servers with really low ping

hi,

i was wondering how severs have such low ping? is it spoofed? do they have some sort of good commands in their server.cfg?

thanks.

The closer a Garry’s Mod servers host is to you the lower the ping will be, so no they don’t spoof their ping at all it’s just you live relatively close to their hosting provider.

do you have any reccommandations for what to set the network settings in the server.cfg to be the “best”?

Ping is relative to you.
It can be 11 for you and 120 for another guy, it depends on where you’re from.

It basically means the times in milliseconds for response variable.
Or basically: how fast you get a response after you’ve sent out a request.

Not much can be done, but improving ping is a thing which mostly only the client can do. Cheers.

I mean you could get a server host closer to where you live, that’s about all you can do.

because we’re so cool


(User was banned for this post ("Why Reply?" - Nookyava))

I feel bad about everyone reacting “dumb” Iuy’s comments. The guy obviously doesn’t understand what he’s talking about, but that’s why he’s made a thread about it. He isn’t being arrogant about it. Cut him some slack, guys.

who called him dumb? .3.

Actually, noone here understands what they’re talking about. Because none of them know what’s actually going on here, so lets have some fun.

Sup are using GMC’s new routing “black magic”, which cause it to have about 10ms ping in the server browser to people in the UK, and other countries, even though the servers are based in the US.
This doesn’t actually improve ping while in game by that much, though. It’s basically anycast or geocast A2S caching I think. I don’t know if it’s out of the testing phase and in production - but if it is, it’ll only be available in their Dallas location.

Psychz (GMC colo w/ Psychz) themselves seem to have infrastructure to do this, by the looks of this page. (This isn’t exactly the same as the service GMC offer, however it’s is an example of this kind of routing)
GMC use BGP through their own ASN and can use any provider including Voxility or some random chinese ISP if they wish. Since he announces the IPs himself, Psychz system could not be used. You can read more on GMC’s stuff here.

The big difference is while Psychz system will lower ping, it’s unlikely theirs will lower it as effectively as GMC’s system does. Specifically regarding A2S; GMC probably guns Psychz down in terms of how effective their solutions are.

To give you a visual explanation of how it basically works; we’ll look at an example map provided by Psychz. When the client queries the server, the nearest point of presence (Often called a POP) responds. It’s pretty cool stuff, honestly.

Obviously this can be scaled globally, and that’s how they’re getting these results from what I know.
^ That’s the answer to your question OP, but the guys showering you in boxes know better, of course. :flex:

A lot of hosts already have the infrastructure in place to do things like this, because it’s the same routing technique used to block huge DDoS attacks, because the traffic can be absorbed by 5 POP’s rather than 1. This avoids an entire data centre getting saturated by an attack. It’s pretty much required.
OVH are my favourites for this, as they’ve got an immense amount of capacity which is rapidly growing. This enables them to block next-level attacks like the Mirai botnet from a while back.

I want to add on, before people grab their pitch forks; this is the future of hosting. This is where game hosting is going, and you can get all upset about how it’s unfair, but that will not stop companies like GMC, Psychz, and even Crident aiming to do shit like this. Get used to it x

So essentially what your saying is: some server hosts can “spoof” the ping to look better by instead showing you the response rate to the server closest to you that’s along the path it takes for your information to reach the server from your client. No?

You can call it spoofing if it makes you feel better, but at the end of the day it’s just caching. Facepunch use caching, Gmodstore use caching, Google use caching, so much technology uses caching already, and now it’s game-servers turn.

I don’t think the reason given for blacklisting a number of servers was “Caching” tho

This has nothing to do with caching. I can’t see anything being ‘cached’ on the proxy servers because game-data is realtime. By the time you cache it, it will be stale already.

I’m not saying that this is hogwash, it’s a good solution for exactly what that website outline - DDoS and congestion mitigation. You shield your actual server behind a proxy server, but it won’t reduce the actual delay or provide any other benefits other than DDoS/congestion mitigation, because you still have to route the packets from your client, through your proxy, and to the actual gameserver.

It’s nothing new. It’s a standard in the industry, we just aren’t seeing this kind of thing for private/community-hosted gameservers because of the infrastructure required for it, and because it’s not really easy to set up.

Just please don’t call this caching, because it’s really not. You cache data for long-term use, not for real-time usage.

EDIT: Unless there is some real arcane shit going on with actual packet-caching (I can’t for the life of me imagine how or why it would be effective, though), of course. In which case, I’d love some elaboration.

They do cache it and the servers info is not proxied/mirrored, I can tell because I crashed their server and the info was still showing and maybe even updating :v:

What do they cache, then? I mean, if you crash their server (the actual server, not the cache), what’s the point of the cache anyway? Just so that it can show up in the server list? You won’t be able to play on it if it’s down.

EDIT: If I understood correctly from the previous posts, they cache certain types of packets relevant to game info, and deliver them to clients browsing the gamelist, which results in the low ping. Maybe even allow them to connect and download content.
But after they connect, I can only see the ‘cache’ acting as a reverse-proxy for the gameserver. I don’t think the architecture of the Source engine is really quite there to permit anything more interesting than that. There needs to be a single server where all the game data is, where all the code runs, and everything else happens. I can only see a few very specific use-cases where caching may be applied - like for the aforementioned gameserver info in the gamelist, and perhaps content.

Please do enlighten me if I’m wrong or am missing something.

-snip-

Those were mirror servers that would redirect you to the real one once you fully joined. This is different.

They cache A2S

[editline]18th November 2017[/editline]

It wont improve in game ping by anything near the ping you see in the browser, obviously that can’t be cached. So I get 100-200ms ping while in game, and 10-20ms ping in the server browser to give you an example

[editline]18th November 2017[/editline]

I wonder what it will be like when Aus, Eu, Us servers all have the same ping in the server browser

[editline]18th November 2017[/editline]

I mean you didn’t need to fully join, they redirected you pretty instantly after starting to connect.
The mirror servers wernt real servers at all - so there was no ability to load in etc

I see. Thank you for the elaboration, it does make sense now!

As far as I could tell at the time from posts, it wasn’t just the fact they were making mirror servers, it was that the ping players saw in the menu was not the ping they got when they connected. If slowboi’s description is accurate to what you’re suggesting, then I think it qualifies just the same.