Ping times to foreign data server

[joe4422]

You're ping rate and what not don't really matter, unless you've got ridiculously bad connection. Even bad IPs have decent ping rates today.


The most important thing is having enough bandwidth. Because you create streaming connections, you need to not have the data bottlenecked.


Forget about pings, you need bandwidth.

 

[dcraig]

Quote from joe4422:

You're ping rate and what not don't really matter, unless you've got ridiculously bad connection. Even bad IPs have decent ping rates today.


The most important thing is having enough bandwidth. Because you create streaming connections, you need to not have the data bottlenecked.


Forget about pings, you need bandwidth.

Very misleading stuff.

Of course latency matters. Especially over intercontinental distances. Distance and number of hops to your destination determine ping time - your ISP has little influence over it. Your bandwidth requirements depend on what you are using it for. For example if you are using IB TWS, your bandwidth requirements are quite low. You can even run the thing over dialup.

 

[Pumpy Dumper]

Have you opened up your dos screen yet and typed: ping and an ip address to the destination you're inquiring about yet? By doing this you'll see all of the cities your packet is getting routed thru prior to the end destination.

 

[Pumpy Dumper]

Quote from Pumpy Dumper:

Have you opened up your dos screen yet and typed: ping and an ip address to the destination you're inquiring about yet? By doing this you'll see all of the cities your packet is getting routed thru prior to the end destination.

OR better yet, and easier, you can type in your dos screen things like: ping yahoo.com and it will still route it for you showing all routes on the WAN

 

[SomeYoungGuy]

You need bigger tubes!

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zmeByDJ02mQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zmeByDJ02mQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[EON Kid]

Quote from rsi80:

Hi

What would be the highest (worst) latency acceptable for the data server of a foreign market?

250ms? 300ms? 350ms? 400ms? 450ms? 500ms?

What if latency varies between a lower level (say, 300ms) and a higher one (say, 500ms)? Would you find such an internet connection usable?

It is assumed that trading is discretionary and non-scalping.

Further, is a packet loss rate not exceeding 1% acceptable?

Thanks for your feedback.

What would be the highest (worst) latency acceptable for the data server of a foreign market?

250ms? 300ms? 350ms? 400ms? 450ms? 500ms? .

You don’t want to push 500ms At peak usage times my ping to the US servers is 600 to 800 ms. This is due to many ADSL connections being shared through a CMUX/RIM in my neighborhood. When its good its about 250 ms




What if latency varies between a lower level (say, 300ms) and a higher one (say, 500ms)? Would you find such an internet connection usable?

Yes should be fine.



Further, is a packet loss rate not exceeding 1% acceptable?


On a poor connection period of time my latency is 800ms and the ping program shows about a 96% success rate. My data can keep up unless there is some seriously huge volume.
Zenfire is great, TT is OK. E signal was also good with a poor connection.

If you don’t need every tick, IB is probably the best in this situation, as they collate and combine the data

 

[moarla]

for high pings IB doesnt work. they check the conn every x seconds and if the conn is unstable, IB disconnects

 

[rsi80]

Quote from moarla:

for high pings IB doesnt work. they check the conn every x seconds and if the conn is unstable, IB disconnects

moarla

Can you possibly be more specific about the conditions under which IB TWS disconnects and the consequences? Presumably, when this happens, price data transmission will be very briefly interrupted but TWS will attempt to re-connect automatically.

In particular, if the TWS re-connection happens very swiftly, will the impact on non-scalping trading be minimal? PocketChange's comment on staging limit orders seems to support this view.

Quote from PocketChange:

Latency is relatively moot if you are simply staging limit orders, they queue on the exchange order book. Your quotes may be delayed by 250ms (1/2 of the 500ms round trip). You will have issues if you are constantly canceling and replacing orders or perceived slippage when utilizing market orders. All issues are fairly manageable if you understand the constraints.

Since some packet loss (say, 0.3% to 0.5%) seems inevitable even for a reliable DSL connection, I wonder how this will affect TWS usage in everyday trading.

 

[tradecalm]

The best article on the internet that answers all questions regarding ping time.
Once and for all. http://www.stuartcheshire.org/rants/Latency.html

Look at this as well: http://www.internettrafficreport.com/

 

[rsi80]

Quote from tradecalm:

The best article on the internet that answers all questions regarding ping time.
Once and for all. http://www.stuartcheshire.org/rants/Latency.html

Excellent article. Thanks for the link, tradecalm.