Socom RED X issues

[[-VR-] Tool_Minion]

So this was found over on the cBF forums from there Clan's IT guru SHANE. I found it very interesting, and with his permission share it with you.

 

There was a post on Socom.com from Seth Luisi (Socom Project Manager) about the latency test. Here is the quote..

 

 

Seth Luisi replied on

09.12.08 07:55 AM I want everyone to listen, this is very important.

 

The issue is not "how fast" your line is, it is how good is your connection. You receive the Red X if you are experiencing excessive latency or packet loss. This has nothing to do with how fast your line is and a speed test proves nothing.

 

Use the following link to run a line quality test if you are seeing the red x issue.

 

http://www.dslreports.com/linequality

 

I use this test when I have had issues in the past and for the most part is pretty accurate. Usually I notice issues to start with when my speeds drop and I mean drop down WELL below what I am suppose to be getting. I am suppose to be getting approx 15Mbps download and 2Mbps upload. When I have had issues in the past I would get 1 maybe 2 Mbps down and 512Kbps up. That is when I would run these tests.

 

Now what you can learn from these tests is if the packet loss is in your house or with your ISP and so on. When I have had my issues I have had to replace my modem, since I am using one from my ISP I just bring it in and swap it out, no big deal. Problem is I have had to do this 4 or 5 times so either the products are bad or something in my line is causing issues. Lucky for me a good friend of mine works for my ISP and has all the testing equipment I would need.

 

Now on to the point.

 

I agree with Seth to a point. The problem is if I am running a speed test to Chicago or Twin Cities and the latency is below 35 my connection is fine. Now when I run the line quality test it is showing 90% packet loss, how can this be? Well the problem with the test is that it runs ping to test. Most routers now block ping in the firewall, ok so I can turn that off but still see 90% packet loss. hmmmm..... my connection cannot be that bad, I wouldn't see 14Mbps down, 1.9Mbps up with a latency of 19ms. So what is going on? Well most routers on the backbone now ignore ping. They regard it as not important and drop them. Well this could be a problem with their latency test as well as the quality test from DSL Reports.

 

Ok so what do we do?

 

Well there is a little used command in DOS called TRACERT. This test is actually quite a good test to see what the system does with your data to get to the final destination. To show you the difference here is a typical Ping response to Yahoo.com from my office.

 

C:\>ping yahoo.com

 

Pinging yahoo.com [68.180.206.184] with 32 bytes of data:

 

Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=64ms TTL=49

Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=115ms TTL=49

Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=106ms TTL=49

Reply from 68.180.206.184: bytes=32 time=87ms TTL=49

 

Ping statistics for 68.180.206.184:

Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),

Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:

Minimum = 64ms, Maximum = 115ms, Average = 93ms

 

C:\>

 

Now here is a simple TRACERT test to Yahoo.com. I edited out the last couple lines because it is internal server which is blocked with a firewall.

 

C:\>tracert yahoo.com

 

Tracing route to yahoo.com [68.180.206.184]

over a maximum of 30 hops:

 

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms

2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms host-66-202-57-97.mil.choiceone.net [66.202.57.9

7]

3 8 ms 8 ms 7 ms host-216-153-172-129.mil.choiceone.net [216.153.

172.129]

4 8 ms 7 ms 9 ms host-64-179-38-177.har.choiceone.net [64.179.38.

177]

5 16 ms 11 ms 10 ms so-6-0-2.edge5.Chicago1.Level3.net [4.71.240.1]

 

6 19 ms 19 ms 15 ms ae-31-55.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net [4.68.101.158]

 

7 12 ms 11 ms 10 ms ae-5.ebr2.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.140.194]

8 47 ms 35 ms 11 ms ae-1-100.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.132.113]

 

9 39 ms 34 ms 34 ms ae-3.ebr2.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.132.61]

10 66 ms 48 ms 60 ms ae-3.ebr2.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.132.57]

11 60 ms 61 ms 60 ms ae-92-92.csw4.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.69.134.222]

 

12 60 ms 69 ms 61 ms ae-43-99.car3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.197]

 

13 63 ms 61 ms 61 ms ae-43-99.car3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.197]

 

14 61 ms 60 ms 73 ms ae0-p171.msr2.sp1.yahoo.com [216.115.107.83]

15 62 ms 64 ms 63 ms te-9-1.bas-a1.sp1.yahoo.com [209.131.32.21]

 

Now as you can see there is much more information. In order for me to connect to Yahoo.com from my office it went through 15 devices. #1 is my firewall at the office so I deleted out the info but you can see the rest. So no matter how good my connection is I still have to route through 15 devices to get to my final destination. That is what will enhance latency. We all give RAFA a hard time about his connection. This is the reason why we have issues with his connection. Think about how many devices he has to get through in order to hit the states? He may even have to hit a satellite.

 

You can run the Line Quality test and see what you get. If you get an error saying that your IP address is not pingable you need to go in to your router settings, Firewall tab and disable "Block Wan Request". Don't worry you will enable it after the test is done and the chances something will happen in that short amount of time is very minimal. I have left it disabled for months and not had an issue.

 

Also I think Seth also neglected the issue of ports as well as how we are connecting with each other. In the past we all connected to the host and then the host connected to their server and updated the server with the data. Is it the same now? Are we all connected to the host and to the server? There are too many unanswered questions and not enough supplied information in order to really troubleshoot issues on our end. Why should we mess around with our equipment not knowing if it is our end?

 

In the end I look at it this way. I have a good connection, I have more then enough speed even with 5 VPN tunnels running out of my router and a web server. I have my PS3 in the DMZ and don't have any issues with other games, so why am I seeing the red x in Socom? The common denominator is the Socom servers. I see the same comments from other users about how everything else works why doesn't Socom?

 

 

 

 

[inadub]

just seems like a detour for me.. i know i have a great connection, i know that i have no problems on other games, or atleast like socom. Hopefully they will fix these issues before the final release..

[Xx-CHURCHY-xX]

How stupid.. I mean I know my connection isn't the fastest in the world, but my connection is decent enough to play online without suffering from any lag and crap. So when I'm moving perfectly fine then I get hit with the Red X and die, it pisses me off.

 

Base the X off of our speed, not dropped packets

[[-VR-] Tool_Minion]

The entire reason for the 'X' to my understanding is to eliminate lag switchs. I would THINK we could still manage a finer tuned system though. I never even HEARD of a lag switch before 3 months ago, but yesterday I had an issue with this. :-\

[V1P3R_1]

With all of this being said...and, while it certainly is informative...we all still need to remember that this game (and all of it's "issues") is still a Beta. They'll "fine tune" all of this stuff (or at least I would assume), before the final build of the game drops in October. But, thanks for all the info Tool.

[CDBS14]

guys there is an announcement on socom.com that says they will get rid of the red x.

 

this is from socom.com

Thank you all for participating in the SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Confrontation Public Beta. We know that it has not gone as smoothly as we would all like, but I want to assure you that we are working on the issues. Please remember, the main purpose of the Public Beta was to identify just these types of issues before the game is launched.

 

We are working on and testing another patch right now. For this patch, the focus is to resolve the following issues:

 

Abnormally long network synchronization issues when some users in a game have a poor network connection. This issue causes 4-7 minute (or longer) load times when late joining a game.

An issue where respawn game late joiners were sometimes stuck in spectator mode and could not respawn into the game.

Remove the latency detection network test which is causing some users with poor network connections to receive the network latency icon (red X).

 

We will announce when the new patch will be released once we've verified the fixes and it has passed our QA.

 

Regards,

 

SOCOM: Confrontation Online Team

 

[SHANE23]

CDBS14 ]

guys there is an announcement on socom.com that says they will get rid of the red x.

 

this is from socom.com

Thank you all for participating in the SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Confrontation Public Beta. We know that it has not gone as smoothly as we would all like' date=' but I want to assure you that we are working on the issues. Please remember, the main purpose of the Public Beta was to identify just these types of issues before the game is launched.

 

We are working on and testing another patch right now. For this patch, the focus is to resolve the following issues:

 

Abnormally long network synchronization issues when some users in a game have a poor network connection. This issue causes 4-7 minute (or longer) load times when late joining a game.

An issue where respawn game late joiners were sometimes stuck in spectator mode and could not respawn into the game.

Remove the latency detection network test which is causing some users with poor network connections to receive the network latency icon (red X).

 

We will announce when the new patch will be released once we've verified the fixes and it has passed our QA.

 

Regards,

 

SOCOM: Confrontation Online Team

 

[/quote']

 

In the comments section of that post is where he posted what I quoted. I am sorry but I have an issue with someone that comes out and says it is our connections that is the problem and that is why they are taking out the latency test. Your severs were not ready, by admission, yet you say it is our poor connections? Sorry but I don't think so.

[CDBS14]

you are 100 percent correct shane, back with rsv2 was just out, the developers asked us to open our port setting and start to open and close certain ports, to some people(me) that is just dumb, we are not all computer technicians that know how to mess around with the routers. we buy games as to play them as easily as possible without having to open up router settings and all.

[GOAT]

 

 

At least they are trying to eliminate lag switch use, don't expect them to tell us how, it would be like giving out the keys to the safe.. they are in a pickle, divulging too much info may result in providing information on how to circumvent their effort.. providing too little info will result in not letting the honest folks know how to correctly set up their connections. It's a dilemma.

[GOAT]

Seth is correct it isn't connection speed, it's the latency caused by hops. A trace route test shows how many hops were taken at the given time for the packet sent the test will rarely give the same results twice. to many variables. Like was said your speed has no bearing. its all about latency and packet loss which is a result of hop count. Sure you could do a trace test, but what good is it? the net decides the route- not your IP, your provider, your speed, your router, your modem, your connection.. THE NET decides. Not a thing you can do about it.

 

I'm working on a new report which concerns a whole other issue but ties together with every thing else. It focuses on multiple console accounts, the problem with keeping two master accounts on the same console. The reason having as many sub accounts under one master works just fine. How DNAS came about and some opinions and theories on the use of console mac address in authentication. Since its long, when its done, I'll post it in the thread on stats and ping rates I started.. its part of my attempt to only goat post on one thread which I started and not elsewhere. LOL.

[CDBS14]

Goat ]

Seth is correct it isn't connection speed, it's the latency caused by hops. A trace route test shows how many hops were taken at the given time for the packet sent the test will rarely give the same results twice. to many variables. Like was said your speed has no bearing. its all about latency and packet loss which is a result of hop count. Sure you could do a trace test, but what good is it? the net decides the route- not your IP, your provider, your speed, your router, your modem, your connection.. THE NET decides. Not a thing you can do about it.

 

I'm working on a new report which concerns a whole other issue but ties together with every thing else. It focuses on multiple console accounts, the problem with keeping two master accounts on the same console. The reason having as many sub accounts under one master works just fine. How DNAS came about and some opinions and theories on the use of console mac address in authentication. Since its long, when its done, I'll post it in the thread on stats and ping rates I started.. its part of my attempt to only goat post on one thread which I started and not elsewhere. LOL.

 

DUDE TEACH ME

[SHANE23]

Goat ]

Seth is correct it isn't connection speed, it's the latency caused by hops. A trace route test shows how many hops were taken at the given time for the packet sent the test will rarely give the same results twice. to many variables. Like was said your speed has no bearing. its all about latency and packet loss which is a result of hop count. Sure you could do a trace test, but what good is it? the net decides the route- not your IP, your provider, your speed, your router, your modem, your connection.. THE NET decides. Not a thing you can do about it.

 

 

That is my point. It is not our connection but he states that it is our poor connections.

At least a tracert gives you some information as opposed to a ping test.

[Chili327]

There should be seperate servers..

Some with minimal connection speeds, etc, & some that are wide open for anyone on any broadband connection. (for those who don't want to, or cant mess with their routers.)

[-Rooster-]

Hey, What if we all donated say, $4 a month. I bet we could get great servers then. ;D

 

It would be worth it to have it all run smooth for just $4. Please accept my mony sony. :'(

[BigMoneyNacku]

Chili-Palmer ]

There should be seperate servers..

Some with minimal connection speeds, etc, & some that are wide open for anyone on any broadband connection. (for those who don't want to, or cant mess with their routers.)

 

Warhawk servers don't have that problem. I don't play, but a guy I know does, and he has very, very minimal problems. I still don't understand why SOCOM doesn't get the dedicated servers like WH does.

[CDBS14]

maybe when HOME and LIFE are out there will be ads and those ads will help pay for better servers, or sony can be a little smart and charge us just 20 bucks a year. i will be willing to pay that much a year, what i pay for national geographic magazine and game informer.

[Xx-CHURCHY-xX]

Pay 50 bucks a year and you'll get the best online gaming service out there.

Right Chili?

[TOW-19]

Sooooooooooooooo.....did Shane just pwn Seth Luisi?

[[-VR-] Tool_Minion]

Goat ]

 

 

At least they are trying to eliminate lag switch use, don't expect them to tell us how, it would be like giving out the keys to the safe.. they are in a pickle, divulging too much info may result in providing information on how to circumvent their effort.. providing too little info will result in not letting the honest folks know how to correctly set up their connections. It's a dilemma.

 

Goat, actually they simply check ping rates to determine when one is in use. Hence the red X when for whatever reason your ping rate drops off. I think it is either a matter of too sensitive, or they don't really have it figured out. :-\