test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

launcher update failure

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I've been unable to get past the 'trying to update the launcher, please be patient', message for the better part of two days.

I am also mostly unable to tracert the patchserver at 208.95.184.25, and typically have 25% packetloss to it as well.

I've tried multiple connections at different sites, and different machines as well, myself and at least 2 other friends have this problem currently.

We are based around NE Boston and have AT&T.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I would have all of you do a tracert to the patchserver and compared is there is a router (hop) in comman thayt is faling.
    Do a nettest and compare results

    (post both here also)

    then take the info you collected to you ISP to see if they can engineer the cause of the problem.
    (this assuming you all are having the same cuase and not one a firewall, another a modem problem etc.)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Tracing route to patchserver.crypticstudios.com [208.95.184.25]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms wireless.colubris.com [192.168.3.1]
    2 4 ms 2 ms 4 ms 12.159.138.1
    3 7 ms 4 ms 10 ms 12.119.239.229
    4 22 ms 21 ms 27 ms gbr2.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.123.40.126]
    5 77 ms 23 ms 22 ms cr2.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.5.65]
    6 25 ms 23 ms 22 ms cr1.phlpa.ip.att.net [12.122.28.114]
    7 31 ms 28 ms 22 ms cr1.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.5.241]
    8 28 ms 36 ms 20 ms n54ny01jt.ip.att.net [12.122.81.57]
    9 36 ms 20 ms 20 ms 192.205.36.118
    10 37 ms 39 ms 23 ms vb2000d1.rar3.nyc-ny.us.xo.net [207.88.13.38]
    11 53 ms 48 ms 27 ms ae0d0.mcr1.cambridge-ma.us.xo.net [216.156.0.26]
    12 33 ms 31 ms 30 ms 216.55.4.18
    13 3356 ms 3009 ms 2848 ms patchserver.crypticstudios.com [208.95.184.25]

    Trace complete.

    It was working well last week. We're not sure what has changed.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Your ISP may require data beyond ICMP (tracert and ping). If that is the case you can use Ping Plotter, WinPcap, and traces with TCP 7255 to patchserver.crypticstudios.com.

    That information can be found at the bottom of this post.

    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?p=2281229#post2281229
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    You're going through AT&T and then XO communications.
    Dahaun wrote:
    Tracing route to patchserver.crypticstudios.com [208.95.184.25]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms wireless.colubris.com [192.168.3.1]
    2 4 ms 2 ms 4 ms 12.159.138.1
    3 7 ms 4 ms 10 ms 12.119.239.229
    4 22 ms 21 ms 27 ms gbr2.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.123.40.126]
    5 77 ms 23 ms 22 ms cr2.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.5.65]
    6 25 ms 23 ms 22 ms cr1.phlpa.ip.att.net [12.122.28.114]
    7 31 ms 28 ms 22 ms cr1.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.5.241]
    8 28 ms 36 ms 20 ms n54ny01jt.ip.att.net [12.122.81.57]
    9 36 ms 20 ms 20 ms 192.205.36.118
    10 37 ms 39 ms 23 ms vb2000d1.rar3.nyc-ny.us.xo.net [207.88.13.38]
    11 53 ms 48 ms 27 ms ae0d0.mcr1.cambridge-ma.us.xo.net [216.156.0.26]
    12 33 ms 31 ms 30 ms 216.55.4.18
    13 3356 ms 3009 ms 2848 ms patchserver.crypticstudios.com [208.95.184.25]

    Trace complete.

    It was working well last week. We're not sure what has changed.

    Take a look at my routing from Dallas on to Cryptic. This is the routing I've seen since beta.
    10 42 ms 57 ms 55 ms cr1-tengig0-7-5-0.Dallas.savvis.net [204.70.200.170]
    11 80 ms 81 ms 81 ms cr2-pos-0-8-5-3.NewYork.savvis.net [204.70.196.129]
    12 90 ms 81 ms 83 ms er1-te-2-0-1.NewYork.savvis.net [204.70.197.9]
    13 90 ms 80 ms 79 ms 208.173.129.62
    14 295 ms 119 ms 95 ms border2.po1-20g-bbnet1.nym008.pnap.net [216.52.95.3]
    15 86 ms 88 ms 101 ms mpr2.te7-3.bsn004-nym008.phi.pnap.net [216.52.93.222]
    16 92 ms 85 ms 88 ms border12.te7-1-bbnet1.bsn.pnap.net [63.251.128.42]
    17 104 ms 111 ms 86 ms cryptic-1.border12.bsn.pnap.net [63.251.130.10]
    18 98 ms 94 ms 87 ms patchserver.crypticstudios.com [208.95.184.25]
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Thanks for the info and the links, now I'm getting no pings. I'll dig into this more tomorrow after I've gotten some sleep. Have a good one!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I've been in touch with the ISP, they're looking into it. They asked me to gather some info, and I just need a little more.

    I've got patch server IP (208.95.184.25) and nettest IP (208.95.184.10) and I have the ports that the comm traffic travels (80, 443, and 7000-7500.)

    Are there any other IPs that actual gameplay traffic travels to/from? And any additional ports the traffic travels on?

    Thanks!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Dahaun wrote:
    I've been in touch with the ISP, they're looking into it. They asked me to gather some info, and I just need a little more.

    I've got patch server IP (208.95.184.25) and nettest IP (208.95.184.10) and I have the ports that the comm traffic travels (80, 443, and 7000-7500.)

    Are there any other IPs that actual gameplay traffic travels to/from? And any additional ports the traffic travels on?

    Thanks!

    If you are NOT using a proxy server, it will be 208.95.18x.TRIBBLE for the IPs (I've seen 208.95.184.10 through 208.95.187.TRIBBLE so far).

    TCP 80, 443, and 7000 - 7500

    That is for patching and game play.

    You might note to them that over 50% of the packets are between 40 and 79 bytes in length, including the header.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Browsing all the information I've seen you post, I recall it being mentioned that these ports and packets of these sizes are commonly used for file sharing via P2P, yes? Is that possibly why they get blocked?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Dahaun wrote:
    Browsing all the information I've seen you post, I recall it being mentioned that these ports and packets of these sizes are commonly used for file sharing via P2P, yes? Is that possibly why they get blocked?

    If you look at a list of registered port numbers you can get an idea of what is in the TCP 7000 - 7500 range

    http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers

    As far as an ISP identifying packet size and port usage, I would think that would be up to each ISP policy.

    However it would not be unlikely that an ISP would throttle or give low priority to non HTTP, HTTPS, VoIP traffic, for example. TCP 7000 - 7500 would fit this case, but it depends on the ISP.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Thanks for all the info milehigh. You're a wonderful source of info here on the forums, and a wonderful asset to this community. 3 cheers for you sir!
Sign In or Register to comment.