It would be cool if PingPlotter docs explained more about interpreting<br>the graphs, including "gotchas" to look out for.<br><br>For instance: speed-of-light delay, congestion avoidance, asymmetrical<br>paths. I found evidence for all these in Speedcorp's article -- my<br>critique can be found here:<br><br><A HREF="http://www.sonic.net/scott/ip/sc-tr-critique/" target="_new">http://www.sonic.net/scott/ip/sc-tr-critique/</A><br><br>Indeed, wouldn't it be cool if you could right-click on a hop and<br>enter mileage to adjust the graph for speed-of-light delay? That would<br>be slick!<br><br> -Scott<br><br><br>[Pete edited the link to make it clickable].<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Pete Ness on 9/6/00 11:17 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

Hi Scott.<br><br>You've included a lot of great information there. There are some great insights there on how to interpret some of the problems highlighted by Ping Plotter.<br><br>You have an interesting idea on entering the distance between hops. Unfortunately, this would only be the distance between 2 hops, and couldn't be re-used if one of these same hops was involved in an alternate route someplace, so it's somewhat likely this entered information would be of short-term relevance. I'll add this to the suggestion list, however. Ideally, Ping Plotter would be able to auto-determine the geographic location of each hop and auto-calculate the speed of light latency between hops. An option to subtract speed of light physics latencies would be pretty sweet once that was in place...<br><br>Anyway, I agree more information about the reasons behind what Ping Plotter shows would be most welcome. I've planned to make some of that information available for quite some time now, but have yet to do so. It's possible some upcoming changes may give me an opportunity to work on this.<br><br>