got a VPN service that lets me choose from a wealth of cities around the world, but I assumed that this would make my connection slower, not faster. Is this what you're talking about? What service do you use? | ||
|
Wolf
Korea (South)3290 Posts
On November 08 2010 15:48 MasterAsia wrote: mine: ![[image loading]](http://www.speedtest.net/result/1021563666.png) ![[image loading]](http://www.pingtest.net/result/27652676.png) I live off campus and use comcast. Can you tell me your ping to Taiwan and Korea servers? Mine are at 300~ish ms. Okay; I just wanted to see your speeds for regular connections. Here's my ping to Taiwan on pingtest: ![[image loading]](http://www.pingtest.net/result/27687165.png) Here's my ping to Korea on pingtest: ![[image loading]](http://www.pingtest.net/result/27687541.png) Trying to ping tw.battle.net and kr.battle.net from command prompt both timed out, so I dunno if that's even where I should be directing my pings, or if Command Prompt times out super fast. | ||
|
OmniscientSC2
United States713 Posts
| ||
|
Wolf
Korea (South)3290 Posts
On November 10 2010 05:05 OmniscientSC2 wrote: I live in Georgia as well but my ping is over 800. I use charter communications (@ 10 mbps) and was wondering if anyone has either switched from Charter to Comcast (or another ISP) or upgraded from 10mbps to the 20mbps and noticed a notable difference. I'm going to try playing on the Korean server tonight if all goes well to test out the lag. I would also like to know if anyone else has tried out Battleping. If it helps out a lot, I would definitely purchase it. I'm using the 20mbps connection; I should have mentioned that. It's a huge speed difference in general. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
| ||
|
R1CH
Netherlands10340 Posts
On November 08 2010 16:24 DTrain wrote: I'm not sure if these services actually send your data through a different physical route. I think they make use of SSH tunneling instead. The encrypted SSH packets get a higher priority through most network routers so this is what lowers the latency. The companies feed you this line but pretty much all traffic barring ICMP has the same priority over the majority of the Internet. They work by directing traffic over different routes - often you will find an ISP tries to keep traffic on their part of the network for a long time in order to avoid paying for transit on another ISP. This minimizes costs but increases latency. The tunnelling services use an intermediate host so the traffic is handed off at a different point and then has access to however many alternate routes are available from the other side of the host. Usually the closer you are to one of the tunnel nodes, the better the effect as the traffic is spending less time on cheaper but higher latency routes. Since gaming traffic is usually very lightweight bandwidth-wise, the tunnelling services can spend more money on more expensive but lower latency transit. Often though you will find they are just hosting dedicated servers in various datacenters around the world that have good peering as this provides enough of a benefit without getting into more complicated routing options. | ||
|
thenk
Australia39 Posts
Straight TCP can be broken up, fragmented, packet sizes change, other TCP connections require the bandwidth; there are many factors in a regular TCP connection that will degrade your connection, especially on long round-trip paths with many hops, such as that to Korea/Taiwan or really, anywhere over 400ms away. The solution to improving stability on high latency connections is using a lower transmit unit, thereby sending more packets which take less time to transfer. Since you set the transmit unit down, you inherently have less variation in packet size, since the stack will no longer wait to fill 1400+ bytes, instead it will send the packet at 800. However, since this is only one side, the target end will still send the same packets, so we will get a higher downstream latency than an upstream one, causing jitter and other wierd lag. What an SSH tunnel does is take advantage of the fact SSH packets are always the same size. SSH packets are always compressed, and SSH packets are additionally encrypted for additional security. It could also be argued that encryption leads to less trip time, as a result of stateful and other security measures inspecting a packet that would otherwise be unencrypted. (No inspection = less latency). On the other end of your SSH connection, the packets are routed as-is; but since they're so close to the point already (probably 2 or 3 hops in Seoul), very little jitter will occur on that end. The issue you will get with SSH tunneling, however, is also a side-effect of the SSH protocol, which basically never loses a packet. When things get really hectic (i.e. when data being sent is moe than available bandwidth), rather than ditching packets, SSH will buffer, and slow down the transfer. You still receive every packet in the correct order; it is just slightly slower than before. Because SSH was designed with file transfer / shell access / other terminal-based activities in mind, this would usually never pose an issue. But for real-time applications, if the available bandwidth is lacking; you get these issues. Your ping time will go down, but you will be slightly behind if the SSH protocol is 'stabilising' your connection. | ||
|
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
On November 08 2010 15:54 xAPOCALYPSEx wrote: I could be wrong, but isn't a program called BattlePing supposed to reduce latency? I live in California and my ping to Seoul is ~ 300 ms used to work for sc2 back in beta, but they've removed sc2 support | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://www.speedtest.net/result/1021552116.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.pingtest.net/result/27652104.png)
