http round trip

Drive better health outcomes through better transportation.

Trusted by the best in care

Reduce no-shows. Increase access to care.

Our healthcare partners report patient no-show rates lower than 4% compared to industry averages of over 20%.

Save time and money.

Less time spent booking rides means more freedom for care coordinators to operate at the top of their licenses.

Book all vehicles, all in one place.

Rideshare (Lyft/Uber), medical sedans, wheelchair vans, stretcher vans, and ALS/BLS -- one workflow.

Get better insights. Deliver better outcomes.

Leverage data on all patient rides for additional insights and improved planning.

What people are saying about Roundtrip:

It’s smooth. And I don’t need a fax machine. I can’t even fathom doing it the old way.

We want to make sure that our patients follow through in their recovery, so we want to provide as many resources to make that possible, including transportation.

We use Roundtrip to facilitate timelines and it’s full range of options for patient needs.

Home  >  Learning Center  >  Round Trip Time (RTT)  

Article's content

Round trip time (rtt), what is round trip time.

Round-trip time (RTT) is the duration, measured in milliseconds, from when a browser sends a request to when it receives a response from a server. It’s a key performance metric for web applications and one of the main factors, along with Time to First Byte (TTFB), when measuring  page load time  and  network latency .

Using a Ping to Measure Round Trip Time

RTT is typically measured using a ping — a command-line tool that bounces a request off a server and calculates the time taken to reach a user device. Actual RTT may be higher than that measured by the ping due to server throttling and network congestion.

Example of a ping to google.com

Factors Influencing RTT

Actual round trip time can be influenced by:

• Distance  – The length a signal has to travel correlates with the time taken for a request to reach a server and a response to reach a browser.
• Transmission medium  – The medium used to route a signal (e.g., copper wire, fiber optic cables) can impact how quickly a request is received by a server and routed back to a user.
• Number of network hops  – Intermediate routers or servers take time to process a signal, increasing RTT. The more hops a signal has to travel through, the higher the RTT.
• Traffic levels  – RTT typically increases when a network is congested with high levels of traffic. Conversely, low traffic times can result in decreased RTT.
• Server response time  – The time taken for a target server to respond to a request depends on its processing capacity, the number of requests being handled and the nature of the request (i.e., how much server-side work is required). A longer server response time increases RTT.

See how Imperva CDN can help you with website performance.

Reducing RTT Using a CDN

A CDN is a network of strategically placed servers, each holding a copy of a website’s content. It’s able to address the factors influencing RTT in the following ways:

• Points of Presence (PoPs)  – A CDN maintains a network of geographically dispersed PoPs—data centers, each containing cached copies of site content, which are responsible for communicating with site visitors in their vicinity. They reduce the distance a signal has to travel and the number of network hops needed to reach a server.
• Web caching  – A CDN  caches  HTML, media, and even dynamically generated content on a PoP in a user’s geographical vicinity. In many cases, a user’s request can be addressed by a local PoP and does not need to travel to an origin server, thereby reducing RTT.
• Load distribution  – During high traffic times, CDNs route requests through backup servers with lower network congestion, speeding up server response time and reducing RTT.
• Scalability  – A CDN service operates in the cloud, enabling high scalability and the ability to process a near limitless number of user requests. This eliminates the possibility of server side bottlenecks.

Using tier 1 access to reduce network hops

One of the original issues CDNs were designed to solve was how to reduce round trip time. By addressing the points outlined above, they have been largely successful, and it’s now reasonable to expect a decrease in your RTT of 50% or more after onboarding a CDN service.

Latest Blogs

Erez Hasson

Apr 16, 2024 4 min read

Grainne McKeever

Mar 13, 2024 2 min read

Mar 4, 2024 3 min read

Feb 26, 2024 3 min read

Jan 18, 2024 3 min read

Luke Richardson

Dec 27, 2023 6 min read

Dec 21, 2023 2 min read

Dec 13, 2023 5 min read

Latest Articles

• Network Management

172.2k Views

154.7k Views

107.1k Views

101.9k Views

59.7k Views

55.3k Views

2024 Bad Bot Report

Bad bots now represent almost one-third of all internet traffic

The State of API Security in 2024

Learn about the current API threat landscape and the key security insights for 2024

Protect Against Business Logic Abuse

Identify key capabilities to prevent attacks targeting your business logic

The State of Security Within eCommerce in 2022

Learn how automated threats and API attacks on retailers are increasing

Prevoty is now part of the Imperva Runtime Protection

Protection against zero-day attacks

No tuning, highly-accurate out-of-the-box

Effective against OWASP top 10 vulnerabilities

An Imperva security specialist will contact you shortly.

Top 3 US Retailer

• Engineering Mathematics
• Discrete Mathematics
• Operating System
• Computer Networks
• Digital Logic and Design
• C Programming
• Data Structures
• Theory of Computation
• Compiler Design
• Computer Org and Architecture

What is RTT(Round Trip Time)?

• What is Real-Time Linux?
• What is RTS(Real Time Streaming)?
• What is Time-To-Live (TTL)?
• Program to calculate the Round Trip Time (RTT)
• What is TCP Fast Open?
• Difference between Round trip time (RTT) and Time to live (TTL)
• Real Time Transport Protocol (RTP)
• How to subtract time in R ?
• Python time.tzset() Function
• TCP Tahoe and TCP Reno
• Ruby | Time to_time function
• Ruby | Time round function
• What is 15:00 Military Time?
• Time tuple in Python
• What Time will it be in 24 Hours From Now?
• Dart - Date and Time
• Ruby | Time utc function
• time.Time.Round() Function in Golang with Examples
• Ruby | Time to_r function

RTT (Round Trip Time) also called round-trip delay is a crucial tool in determining the health of a network. It is the time between a request for data and the display of that data. It is the duration measured in milliseconds. 

RTT can be analyzed and determined by pinging a certain address. It refers to the time taken by a network request to reach a destination and to revert back to the original source. In this scenario, the source is the computer and the destination is a system that captures the arriving signal and reverts it back. 

RTT(Round Trip Time) Measurement

What Are Common Factors that Affect RTT?

There are certain factors that can bring huge changes in the value of RTT. These are enlisted below:

• Distance: It is the length in which a signal travels for a request to reach the server and for a response to reach the browser,
• Transmission medium: The medium which is used to route a signal, which helps in faster transfer of request is transmitted.
• Network hops: It is the time that servers take to process a signal, on increasing the number of hops, RTT will also increase.
• Traffic levels: Round Trip Time generally increases when a network is having huge traffic which results in that, for low traffic RTT will also be less.
• Server response time: It is the time taken by a server to respond to a request which basically depends on the capacity of handling requests and also sometimes on the nature of the request.

Applications of RTT

Round Trip Time refers to a wide variety of transmissions such as wireless Internet transmissions and satellite transmissions. In Internet transmissions, RTT may be identified by using the ping command. In satellite transmissions, RTT can be calculated by making use of the Jacobson/Karels algorithm.  

Advantages of RTT

Calculation of RTT is advantageous because:

• It allows users and operators to identify how long a signal will take to complete the transmission.
• It also determines how fast a network can work and the reliability of the network.

Example: Let us assume there are two users, one of which wants to contact the other one. One of them is located in California while the other one is situated in Germany. When the one in California makes the request, the network traffic is transferred across many routers before reaching the server located in Germany. Once the request reverts back to California, a rough estimation of the time taken for this transmission could be made. This time taken by the transmitted request is referred to as RTT. The Round Trip Time is a mere estimate. The path between the two locations can change as the passage and network congestion can come into play, affecting the total period of transmission. 

How Does Round-Trip Time Work?

Consider a topology where an appliance named “Exinda” is located between the client and the server. The diagram shown below depicts how the concept of RTT works: 

RTT Calculation

  For the calculation of Average RTT, RTTS for server and client needs to be calculated separately. The performed calculations are shown below:

Server RTT: RTT1 = T2 – T1 RTT2 = T5 – T4

Client RTT: RTT3 = T3 – T2 RTT4 = T7 – T6 

Average RTT: Avg Server RTT = (RTTs1 + RTTs2) / 2 Avg Client RTT = (RTTc1 + RTTc2) / 2 Avg Total RTT = Avg Server RTT + Avg Client RTT 

You can refer to the Program to calculate RTT for more details.

Measures To Reduce RTT

 A significant reduction in RTT can be made using Content Delivery Network (CDN) . A CDN refers to a network of various servers, each acquiring a copy of the content on a particular website. It addresses the factors affecting RTT in the enlisted ways:

• Points of Presence (PoP)
• Web caching
• Load distribution
• Scalability
• Tier 1 access 

CDN has been largely successful in reducing the value of RTT and due to this, a decrease in RTT by 50% is achievable.

Please Login to comment...

Improve your coding skills with practice.

What kind of Experience do you want to share?

• Monitor website traffic and optimize your user experience
• Evaluate which marketing channels are performing better
• Analyse aggregated data about usage of the website to understand our customers. Randomized identifiers shared with partners.
• Store your preferences from previous visits
• Collect user feedback to improve our website
• Evaluate your interests to provide you unique customised content and offers
• Make online and social advertising more relevant for you
• Invite specific customer groups to reconnect with our products later
• Share data with our advertising and social media partners via their third-party cookies to match your interests

Round Trip Time (RTT)

In the realm of network technology, there is a wealth of specialized terms and procedures. These elements pivotally support the smooth operation of the global Internet. Central among these is the concept of Round Trip Time (RTT). Understanding RTT is crucial for unraveling how data moves across networks, and its influence on the quality of online activities.

The term 'Round Trip Time', or RTT, denotes the timespan taken for a data unit to journey from its starting point to a specified destination and back. Simplistically put, it symbolizes the united timespan that includes signal transmission and the receipt of a responding signal. This counter-signal typically signifies successful acknowledgment of the original signal, dispatched from the destination back to the starting point.

RTT is a respected metric in network technology due to its profound impact on the efficiency and speed of data interchange. It serves as a 'heartbeat' of a network, determining critical attributes about its ongoing health and functional capacity.

Why RTT Matters

RTT matter extends beyond its capacity to measure time. It acts as a vital index of the performance of your network connection. A decreased RTT indicates speedy sending and reception of data packets, resulting in quick website content loading times, uninterrupted multimedia broadcasting, and reduced in-game network latency. Conversely, an increased RTT can result in Internet delays and a subsequent degraded user experience.

RTT: The Key Yardstick in Networking

RTT is pivotal in network technology as it is involved in multiple networking protocols like the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) to direct the exchange of data packets amongst computer systems. For example, TCP uses RTT to specify the optimal waiting period for response receipt before it restarts data packet transmission. This approach minimizes repeated transmissions, thereby enhancing data buffering efficiency.

In conclusion, Round Trip Time (RTT) is a critical aspect of network technology. It measures how long a data chunk needs to travel from its origin to a selected spot and back. Familiarizing with this concept is vital for gaining insights into the workings of the Internet and strategies for boosting network performance. The subsequent sections delve deeper into RTT's intricacies, exploring its everyday implications for Internet usage, its significance in gaming, and its crucial role in network troubleshooting, among others.

Unraveling the Basics of RTT

RTT, acronym for Round Trip Time, underscores an imperative idea in the universe of networking. It specifically refers to the duration a chunk of data experiences during its travel from origin to endpoint, and returning back to the source. A comprehensive cognizance of this idea is instrumental in decoding the operational speed and dexterity of a network system.

Data Packet Transit: An Overview

A clear perception of RTT requires cognizance of the voyage undertaken by a data packet. When initiating a request online, such as prompting a hyperlink or sending an email, your device dispatches a chunk of data towards the server that hosts the desired website or emailing facility. This chunk of data, or packet, maneuvers through an array of routers and switches, each contributing a minor time incrementation to the overall journey. Upon the receipt of this packet, the server processes the request and generates a response that is directed back to your device. The complete duration taken for this travel constitutes the RTT.

Exploring RTT Components

RTT is an amalgamation of distinct elements. Initial element is propagation delay, reflecting the time consumption for a packet to move from origin towards its destination. The computation of this time duration takes into account the physical distance between the targeted points, aided by the pace of light within the medium, generally fiber optic cables.

The next element contributing to RTT is transmission delay, quantifying the duration for the data packet to gain physical entry onto the network. This duration is influenced by the packet size and the network's bandwidth capacity.

Additional elements include processing delay, highlighting the duration taken for a router or switch to handle the packet. This entails time taken for error identification and resolution, and routing.

The final ingredient in the RTT is queuing delay - the duration a packet spends in the queue awaiting processing by a router or switch, which is contingent upon the network's congestion status and the protocol-defined packet priority level.

RTT’s Function within TCP/IP

RTT acts as a significant clog in the mechanism of the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) - the basic internet protocol suite. TCP/IP utilizes RTT to ascertain the ideal window size favoring data upload and to formulate an accurate timeout duration for packets remaining unacknowledged.

Within TCP/IP, the Round Trip Time Estimator algorithm calculates the anticipated RTT (ERTT) grounded on the recently recorded RTT (MRTT) of previous packet transmissions. This mathematical computation follows the formula:

ERTT = (1 - α) ERTT + α MRTT

Here, α is a factor that oscillates between 0 and 1. The weightage of the recent RTT measurements is elevated in this formula, allowing the ERTT to adapt to the fluctuating network conditions.

Interplay of RTT and Ping

Measuring RTT is often conducted leveraging a tool such as ping. Activating ping directs a packet towards a defined destination, awaiting a desired response. The duration occurring between the dispatch and receipt of the packet equates to the RTT. Ping’s simplistic characteristics render it a capable instrument for RTT measurement and network issue identification.

In conclusion, RTT is a core evaluating factor for network efficiency determination. It encapsulates the duration experienced by a data packet from the moment of dispatch until its return journey. RTT plays an impactful role in the functionality of the TCP/IP protocol compliance. For those working alongside network or internet-centric technologies, an enriched understanding of RTT is crucial.

RTT in Daily Life: Everyday Examples

Our regular activities are intimately intertwined with a lesser-known concept, RTT (Round Trip Time). From emailing to gaming or video surfing, this underpinning principle becomes paramount in dictating your interaction's excellence. Let's illuminate this critical component with a few real-life illustrations.

Electronic Mail Exchange

Picture the journey of an email, fragmented into multiple data fragments, propelled across the internet stratosphere to land in the recipient's server. RTT fundamentally measures the span it takes for a single fragment to make a round trip between your system and the destination server. Elements of delay creep in with a high RTT, impacting the swiftness of your email delivery. Although this may appear inconsequential in standard exchanges, the ramifications are significant during time-critical correspondences.

Virtual Gameplay

In the virtual gaming universe, RTT becomes the invisible adjudicator of your experience. Every action you make, be it character motion or launching an attack, converts into data fragments moving towards the gaming server. This server digests this information before reciprocating a response. The chronology of this entire operation is termed RTT.

A low RTT manifests in a virtually instantaneous in-game reflection of your actions, creating a fluid, pleasurable gaming session. Conversely, a high RTT brings about an irritating delay or 'lag' between your maneuvers and in-game ramifications.

Digital Video Consumption

During a video playback, data fragments are in a constant relay from the content server to your gadget. RTT captures the timescale this fragment takes to make a return journey from the server to your device.

When RTT is minimal, you enjoy a smooth, non-stuttering video playback. But a high RTT gives rise to frequent halts due to buffering and a compromised video resolution, all because the data fragments are unable to match pace for a continuous video render.

Internet Surfing

Browsing the internet is essentially a practice of dispatching requests to respective web servers and receiving website data in return. RTT measures the timeframe for this exchange.

Reduced RTT ensures swift webpage rendering, enabling a fluid browsing experience. However, a high RTT translates to a sluggish loading speed, particularly noticeable when accessing data-intensive websites.

Therefore, RTT is an obscure key influencing our daily digital interactions. By grasping its function & impact, we can uncover the intricate mechanics empowering our online existence.

The Mathematics behind RTT: A Non-Complex Explanation

To parse the principles that are intertwined with Round Trip Time (RTT), one doesn't necessarily need to be a mathematician. Essentially, these principles are not beyond basic arithmetic and common sense. Here, we'll demystify the essentials.

Symbolic Representation

Think of RTT as a clock measuring the journey of a data packet as it moves from origin to destination and reintegrates into the origin. Its formulaic expression captures four distinct stages in this journey:

RTT = Journey Initiation Time + Travel Time + Waiting Time + Decoding Time

Here's a closer look at each of these phases:

• Journey Initiation Time: Envisage a highway with vehicles (data packages) rushing in at bursting speed. This time is essentially the span required for each vehicle to completely enter onto the highway. It's ascertained by the ratio of packet dimensions to the carrying capacity of the link.
• Travel Time: This second phase is about the transmigration of a single data fragment across the highway from the beginning to the endpoint. It's the ratio of the geographical gap between the two points to the speed of light in the transmission medium.
• Waiting Time: This is the time a data packet spends in line, waiting its turn to get processed. This duration can see significant fluctuations depending upon the pile-up on the highway.
• Decoding Time: It is the duration utilized by the routers and hosts to unravel the packet's identity from its header.

Sizing Implication on RTT

Packet or vehicle size plays a striking role in the dynamics of RTT. Higher dimensions lead to extended journey initiation and travel times, thus elevating RTT. Smaller sizes may pull down RTT but might simultaneously increase administrative load due to the swelling number of packets.

Bandwidth: A Key Player

Highway capacity or bandwidth can dramatically influence RTT. With more room to accommodate data, RTT drops. However, a greater bandwidth won't guarantee diminished RTT if traffic becomes overwhelming.

The Geographic Factor

The physical space between data sender and receiver fundamentally affects the travel time and hence the RTT. Expanded distances translate to increased RTT.

Network Traffic and RTT

The overall health of the highway, marked by scenarios like congestion and data loss, can substantially augment RTT. While congestion results in extended waiting duration, data loss necessitates re-dispatching of packets, thereby escalating RTT.

Let's emulate these ideas. Imagine a data unit of 1000 bytes in dimension, a highway of 1 Mbps bandwidth, a geographical gap of 1000 km between the sender and receiver, and light speed in medium measured at 200,000 km/s.

Deploying this input in the formula, we get:

• Journey Initiation Time = 1000 bytes * 8 bits/byte / 1 Mbps = 8 ms
• Travel Time = 1000 km / 200,000 km/s = 5 ms
• Considering negligible waiting and decoding times, the RTT equates to 8 ms + 5 ms = 13 ms.

This little illustration lights up our understanding of the rudimentary mathematics enmeshed within RTT. Mastering this knowledge can empower individuals to dissect the forces shaping RTT and how to manoeuvre it into achieving enhanced network output.

How RTT Impacts Your Internet Experience

As we venture into the digital wilderness, every device we use, be it a laptop, smartphone or a tablet, participates in a colossal information dance across the globe. This dance, which involves sending and receiving data, moulds the efficiency and smoothness of our online journey, with the Round Trip Time (RTT) operating as its intrinsic compass.

Decoding the Influence of RTT on Digital Experience

At the essence of RTT is the time an info-packet consumes to traverse from the initiation point (your gadget) to its terminus (the receiver server), and back. It’s a fundamental network barometer, intimately dictating the swiftness and reliability of your online connectivity.

Whenever you activate a weblink, dispatch an email or stream multimedia, your device is in a constant state of communication with the server that hosts the desired content. As the server returns the requested data, the clock ticks on this two-way journey - providing the RTT value.

A swift RTT translates into faster data transit, forging a slicker and fluid online journey. Conversely, a time-consuming RTT is responsible for frustrating hiccups such as buffering, lagging, and delays that could cripple your digital activities.

RTT’s Effect on Web Surfing

Think of the routine act of exploring a webpage. As you input a web address and press enter, your gadget shoots a request to locate and retrieve this webpage from its respective server. The server responds by sending the webpage details, which your browser converts into the visible screen content.

A time-intensive RTT slows down this relay race, potentially leading to delays and lag times. This becomes even more aggravating while navigating heavy-content platforms or multitasking across several tabs.

RTT’s Impact on Streaming Portals

Streaming platforms like Netflix, YouTube, and Spotify depend immensely on nimble RTTs to function seamlessly. As you enjoy a media file, your gadget is persistently soliciting additional data packets and receives them in return from the host server.

A sluggish RTT can trigger buffering lags as your device waits impatiently for data to land, placing unwanted interruptions in your streaming experience and causing potential dissatisfaction.

RTT and the Gaming Arena

Within the thrilling domain of online gaming, RTT could determine the victor and the fallen. Games mandate spontaneous interactions among players, and any communication delay can disturb the gaming rhythm.

A lethargic RTT time can instigate a lag – a noticeable and annoying lag between your gaming actions and the game’s reaction. In intense competitive gaming scenarios, every split second matters.

RTT and Virtual Meetings

In the contemporary remote work dynamics, video conferencing platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams have become indispensable. Even these tools lean on efficient RTTs for uninterrupted, latency-free dialogues.

An elongated RTT may introduce delays in audio and visual inputs, potentially disrupting effective communication and causing potential confusion. This can have dire consequences in professional environments, where time is key, and clear dialogue is essential.

To manifest, RTT is an unsung hero shaping the quality of your digital interactions. A record low RTT time paves the way for a swift, efficient data relay, crafting a seamless online engagement. Contrarily, a slow RTT might introduce noticeable drags and disrupt your online immersion.

RTT in the World of Gaming: Making the Connection

In the digital sphere of gaming, each split-second is paramount. The deciding factor between triumph and defeat frequently rests on the pace and productivity of your network link speed. Here, the concept of Round Trip Time (RTT) becomes indispensable. Grasping the profound role of RTT can lead to maximizing your gaming prowess.

The Function of RTT in Virtual Gaming

When it comes to interactive gaming, RTT signifies the interval required for a data chunk to journey from your gaming unit (whether it's a console, desktop, or handheld device) towards the game host and return. This two-way journey is pivotal as it dictates the rapidity of your gaming response based on your controls and the maneuvers of other participants.

Take an example of you initiating a jump maneuver in the game, this instruction is relayed as a data chunk towards the game host. The host subsequently processes your instruction and reciprocates with a response, visualized on your interface. The entire time spent during this operation is your RTT.

RTT's Impact on Gameplay Quality

An optimized, low RTT translates to swift reaction times providing you an advantageous edge in adrenaline-pumping games where precision and speed hold the key. Conversely, a high RTT results in latency, prompting your game to respond lethargically.

This can be visualized using a first-person shooter game scenario. Sporting a high RTT, you take a shot at a rival but owing to the delay, the host logs your shot post the enemy's evasion, resulting in a miss. On the contrary, a minimal RTT records your maneuvers virtually instantaneously, providing you a realistic shot at the target.

RTT's Connection to Server Proximity

The geographical separation between your gaming equipment and the game host has substantial bearings on your RTT. Greater the distance to the host, the more time required for data chunks to complete their journey, culminating in a high RTT. It's no surprise that serious gaming enthusiasts gravitate towards hosts situated in close proximity.

RTT's Relationship with Network Traffic

Network traffic too has a pivotal role in defining your RTT. If your network is swarmed by numerous devices attempting simultaneous internet access, it curbs the data chunks' travel speed, resulting in an amplified RTT.

Quantifying RTT during Gaming

Almost all virtual games provide an avenue to verify your RTT or latency period. This is often illustrated in the game's configuration or flashed on the interface amid the gameplay. By vigilantly tracking your RTT, you can take corrective measures to reduce it when warranted, like shutting down bandwidth-consuming applications or opting for a proximal host.

In conclusion, RTT is of paramount significance in virtual gaming, wielding influence over your game's operational speed and your gaming session's quality. An awareness of RTT operations enables you to finely tune it, ensuring a competitive edge and enhancing your gaming enjoyment.

Network Diagnostics and RTT: A Deep Dive

Investigating network functions is pivotal for preserving and boosting the efficiency of a network. An instrumental index utilized in these probes is the Round Trip Time (RTT), which we'll expound on. We will dissect the interaction between RTT and network probes to offer a thorough insight into its value in resolving network complications and bolstering network operations.

Dissecting Network Probes

Network probes are an organized method applied to discover, isolate, and rectify issues connected to the network. They incorporate a succession of evaluations and verifications to study the network's functioning, pinpoint problem areas, and apply appropriate solutions. These evaluations could span from elementary ping evaluations to intricate scrutiny of network traffic.

Influence of RTT in Network Probes

RTT has a prominent role in network probes, delivering helpful data on the network functionality by calculating the duration needed for a data packet to journey from the origin to the endpoint and return. Extended periods for RTT regularly signify network pile-up, substantial latency, or alternative efficiency complications.

RTT and Efficient Network Operations

RTT is a reliable measure of network efficiency. A lesser RTT signifies an operational network with little latency, whereas an elevated RTT implies possible problems, for instance, network pile-ups or malfunctioning hardware. With RTT monitoring, network administrators can detect and tackle these issues swiftly, thus guaranteeing best network operations.

RTT and Network Problem-solving

RTT also aids considerably in network problem-solving. By comparing varying RTT values of separate network segments, operators can accurately locate a network issue. For example, repeated high RTT values in a specific segment could suggest an issue in that exact segment.

Instruments to Determine RTT

Several mechanisms can calculate RTT, each with their distinctive attributes and capabilities. A few often-used tools are:

• Ping : This basic command-line function dispatches an ICMP echo request to an assigned host and anticipates a response. The duration needed for the response to arrive is the RTT.
• Traceroute : This mechanism calculates the RTT needed for each step along the route from the origin to the endpoint. It aids in identifying the specific network segment responsible for high RTT rates.
• Network probes software : These all-encompassing tools offer real-time monitoring of network functionality, encompassing RTT. Examples of these tools consist of SolarWinds Network Performance Monitor and PRTG Network Monitor .

Techniques to Boost RTT

Boosting RTT is essential for improving network operations. Some of the strategies applied include:

• Load balancing : Apportioning network traffic across numerous servers can alleviate overload and lessen RTT.
• Quality of Service (QoS) : Giving priority to certain types of traffic can guarantee they encounter lower RTT.
• Route optimization : Selecting the shortest paths for data packet travels can minimize RTT.

In summary, RTT is a central measure in network probes. It offers crucial insights into network operations and assists in problem-solving. By accurately calculating and boosting RTT, operators can corroborate seamless and effective network operations.

Understanding Packet Travel and its Relation to RTT

The world of virtual transactions mandates a deep comprehension of the voyage adopted by data morsels. This signifies the path these morsels embark on while traversing from one endpoint to another via an internet grid, an intriguing journey, to say the least. This intricate path comprises numerous phases such as the encasing of data, broadcasting of signals, tracing the path, and ultimately unmasking at the intended endpoint. These phases attribute to the overall duration documented for a complete two-way trip (RTT) – a crucial metric of a network's operational competence.

Delineating the Expedition of Data Segmentations

Emphasizing the link between RTT and the motion of data segmentations involves an exploration of this voyage. As data disseminates over a grid, it disintegrates into minute parts labeled 'segmentations.' Each of these segmentations then obtains a protective coating of cardinal identifiers and trailing notes housing essentials about the origin, endpoint, and the correct order of the segmentation.

Initiated next is the travel over the grid for these fortified segmentations. The blueprint of the grid, coupled with the tangible stretch between the initiator and the receiver, outlines the quantity of routers and toggles the segmentations navigate through. Every device on the course scrutinizes the segmentation's identifiers to pinpoint the optimal pathway to the final destination.

On arrival at their destination, these segmentations shed their protective casings, and the introductory message undergoes reconstitution. The transmission process is announced successful if all segmentations arrive in the correct sequence, free of any anomalies.

How Segmentations Movement Influences RTT

The Round Trip Time (RTT) mirrors the comprehensive duration a data segmentation spends journeying from its origin, reaching the receiver, and retracing its path. It offers an insight into network delay or latency. An escalated stretch covered by the segmentation amplifies the RTT, subsequently depreciating the network’s efficiency.

A variety of elements could sway RTT during the segmentation's voyage:

• Dispatch Span: The duration expended in freeing the segmentation from its source to the endpoint. It is reliant on the segmentation's volume and the network's bandwidth. Vast segmentations and meager bandwidths culminate in extended dispatch spans and an escalated RTT.
• Signal Span: The essential duration for a signal to transit from the initiator to the receiver. It leans heavily on the geographical expanse and signal propagation speed. Extensive distances and slower velocities can trigger extended signal spans and an increased RTT.
• Computation Span: The duration a router or toggle takes to process each segmentation. The intricacy of the routing operation and the machine's efficacy show direct correlation. Complicated routes and inefficient machines inject lengthier computing spans, thereby escalating RTTs.
• Queue Span: The waiting duration a segmentation endures in a queue before getting addressed by a router or toggle. It pivots on network traffic. Overburdened networks result in lengthened queue spans and thus, higher RTTs.

Grasping these dynamics empowers network custodians to employ strategies to better segmentation traffic and minimize RTT, hence escalating network competence.

Drawing Parallels: Segmentations' Movement and RTT

The following matrix distinguishes the connection between segmentations' movement and RTT:

These findings reveal that each facet influencing segmentation movement correlates to its impact on RTT. Hence, enhancing segmentations' motion is fundamental in curbing RTT, thereby augmenting network efficiency.

To encapsulate, acquiring thorough knowledge of segmentation advancement and its connection with RTT is indispensable for those tasked with refining network movement or efficiency. Focusing on the factors that influence both segmentations' movement and RTT can enable proactive steps towards enhancing network operations, ensuring a seamless and efficient data exchange process.

RTT in Relation to Network Speed and Efficiency

Network performance and user satisfaction are paramount in the networking arena, highly dependent on two prime parameters: pace and proficiency. One pivotal component shaping these features is the Round Trip Time (RTT).

Unveiling Direct Impact of RTT on Network Pace

Essentially, RTT measures the time it needs for a data chunk to voyage from its origin, reach the destination, and return. The length of this tour mirrors the pace of your network. Lower RTT is synonymous with faster networks, hinting that data chunks are making their journeys quicker than usual. Conversely, elevated RTT levels correspond to languid networks - data chunks take an unusually long time to complete their round trips.

Here's a deciphered table to comprehend the essence:

Thus, Connection X, having the shortest RTT, exceeds in speed, while Connection Z, carrying the heaviest RTT, lags behind.

Unraveling Indirect Impact of RTT on Network Proficiency

RTT not only sets the pace but also molds the proficiency of a network. How effectively a network utilizes its resources to relay data chunks from origin to destination is its proficiency. Elevated RTT levels can stretch the waiting time for acknowledgement of the data chunks sent. Throughout this span, the sender stays dormant, sending no fresh data chunks, causing a gap in network potential. Such scenarios frequently arise in protocols like TCP relying on acknowledgments to steer data flow.

However, a contracted RTT lets the sender grab the acknowledgements quicker, permitting more data chunk transmission in the same span. This maximizes network potential, therefore enhancing proficiency.

Below is a clearer depiction:

In the end, RTT stands as a crucial determinant of the pace and proficiency of a network. Networks with lower RTTs race towards speed and proficiency, while those with higher RTTs lag. Hence, decoding and controlling RTT sits at the core of network performance enhancement.

Latency vs RTT: Essential Differences and Comparisons

Untangling the Web: Probing Network Functionality with a Focus on Delay and Complete Cycle Time (CCT)

Delay and Complete Cycle Time (CCT) are elemental factors that chiefly shape the efficacy of a network’s operation. While they are frequently interconnected, each presents separate facets of network data migration .

Clarifying Network Delay

Visualize network delay as a digital sand timer counting down fractions of a second. It shows the span needed for a data packet to travel from its initial source to its finishing destination within a network — a lightning-fast sprint from point A to point B, with the distance gauged in milliseconds (ms).

Factors such as the physical gap between the sender and the receiver nodes, the mode of data delivery (be it copper wires, fiber threads, or airwaves), along with the integration of multiple network components can affect this interval.

In-depth Analysis of Complete Cycle Time (CCT)

Conversely, CCT represents a full roundtrip — picture it as driving from your abode (point of departure), touring a botanical garden (final stop), and then heading back home (starting point). This accounts for the complete time investment needed for the roundtrip plus the waiting period at the stopover, along with the return to the onset. The CCT is proportional to the delay for the timing reflected in milliseconds (ms).

Separating Delay from CCT

These temporal facets are significant in detecting anomalies in network tasks. Typically, the swiftness of a network gets represented by delay, whereas the responsiveness gets determined by the CCT. Occasionally, a network might exhibit low delay, yet necessitate an extended period to wrap up a full cycle due to hold-ups and response lags at endpoints (high CCT).

Link between Delay and CCT

It’s vital to realize that CCT will invariably be on par with or surpass the delay. The CCT calculates the span consumed by data packets during a return trip, inclusive of surplus data handling time.

In theory, in a flawless network, the CCT would amount to twice the delay. However, practical complications like network interference, route hurdles, and traffic in network equipment generally cause the CCT to exceed twofold the span of the one-way journey.

Fundamentally, delay and CCT, while interconnected, divulge exclusive details for assessing network productivity. A keen comprehension of these disparities can markedly hone one’s proficiency in handling network-related intricacies with superior accuracy and productivity.

How to Measure RTT Accurately for Optimal Performance

The efficiency of web infrastructures is inherently determined by the accurate evaluation of its Data Turnaround Time (DATT), a crucial criterion used by IT specialists to detect and mend underperforming networks, enhance network output, and ensure a seamless working environment for end-users.

Constructing a Procedure for DATT Calculation

Observing DATT necessitates a rigorous analysis of the entire course a data unit navigates, from inception to termination. Given this task typically, transmission procedures such as ICMP (Inter-Network Communication Evaluation System) or TCP (Transmission Regulation System) are deployed. The major approaches used to scrutinize DATT include:

1. Echo Command : Among the prevalent techniques for measuring DATT is the 'echo' command. This sequence dispatches an ICMP echo plea to a predetermined site, and the infrastructure anticipates a reply. The duration taken to get this reply establishes the DATT value. Implement the echo command as such:

The outcome displays the DATT in milliseconds (ms).

2. RouteTrack Command : A viable addition to Echo, the 'routetrack' command lets you peep into the track a data unit covers and separately displays the DATT for each lap of its journey. Execute the routetrack command like this:

This will dissect the individual DATTs for each leg of the data unit's journey.

Undetectable Factors that Might Misinterpret DATT Calculations

Unrecognizable variables that may misrepresent DATT evaluations encompass:

• Surge in Network Consumption : An abrupt leap in network usage may lead to data unit stacking, thereby extending the DATT.
• Geographical Extent : The physical distance separating the source and the endpoint can augment DATTs due to extended transfer periods.
• Device Potency : The sufficiency and robustness of the tools used to create and gather data can also distort DATT calculations.

Sophisticated Instruments for Accurate DATT Estimation

For precise DATT estimates, Network supervisors can employ these universally acknowledged instruments:

• CybernetScope : Renowned for its extensive prowess in network procedure inspection, CybernetScope can analyze and display data unit DATTs.
• EchoMapper : This progressive apparatus combines 'echo' and 'routetrack' functionalities into a visual and intuitive depiction.
• VirtuNet : VirtuNet offers DATTs together with an array of comprehensive network performance markers.

Ensuring Dependable DATT Outputs

To retain reliable DATT outputs:

• Frequent Verification : Conduct multiple inspections at varied intervals to cross-verify network inconsistencies.
• Review of Network Consumption : Schedule assessments during peak and off-peak traffic slots for a balanced evaluation.
• Dependable Methods : Use extensively acknowledged tools known for their efficacy in DATT calculation.

In the final analysis, a precise appraisal of DATT enables IT gurus to ensure maximum network output. Adequate probing techniques, recognition of misleading variables, and the application of tried-and-tested tools are critical determinants in ascertaining a network's top-tier performance.

Techniques for Reducing and Controlling RTT

Pursuing an optimal online journey? Managing and trimming down Round Trip Time (RTT) is a paramount consideration. In this context, we'll explore a multitude of methodologies designed to thresh out this objective.

Grasping the Importance of RTT Trimming

It's favorably beneficial to comprehend the vital underpinnings of why RTT reduction is of supreme importance. Mile-high RTT measurements may retard network competency, impinging activities from web surfing to E-sport challenges and media broadcasting online. By constraining RTT, we are able to exponentially boost the online experiences.

Approach 1: Refining Network Apparatus

Carving the inaugural step towards RTT attenuation involves refining network apparatus. This consolidation consists of assuring optimal performance of all network devices, comprising of routers and switches. Periodic fine-tuning and upgrades can support this pursuit.

Additionally, the spatial configuration of the network might influence the RTT. To illustrate, an overextended network covering a vast geographical region will inherently possess an escalated RTT compared to networks confining to a smaller area. Hence, orchestrating the network configuration with a focus on RTT minimization can aid its reduction.

Approach 2: Deploying Content Delivery Networks (CDNs)

Deploying Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) are formidable in curtailing RTT. CDNs function by cacheing a website's content on an assemblage of servers dispersed globally. If a user petitions to view a webpage, the content is expedited from the nearby server, effectively diminishing the RTT.

Approach 3: Leveraging TCP Window Scaling

TCP Window Scaling is a technique that can aid in trimming down RTT in networks with towering bandwidth-delay product (BDP). Expanding the TCP window size allows an increase in the amount of unconfirmed data that can be transmitted before an acknowledgment is required, thus curbing RTT.

Approach 4: Pathway Refinement

Pathway refinement entails the selection of the most beneficial route for data packets to traverse from source to destination. Opting for the shortest and least congested route can contribute to significant RTT reduction.

Approach 5: Protocol Streamlining

Disparate protocols bear different RTTs. Such as, TCP commonly has a higher RTT compared to UDP . Therefore, protocol selection can play a vital role in RTT reduction by choosing the apt protocol for the requirement.

Approach 6: Deploying Condensation Techniques

Utilizing condensation methods may assist in shrinking the volume of data transmitted, thus restricting RTT. It should be highlighted, however, that condensation can also enhance processing time, thus a careful cost-benefit analysis is essential.

Approach 7: Controlling Buffer Bloating

Buffer bloating is a scenario where superfluous buffering of data packets elevates latency and jitter, additionally decreasing overall network pace. Taming this phenomenon can help in curtailing RTT.

To wrap up, managing and constraining RTT embraces diverse strategies, ranging from refining network apparatus and activating CDNs, to streamlining communication protocols and controlling buffer bloating. By activating these approaches, we can potentially uplift the online experiences comprehensively.

The Impact of RTT on Video Streaming and VoIP Calls

In the digital world, our dependence on advanced tech tools, such as online video streaming and internet-based calls (VoIP), is tremendous. The effectiveness of these tools is directly reliant on robust and rapid internet connections. The network's Round Trip Time (RTT)- the time taken for data packets to travel from source to destination and back, is a significant determinant of their performance.

Insights on RTT's Influence on Online Video Streaming

Our everyday activities often involve the exchange of video data, whether we're binge-watching TV shows on Netflix, gaining knowledge from YouTube educational content, or engaging in live chats on Facebook. The quality and reliability of these platforms are significantly affected by RTT.

When a video begins to stream, data packets take a journey from the origin server to the viewer's gadget. The complete circuit followed by these packets, from their origin to destination and return, constitutes the RTT. A high RTT implies a greater delay in data packet delivery, causing irritations such as continuous buffering or lagging, which drastically compromises the viewing experience.

In contrast, a lower RTT means faster connectivity, contributing to an uninterrupted streaming journey. Therefore, ensuring a minimal RTT is key to top-notch digital entertainment experience.

The Bearing of RTT on VoIP Calls

Similarly, RTT largely impacts the quality of VoIP calls. In a VoIP call, verbal communications are converted from analog signals into digital data packets, which are then dispersed across the network.

The effectiveness of a VoIP call is strongly dictated by its RTT. A high RTT has the potential to cause substantial audio transmission delays, resulting in undesirable effects like echoes or overlapping speeches. Such disruptions hinder the natural flow of conversation and induce user dissatisfaction.

On the other hand, a smaller RTT ensures an audible and realistic voice quality, resembling conventional telephone call experiences. Hence, lower RTT is essential for flawless VoIP communication.

Drawing Parallels: Effects of RTT on Video Streaming and VoIP Calls

How to Reduce RTT for Optimal Video Streaming and VoIP Calls Experience

Various methods can be employed to curtail RTT and enrich your video streaming and VoIP call experiences:

• Choose a wired network : Generally, a wired (cable) connection yields lower RTTs than a wireless one.
• Upgrade your internet package : A superior bandwidth package can substantially reduce RTT.
• Use a server in close geographical reach : Selecting a server near your location often culminates in a smaller RTT.
• Utilize Quality of Service (QoS) tools : QoS tools can prioritize certain network activities, thereby reducing RTT for video streaming and VoIP calls.

In summary, RTT significantly affects the experience of video streaming and VoIP calls. Understanding this fact and implementing strategies to minimize it can dramatically enhance users' online communication experiences.

RTT in Wireless Networks: An In-depth Analysis

Wireless networks have become our invisible companions, silently fuelling our digital existence, be it at home, work, or cafes. Yet, they leave us in a lurch when poorly performing, often attributed to factors like Round Trip Time (RTT).

Decoding RTT in Wireless Setups

Simply put, RTT is the full circle time a data packet takes from origin to the end-point and back to the origin. It's a barometer of various influencing elements such as network density, distance between data source and recipient, radio wave disturbances, and signal power.

Imagine streaming your favorite movie in an overpopulated café with numerous devices jostling for Wi-Fi. The network density escalates, leading to higher RTT. Likewise, connecting to the Wi-Fi from your garden might lead to weakened signals due to distance, further escalating RTT.

RTT's Impression on Wireless Network Efficiency

RTT propels a domino effect on the quality of wireless productivity. Imbalanced RTT triggers sluggish data movement, souring the digital experience. Streaming or gaming with escalated RTT is the culprit behind intermittent buffering or lagging.

In contrast, regulated RTT is the assurance of brisk data movement, promising uninterrupted, pleasurable digital navigation.

The Puppeteers of RTT in Wireless Ecosystems

• Distance: A stretched distance between sender and receiver expands the data packet's journey, inflating RTT.
• Network Density: A jam-packed network, bustling with multiple users or data packets, clutters the gateway, amplifying RTT.
• Radio Wave Disturbances: Any electronic equipment interfering with the wireless signal can deviate the signal, leading to augmented RTT.
• Signal Power: A feeble signal intensifies RTT since the data packets frequently miss the reception, triggering retransmission.

Estimating RTT in Wireless Ecosystems

Tools like the "ping" are your allies to gauge RTT in wireless environments. It propels a data packet to a designated IP and records the round trip time.

For example, on a Windows system, activate the Command Prompt, input "ping www.google.com", and the outcome will register the RTT time stamp in milliseconds.

Diminishing RTT in Wireless Ecosystems

Here are some tactics that can help mitigate RTT in wireless setups:

• Router Placement: An ideally placed router, preferably central and obstruction-free, boosts the signal strength.
• Minimizing Network Jam: Scrimping on device connectivity can help ensure fluid network traffic and deflate RTT.
• Dual-Band Router Utilization: Such routers can shift between two frequencies, mitigating interference and thereby lowering RTT.
• Updating Network Assets: Integration of contemporary networking assets and technology can enhance network quality, pushing down the RTT.

To sum up, understanding and handling RTT can make or break your wireless network’s efficiency. Harnessing knowledge about RTT, its influencers, estimation techniques, and mitigation strategies can help you sculpt an optimized, high-performance wireless network.

RTT: A Critical Factor in Telecommunications

Gauging network efficiency in telecommunications is incumbent upon a key metric known as the Bidirectional Transit Duration (BTD). This component significantly modifies and shapes the system's output, a relationship we will explore alongside its interaction with distinctive communication models, and how adept BTD control plays a definitive role in yielding superior performance.

BTD: An Indispensable Parameter in Telecommunication Platforms

To decode telecommunication jargon, Bidirectional Transit Duration or BTD refers to the time taken for the successful journey of data from its genesis to the allocated endpoint and back. Its impact in telecommunication processes is immeasurable as its influence is directly proportional to the pace and efficiency of data dispersion. Hence, a compressed BTD duration implies an amplified data transmission speed which triggers an enhancement in the quality of communication.

BTD serves as an indispensable yardstick assessing the performance of the network within the foundations of telecommunication infrastructure. This enables the identification and timely mitigation of impending issues, thus optimizing network function to superior stages. For instance, an elevated BTD can be indicative of network overloading, obligating administrative intervention for apt adaptations.

Repercussion of BTD on Protocols for Communication

Numerous communication guidelines experience the profound impression of BTD. Consider the example of Communication Regulation Protocol (CRP). This protocol depends on BTD to determine the most flexible volume designated for data exchange. In this setting, the term 'volume' denotes the quantity of data that can be dispatched without the requirement for acknowledgement of receipt from the recipient's end. By modulating this volume in accordance with BTD parameters, CRP can facilitate uninterrupted exchange of data, thus averting any possible bottlenecks.

Tailoring BTD for Luxuriant Performance

Exemplary telecommunication output warrants proficient BTD control. This includes regular monitoring of BTD values, noting deviations, and initiating rectifying procedures.

• BTD Parameter Observation : Diurnal BTD observation can pinpoint potential network issues. Instruments like Axial Monitor and Navigation Tracker can be availed for this purpose.
• Deviation Monitoring : A remarkable shift from the typical BTD values can portend possible network issues. For instance, a sudden surge in BTD could be indicative of network bottlenecks or malfunctioning equipment.
• Adaptation Initiatives : Once the anomaly is detected , immediate curative steps need to be taken. Such actions may encompass rerouting of traffic channels, upgrading system hardware or modifying network settings.

To encapsulate, BTD has yielded itself indispensable, imposing a paramount influence in the realm of telecommunications, bearing a pronounced effect on its output and productivity. By maintaining a stringent measure on BTD, telecommunication service providers can ensure unrivalled service, consequently refining user experience.

How RTT Shaped the Internet: A Historical Perspective

RTT (Round Trip Time) has been instrumental in the transformation of the internet throughout the ages. A deeper study of RTT's influence on successive internet modifications aids our understanding of its comprehensive evolution.

RTT: The Catalyst for Advanced Network Functionality

In the early part of internet history, functioning under the aegis of the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET), RTT held a vital value. Here, communication happened through fragmenting data into small packets, which then traveled via the network. The time consumed for one such packet to travel from origin to endpoint and again to the origin— denoted as RTT — became an imperative parameter of network proficiency.

During the infancy period of ARPANET, the RTT values were considerably high due to rudimentary technologies and structural limitations. Gradual technology advancements subsequently curtailed the RTT values, promoting quicker and more effective networks.

RTT: Stepping Stone to the TCP/IP Epoch

The introduction of Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) in the 80s marked a significant stride in the internet's chronicle. TCP/IP utilized RTT to control the speed of data transfer and avert probable network traffic jams — predicaments crucial to sustaining network regimentation and efficiency.

Using a specialized algorithm, TCP/IP modulated the data transmission speed based on RTT values. A soaring RTT value signified network congestion, which directed a reduction in data transmission to circumvent packet loss. In contrast, a lower RTT value indicated an unfettered network passage, thereby accelerating data transmission.

RTT: Guiding Light in the WWW Phase

The advent of the World Wide Web in the 1990s underscored the relevance of RTT. As websites started adopting graphic illustrations, multimedia components, and interactive modules, both the size of data packets and RTT saw an uptick.

However, continuous scientific developments combined with infrastructural improvements managed to regulate the RTT. The inception of Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) specifically mitigated the RTT values by repetitively hosting web content in diverse locations— thereby reducing data packet travel distances.

RTT in Today's Internet World

In today's interconnected world, RTT remains crucial for network efficacy. As we witness an etiolation in the utilization of bandwidth-demanding applications like cloud computing, video broadcasting, and digital gaming, the need for least possible RTT has magnified many folds.

Currently, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and network overseers employ cutting-edge methods and apparatuses to gauge and enhance RTT. This is done to offer the least possible RTT, ensuring a hiccup-free user experience.

In summary, the journey of the internet from the ARPANET phase to the current interconnected era has been hugely influenced by RTT. The level of RTT's influence on internet modifications and feasibility is immense. With forthcoming technological breakthroughs like 5G and the Internet of Things (IoT) , RTT's relevance is envisaged to escalate even further.

Future of RTT: Trends and Predictions

As the digital world evolves, Round Trip Time (RTT) remains a crucial gauge in determining network efficiency. With entire societies increasingly dependent on the internet for information exchange or corporate logistics, network speed and accuracy are paramount. It's in this backdrop where RTT is continually scrutinized for network productivity and troubleshooting bottlenecks.

5G and its Correlation with RTT

A significant milestone in the communication sphere is the advent and deployment of 5G networks. These networks pledge remarkable speed and minimal latency, potentially reducing RTT and positively influencing data transfer and network productivity.

5G networks anticipate a latency rate of approximately one millisecond, a massive leap from the 50-millisecond latency rate exhibited by 4G networks. This dramatic dip in latency will invariably lower RTT, securing faster data interchange and enhanced network productivity.

Despite these promising features, 5G will not eradicate RTT. The data transfer sequence from the origin to recipient and vice versa is inescapable, requiring a time allotment. Hence, while 5G significantly diminishes RTT, its monitoring and management are unarguably necessary.

IoT’s Influence on RTT

Internet of Things (IoT), with its proliferating devices linked to the internet, could affect RTT. IoT might elevate RTT since the network may be hard-pressed to manage escalating traffic due to the exponential data exchange increase.

Despite this, IoT devices usually work on low power and exchange minimal data, thus alleviating potential stress on RTT. Coupled with breakthroughs in network technology such as edge computing, these factors facilitate RTT reduction as data is processed closer to origin, thus shrinking the travel radius.

Incorporating AI in Micro-managing RTT

Artificial Intelligence (AI) , another transforming trend, could significantly decimate RTT. AI, with its automation capacity, could redefine network management by mechanizing RTT monitoring and optimization.

AI's capability to scrutinize network traffic tendencies and predict probable RTT hikes serves as an ingenious tool. Network managers could leverage this information to take preemptive actions such as redirecting traffic or escalating bandwidth prior to RTT becoming a significant issue.

In essence, the factors shaping RTT's future are varied, including 5G deployment, IoT expansion, and AI integration. Nonetheless, RTT stays a decisive gauge for network productivity assessment. Therefore, accurately deciphering and micro-managing RTT is a skill that network managers and IT practitioners must hone.

Case Studies: The Effect of RTT on Major Corporate Networks

In the sphere of business communication systems, we can often overlook the impact of Round Trip Time (RTT). Yet, the evidence from different scenarios has reflected the considerable role that RTT plays in shaping the functionality and productivity of these systems. This chapter explores a number of such practical examples illustrating the importance of RTT within the digital infrastructure of large-scale businesses.

Illustrative Example 1: International Banking Corporation

An International banking corporation, operating in more than 50 nations, reported fluctuating network performance issues. Initially, the corporation's information technology specialists suggested that lack of sufficient bandwidth was for the inconsistency. A comprehensive examination, however, revealed an elevated RTT was the main reason.

Capable of managing an enormous flow of digital information, the corporation's network started having issues due to increased RTT, the result of geographical diversity of its operations. High RTT led to problems with the TCP window size, inadequately utilizing the existing bandwidth.

The corporation enforced several modifications to cut down on RTT, such as enhancing routing protocols and enacting Quality of Service (QoS) guidelines. This remedial action markedly improved the network performance - a testament to RTT’s vital effect on network productivity.

Illustrative Example 2: Online Retail Behemoth

An online retail behemoth catering to a worldwide clientele encountered difficulties with its website's response time. Regardless of a solid infrastructure and sufficient bandwidth, the company’s website response time fell below the set industry norms, particularly for clients located remotely from its server base.

After thorough research, the main reason behind the extended response time was identified as high RTT; with each HTTP request from the client’s browser needing to cover a significant distance to reach the corporation’s servers, thus creating a high RTT.

In order to rectify this problem, the company put a Content Delivery Network (CDN) into operation which reduced the physical space between clients and servers, consequently mitigating the RTT. This move considerably enhanced the website’s response time, emphasizing the integral role of RTT in ensuring a smooth user experience.

Illustrative Example 3: Transnational Software Conglomerate

A transnational software conglomerate, with a scattered workforce, faced trials with its in-house communication applications. In spite of having access to a rapid internet connection, its workforce faced delays during video calls and VoIP communications.

The IT team of the conglomerate realized the issue wasn't with the internet speed but the high RTT. The data packages were travelling long distances to reach the receivers, causing a high RTT and subsequent delays in communication.

The conglomerate dealt with this problem by deploying edge computing, moving data processing closer to the source, and thus reducing RTT. This adjustment enhanced the quality of video calls and VoIP discussions, emphasizing the influence of RTT on instantaneous communication.

These practical examples illustrate RTT's vast role in shaping the functionality and productivity of business communication systems. They also emphasize the necessity of precise evaluation and control of RTT for optimal network performance. As businesses continue their expansion on a global scale, RTT will play an increasingly pivotal role in shaping their digital communication experiences.

The Role of RTT in Internet Troubleshooting

When wading through the maze of the web, both regular netizens and tech savants may occasionally hit a snag. During these moments, bearing witness to the potency of the Round Trip Time (RTT) metric can be a revelation. RTT is instrumental in tackling problematic internet connectivity, ensuring a smooth, proficient handling of interruptions.

Pegging Network Problems: RTT's Decisive Duty

Essentially, RTT is the time taken for a packet of data to be dispatched from its source, reach its desired destination, and return. The insights derived from RTT can offer a wealth of information about the performance and operation status of a network.

Stumbled over a cyber hurdle? RTT fills the role of an efficient mechanic, isolating problems like high latency, disappearing data packets, and network congestion. If you notice your RTT scores skyrocketing, that could mean the network’s speed is deteriorating. Sudden, drastic alterations in RTT could indicate fluctuating network stability or obstructions.

Interpreting the Link between RTT and Network Efficiency

RTT's influence on network performance is paramount. A lower RTT denotes a speedy, high-functioning network. In contrast, a sky-high RTT implies the opposite. By evaluating RTT, cybersecurity experts can home in on and iron out network kinks.

Any unexpected hike in a network's RTT might originate from excessive network traffic, hardware snags, or hiccups with the Internet Service Provider (ISP). Recognizing the seeds of an inflated RTT is the initial step in overcoming these hurdles and bolstering network efficiency.

Tracking Disappearing Data Packets: RTT's Role

One common cyber conundrum is the loss of data packets during transmission, resulting in imperfect or delayed data delivery. RTT can be employed as a trustworthy auditor to root out this issue by highlighting discrepancies in data packet transmission timelines.

Persistently high RTT could indicate vanishing or delayed packets due to overburdened networks, hardware hang-ups, or ISP-specific headaches. Identifying and methodically correcting these elements could lead to noticeable enhancements in network performance.

The Symbiosis Between RTT and Network Traffic Jams

When networks are overwhelmed with data deluge, it can manufacture hold-ups and disruptions in data transference, often manifested as escalated RTT values and errant packets.

IT wizards can tackle these complexities by vigilantly monitoring RTT. For instance, a sharp upswing in RTT during high traffic periods might signify network congestion. Well-planned strategies like bandwidth allocation or traffic routing could come in handy in distributing network workload fairly and preventing system overwhelm.

RTT as a Technological Troubleshooter: A Real-life Example

Consider the scenario of an internet user tormented by sluggish connections and sporadic disconnections. They could conduct a basic ping test, leveraging RTT to clock the time lapse between their device and the server.

Consistent, high RTT could suggest network malfunctions. Users can investigate potential culprits like network bottlenecks, hardware hitches, or ISP-induced glitches. Pinpointing and eliminating the triggers behind such escalated RTT can enhance their internet speed and stability.

To sum up, RTT is a powerful tool when it comes to identifying, analysing and resolving internet challenges. It offers vital data about network functions, while also assisting in identifying and rectifying issues like severe latency, packet losses, and network blockages. By wielding RTT intelligently, everyday web users and IT pros can experience secure, nimble, and consistently high-performing internet connectivity.

What is Round Trip Time (RTT)?

What RTT is, the tools that use it, and what it means.

• What is Networking?

Network Basics & Protcols

Performance

Diagnostics

Introduction

The RTT measures latency between a client and host, including the time taken for said host to respond. Tools such as ping , traceroute , and mtr are often used when measuring latency. These tools report various metrics, including latency and the Round Trip Time .

To understand RTT, you might need a refresher about TCP connections. When a connection is established, a client sends a SYNchronize packet, followed by a SYN-ACK state. If everything goes well, the client receives an ACKnowledge response from the host.

How to measure RTT

Round Trip Time can be measured using any of the tools above, and some others. For this example, let's use ping. When you run ping test.b-cdn.net , you see an output like this:

Take a look at the last line, which refers to the round-trip. The time shown is the total time taken for a request. This includes the time taken for SYNchronization. The next value is the time for the packet (in this case, an ICMP echo) and the time taken for a reply to be ACKnowledged and received.

Diagnostic tests might detect suboptimal latency due to a variety of issues:

• Rate-limiting, wherein routers are configured not to reply after a certain number of ICMP requests.
• Long physical distance can mean your ICMP packet needs to hop over more networks before it reaches its destination.
• Attempting to test network performance to a host on a slow 3G connection; or a heavily congested network
• Servers occasionally experience periods of high congestion, meaning they don't have enough CPU cycles left to send an ACKnowledgement for your ping requests.

For the most part, when measured under typical conditions, RTT can provide valuable insight into the performance of existing routes. With deprioritization, ICMP responses can occasionally be lost or be delayed significantly. In most cases, routers either block or accept requests. Deprioritization is less popular than outright blocking ICMP requests because they make it more difficult to diagnose routing and latency issues.

In essence, RTT is a performance metric returned by ping , traceroute , and many other latency monitors. It is important to understand this metric as it bundles both the time taken to reach the host (using your ISP's routes) and back (using a host's routes). The routes taken to reach a host and back are sometimes different, which is why this metric is so helpful for both end-users and network administrators alike.

Did you find this article helpful?

0 out of 0 Bunnies found this article helpful

A measure of the time between a request being made and fulfilled. Latency is usually measured in milliseconds.

A tool to measure latency on the 3rd layer.

A network diagnostic tool used to find the path taken by a network packet to reach a destination IP.

Round Trip Time is a measure of how long a packet takes to reach a host, and back.

Prove your Knowledge. Earn a bunny diploma.

Test your knowledge in our Junior and Master Quizes to see where you stand. Prove your mastery by getting A+ and recieving a diploma.

Compare flights from 100s of sites.

Big names, great deals, filter for what you want, track prices, more than flights, search cheap flights by destination, find cheap flights.

Save money on airfare by searching for cheap flight tickets on KAYAK. KAYAK searches for flight deals on hundreds of airline tickets sites to help you find the cheapest flights. Whether you are looking for a last minute flight or a cheap plane ticket for a later date, you can find the best deals faster at KAYAK.

New York Flights

• Flight Atlanta - New York (ATL - LGA) $39+
• Flight Atlanta - Newark (ATL - EWR) $39+
• Flight Fort Lauderdale - Newark (FLL - EWR) $40+
• Flight Chicago - New York (ORD - LGA) $50+
• Flight Dallas - Newark (DFW - EWR) $55+
• Flight Miami - Newark (MIA - EWR) $55+
• Flight Dallas - New York (DFW - LGA) $60+
• Flight Fort Lauderdale - New York (FLL - LGA) $61+
• Flight Orlando - Newark (MCO - EWR) $71+
• Flight Miami - New York (MIA - LGA) $76+
• Flight Orlando - New York (MCO - LGA) $78+
• Flight Chicago - Newark (ORD - EWR) $87+
• Flight Fort Lauderdale - New York (FLL - JFK) $117+
• Flight Miami - New York (MIA - JFK) $117+
• Flight Los Angeles - Newark (LAX - EWR) $155+
• Flight Los Angeles - New York (LAX - LGA) $158+
• Flight Dallas - New York (DFW - JFK) $179+
• Flight San Francisco - New York (SFO - LGA) $180+
• Flight Los Angeles - New York (LAX - JFK) $191+
• Flight Seattle - Newark (SEA - EWR) $241+
• Flight San Francisco - Newark (SFO - EWR) $246+
• Flight Ontario - New York (ONT - JFK) $262+
• Flight Seattle - New York (SEA - JFK) $266+
• Flight San Francisco - New York (SFO - JFK) $267+

Orlando Flights

• Flight Atlanta - Orlando (ATL - MCO) $40+
• Flight Philadelphia - Orlando (PHL - MCO) $40+
• Flight Baltimore - Orlando (BWI - MCO) $48+
• Flight Cleveland - Orlando (CLE - MCO) $49+
• Flight Raleigh - Orlando (RDU - MCO) $49+
• Flight Houston - Orlando (HOU - MCO) $54+
• Flight Houston - Orlando (IAH - MCO) $54+

London Flights

• Flight New York - London (JFK - LHR) $276+
• Flight Newark - London (EWR - LHR) $276+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - London (IAD - LHR) $276+
• Flight Boston - London (BOS - LHR) $323+
• Flight Los Angeles - London (LAX - LHR) $330+
• Flight New Windsor - London (SWF - STN) $399+
• Flight Boston - London (BOS - LGW) $403+
• Flight New York - London (JFK - LGW) $410+
• Flight Chicago - London (ORD - LHR) $417+

Fort Lauderdale Flights

• Flight Baltimore - Fort Lauderdale (BWI - FLL) $33+
• Flight Philadelphia - Fort Lauderdale (PHL - FLL) $39+
• Flight Atlanta - Fort Lauderdale (ATL - FLL) $40+
• Flight Newark - Fort Lauderdale (EWR - FLL) $40+
• Flight Atlantic City - Fort Lauderdale (ACY - FLL) $45+
• Flight Raleigh - Fort Lauderdale (RDU - FLL) $45+
• Flight Cleveland - Fort Lauderdale (CLE - FLL) $48+

Boston Flights

• Flight Chicago - Boston (ORD - BOS) $42+
• Flight Newark - Boston (EWR - BOS) $44+
• Flight Baltimore - Boston (BWI - BOS) $58+
• Flight Fort Lauderdale - Boston (FLL - BOS) $63+
• Flight Philadelphia - Boston (PHL - BOS) $65+
• Flight Atlanta - Boston (ATL - BOS) $71+
• Flight Detroit - Boston (DTW - BOS) $81+

India Flights

• Flight Newark - Mumbai (EWR - BOM) $478+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - Hyderabad (IAD - HYD) $586+
• Flight New York - Mumbai (JFK - BOM) $596+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - New Delhi (IAD - DEL) $628+
• Flight Chicago - New Delhi (ORD - DEL) $662+
• Flight San Francisco - New Delhi (SFO - DEL) $689+
• Flight New York - New Delhi (JFK - DEL) $697+

Japan Flights

• Flight Los Angeles - Tokyo (LAX - NRT) $578+
• Flight San Francisco - Tokyo (SFO - NRT) $629+
• Flight Dallas - Tokyo (DFW - NRT) $757+
• Flight Seattle - Tokyo (SEA - NRT) $791+
• Flight Chicago - Tokyo (ORD - NRT) $805+
• Flight San Francisco - Tokyo (SFO - HND) $807+
• Flight Los Angeles - Tokyo (LAX - HND) $821+

Phoenix Flights

• Flight Ontario - Phoenix (ONT - PHX) $43+
• Flight Dallas - Phoenix (DFW - PHX) $53+
• Flight Houston - Phoenix (HOU - PHX) $56+
• Flight Chicago - Phoenix (ORD - PHX) $57+
• Flight San Francisco - Phoenix (SFO - PHX) $58+
• Flight Los Angeles - Phoenix (LAX - PHX) $60+
• Flight Seattle - Phoenix (SEA - PHX) $70+

Honolulu Flights

• Flight Los Angeles - Honolulu (LAX - HNL) $186+
• Flight San Francisco - Honolulu (SFO - HNL) $201+
• Flight San Jose - Honolulu (SJC - HNL) $209+
• Flight San Diego - Honolulu (SAN - HNL) $252+
• Flight Oakland - Honolulu (OAK - HNL) $283+
• Flight Ontario - Honolulu (ONT - HNL) $283+
• Flight Las Vegas - Honolulu (LAS - HNL) $289+

Los Angeles Flights

• Flight Oakland - Los Angeles (OAK - LAX) $39+
• Flight Salt Lake City - Los Angeles (SLC - LAX) $39+
• Flight San Jose - Los Angeles (SJC - LAX) $50+
• Flight San Francisco - Los Angeles (SFO - LAX) $53+
• Flight Seattle - Los Angeles (SEA - LAX) $55+
• Flight Portland - Los Angeles (PDX - LAX) $68+
• Flight Philadelphia - Los Angeles (PHL - LAX) $75+
• Flight Dallas - Los Angeles (DFW - LAX) $77+
• Flight Newark - Los Angeles (EWR - LAX) $80+

Chicago Flights

• Flight Atlanta - Chicago (ATL - MDW) $38+
• Flight Boston - Chicago (BOS - ORD) $40+
• Flight Denver - Chicago (DEN - ORD) $48+
• Flight Atlanta - Chicago (ATL - ORD) $52+
• Flight Dallas - Chicago (DFW - MDW) $53+
• Flight New York - Chicago (LGA - ORD) $54+
• Flight Dallas - Chicago (DFW - ORD) $58+

Denver Flights

• Flight Houston - Denver (HOU - DEN) $53+
• Flight Houston - Denver (IAH - DEN) $53+
• Flight Ontario - Denver (ONT - DEN) $55+
• Flight Chicago - Denver (ORD - DEN) $57+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - Denver (DCA - DEN) $57+
• Flight Los Angeles - Denver (LAX - DEN) $59+
• Flight Baltimore - Denver (BWI - DEN) $68+

Washington, D.C. Flights

• Flight Fort Lauderdale - Baltimore (FLL - BWI) $40+
• Flight Atlanta - Baltimore (ATL - BWI) $47+
• Flight Orlando - Baltimore (MCO - BWI) $53+
• Flight Boston - Baltimore (BOS - BWI) $58+
• Flight Dallas - Baltimore (DFW - BWI) $83+
• Flight Chicago - Baltimore (ORD - BWI) $89+
• Flight Houston - Baltimore (IAH - BWI) $103+
• Flight Houston - Baltimore (HOU - BWI) $109+
• Flight Los Angeles - Baltimore (LAX - BWI) $112+
• Flight Miami - Washington, D.C. (MIA - DCA) $127+
• Flight Boston - Washington, D.C. (BOS - DCA) $133+
• Flight Dallas - Washington, D.C. (DFW - DCA) $162+
• Flight Orlando - Washington, D.C. (MCO - IAD) $162+
• Flight Houston - Washington, D.C. (HOU - DCA) $166+
• Flight Atlanta - Washington, D.C. (ATL - IAD) $169+
• Flight Chicago - Washington, D.C. (ORD - DCA) $184+
• Flight Seattle - Washington, D.C. (SEA - DCA) $184+
• Flight Los Angeles - Washington, D.C. (LAX - DCA) $187+
• Flight San Francisco - Baltimore (SFO - BWI) $188+
• Flight Los Angeles - Washington, D.C. (LAX - IAD) $192+
• Flight San Francisco - Washington, D.C. (SFO - DCA) $198+
• Flight Dallas - Washington, D.C. (DFW - IAD) $208+
• Flight Seattle - Washington, D.C. (SEA - IAD) $277+
• Flight San Francisco - Washington, D.C. (SFO - IAD) $292+

Atlanta Flights

• Flight Chicago - Atlanta (MDW - ATL) $37+
• Flight Fort Lauderdale - Atlanta (FLL - ATL) $39+
• Flight New York - Atlanta (LGA - ATL) $40+
• Flight Newark - Atlanta (EWR - ATL) $40+
• Flight Detroit - Atlanta (DTW - ATL) $46+
• Flight Philadelphia - Atlanta (PHL - ATL) $47+
• Flight Baltimore - Atlanta (BWI - ATL) $49+

United States Flights

• Flight Newark - Miami (EWR - MIA) $40+
• Flight Los Angeles - Seattle (LAX - SEA) $61+

Hawaii Flights

• Flight Los Angeles - Hawaii (LAX - USHI) $186+
• Flight San Francisco - Hawaii (SFO - USHI) $196+
• Flight San Jose - Hawaii (SJC - USHI) $209+
• Flight San Diego - Hawaii (SAN - USHI) $252+
• Flight Seattle - Hawaii (SEA - USHI) $279+
• Flight Ontario - Hawaii (ONT - USHI) $283+
• Flight Las Vegas - Hawaii (LAS - USHI) $289+

Tampa Flights

• Flight Atlanta - Tampa (ATL - TPA) $44+
• Flight Raleigh - Tampa (RDU - TPA) $51+
• Flight Baltimore - Tampa (BWI - TPA) $57+
• Flight Cincinnati - Tampa (CVG - TPA) $58+
• Flight Philadelphia - Tampa (PHL - TPA) $58+
• Flight Dallas - Tampa (DFW - TPA) $64+
• Flight Houston - Tampa (HOU - TPA) $66+

Houston Flights

• Flight Atlanta - Houston (ATL - IAH) $34+
• Flight Newark - Houston (EWR - IAH) $52+
• Flight Orlando - Houston (MCO - IAH) $57+
• Flight Dallas - Houston (DFW - IAH) $58+
• Flight Chicago - Houston (ORD - IAH) $65+
• Flight Denver - Houston (DEN - IAH) $68+
• Flight Detroit - Houston (DTW - IAH) $72+

Las Vegas Flights

• Flight Burbank - Las Vegas (BUR - LAS) $33+
• Flight Los Angeles - Las Vegas (LAX - LAS) $36+
• Flight Oakland - Las Vegas (OAK - LAS) $45+
• Flight Seattle - Las Vegas (SEA - LAS) $51+
• Flight San Francisco - Las Vegas (SFO - LAS) $58+
• Flight Santa Ana - Las Vegas (SNA - LAS) $64+
• Flight Dallas - Las Vegas (DFW - LAS) $65+
• Flight Houston - Las Vegas (HOU - LAS) $69+
• Flight Houston - Las Vegas (IAH - LAS) $69+
• Flight Denver - Las Vegas (DEN - LAS) $70+
• Flight Chicago - Las Vegas (ORD - LAS) $85+
• Flight Detroit - Las Vegas (DTW - LAS) $93+
• Flight Atlanta - Las Vegas (ATL - LAS) $118+
• Flight Philadelphia - Las Vegas (PHL - LAS) $119+

Miami Flights

• Flight Baltimore - Miami (BWI - MIA) $39+
• Flight Philadelphia - Miami (PHL - MIA) $39+
• Flight Dallas - Miami (DFW - MIA) $40+
• Flight Detroit - Miami (DTW - MIA) $40+
• Flight Raleigh - Miami (RDU - MIA) $46+
• Flight Chicago - Miami (MDW - MIA) $48+
• Flight Chicago - Miami (ORD - MIA) $50+
• Flight Atlanta - Miami (ATL - MIA) $51+
• Flight Charlotte - Miami (CLT - MIA) $55+
• Flight Houston - Miami (HOU - MIA) $58+
• Flight Houston - Miami (IAH - MIA) $58+
• Flight New York - Miami (LGA - MIA) $61+
• Flight Boston - Miami (BOS - MIA) $66+
• Flight Cleveland - Miami (CLE - MIA) $83+
• Flight Minneapolis - Miami (MSP - MIA) $112+
• Flight New York - Miami (JFK - MIA) $117+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - Miami (DCA - MIA) $127+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - Miami (IAD - MIA) $127+
• Flight Denver - Miami (DEN - MIA) $140+
• Flight Los Angeles - Miami (LAX - MIA) $159+
• Flight Ontario - Miami (ONT - MIA) $177+

San Francisco Flights

• Flight Ontario - San Francisco (ONT - SFO) $47+
• Flight Phoenix - San Francisco (PHX - SFO) $53+
• Flight Santa Ana - San Francisco (SNA - SFO) $57+
• Flight Los Angeles - San Francisco (LAX - SFO) $68+
• Flight Denver - San Francisco (DEN - SFO) $78+
• Flight Dallas - San Francisco (DFW - SFO) $140+
• Flight Seattle - San Francisco (SEA - SFO) $142+
• Flight Atlanta - San Francisco (ATL - SFO) $144+
• Flight Houston - San Francisco (HOU - SFO) $159+
• Flight Houston - San Francisco (IAH - SFO) $159+
• Flight Chicago - San Francisco (ORD - SFO) $161+
• Flight Minneapolis - San Francisco (MSP - SFO) $172+
• Flight Austin - San Francisco (AUS - SFO) $174+
• Flight Philadelphia - San Francisco (PHL - SFO) $188+

Seattle Flights

• Flight Ontario - Seattle (ONT - SEA) $75+
• Flight Phoenix - Seattle (PHX - SEA) $81+
• Flight Denver - Seattle (DEN - SEA) $89+
• Flight Oakland - Seattle (OAK - SEA) $89+
• Flight San Diego - Seattle (SAN - SEA) $90+
• Flight Burbank - Seattle (BUR - SEA) $98+

Paris Flights

• Flight Boston - Paris (BOS - CDG) $205+
• Flight New Windsor - Paris (SWF - CDG) $328+
• Flight Washington, D.C. - Paris (IAD - CDG) $340+
• Flight Baltimore - Paris (BWI - CDG) $341+
• Flight Chicago - Paris (ORD - ORY) $354+
• Flight New York - Paris (JFK - ORY) $380+
• Flight New York - Paris (JFK - CDG) $391+

Europe Flights

• Flight Miami - Madrid (MIA - MAD) $253+
• Flight New York - Barcelona (JFK - BCN) $314+
• Flight Newark - Barcelona (EWR - BCN) $317+

Florida Flights

• Flight Dallas - Florida (DFW - USFL) $40+
• Flight Newark - Florida (EWR - USFL) $40+
• Flight Philadelphia - Florida (PHL - USFL) $40+
• Flight Atlanta - Florida (ATL - USFL) $51+
• Flight Boston - Florida (BOS - USFL) $57+
• Flight New York - Florida (LGA - USFL) $61+
• Flight Chicago - Florida (ORD - USFL) $64+

Dallas Flights

• Flight Fort Lauderdale - Dallas (FLL - DFW) $40+
• Flight Phoenix - Dallas (PHX - DFW) $46+
• Flight Atlanta - Dallas (ATL - DFW) $51+
• Flight Newark - Dallas (EWR - DFW) $56+
• Flight Chicago - Dallas (ORD - DFW) $58+
• Flight Houston - Dallas (HOU - DFW) $58+
• Flight Chicago - Dallas (MDW - DFW) $60+

San Diego Flights

• Flight San Jose - San Diego (SJC - SAN) $48+
• Flight Denver - San Diego (DEN - SAN) $58+
• Flight Phoenix - San Diego (PHX - SAN) $59+
• Flight Oakland - San Diego (OAK - SAN) $60+
• Flight San Francisco - San Diego (SFO - SAN) $68+
• Flight Houston - San Diego (HOU - SAN) $78+
• Flight Portland - San Diego (PDX - SAN) $84+

Frequently asked questions

What do i need to know before booking a flight.

There are various factors to consider when booking a flight including cost, fare classes, baggage policies, the complications of flying long haul, and complying with airport regulations. To make your booking journey smoother KAYAK has developed a comprehensive flight guide including insights on finding affordable flights, packing efficiently, and utilizing the best travel tools.

What is the cheapest day of the week to book a flight?

The best day to book your flight depends on a number of factors, but there are general trends that you can follow to increase your chances of cheaper plane tickets. Based on an analysis of KAYAK data for all flights departing from inside United States over the last 12 months, the cheapest day to fly for domestic flights is Wednesday. For international flights, Tuesday had the cheapest tickets on average.

Which month of the year are flight prices lowest?

It’s well established that flights in the low season are generally cheaper than ticket prices during the high season. That means that knowing which month to find the lowest priced plane tickets will depend heavily on seasonality and your destination. While avoiding peak travel times can help you keep costs down, our data shows that the month with the lowest priced plane tickets for domestic flights based on all searches made on KAYAK in the last 12 months was January, while the most expensive was June. If you’re booking an international flight, then January is the cheapest month to fly and June the most expensive.

When is the best time to buy plane tickets - Last minute or in advance?

Last minute flight deals are definitely up for grabs but when exactly to purchase your plane tickets will depend on where you’re traveling to and from. Based on all data for flight searches made on KAYAK over the last 12 months, prices for domestic flights remained below the average price up to 1 weeks before departure. For international flights, deals could still be had up to 1 weeks prior to the departure date, with prices remaining below average. If you’re flexible, KAYAK brings you both advance and last minute one-way and round-trip flight deals.

Can flying international flights with a layover save money on airfare?

For many long-haul international flights, flying non-stop is not possible and you will have to fly with a layover. Some routes will offer both and you could consider flying with a layover for a number of reasons. Firstly, breaking up what would otherwise be a long-haul flight, taking a rest and then completing the journey might make the flight more manageable. Secondly, prices can also be lower than non-stop flights, so while it might take longer for you to reach your destination, you could save money. We’ve looked at prices over the last 12 months for the 100 most popular international destinations for KAYAK users and on average, prices for non-stop flights were cheaper than flights with a layover.

How does KAYAK find such low flight prices?

KAYAK processes over 2 billion flight queries annually and displays results from hundreds of airlines and third party sites, allowing it to find a variety of flight prices and options. It also displays results from 2M+ properties along with rental cars, vacation packages, activities and millions of verified reviews so users can see as many available travel options as possible.

How do I find the best flight deals on KAYAK?

A simple flight search at https://www.kayak.com/flights scans for prices on hundreds of travel sites in seconds. We gather flight deals from across the web and put them in one place. Then on the search results page you can use various filters to compare options for the same flight and easily choose the best flight deal from all of the deals coming straight from the travel sites to your screen, with no extra fee from KAYAK.

How can Hacker Fares save me money?

Hacker Fares allow you to combine one-way tickets on different airlines when it can save you money over a traditional round-trip ticket.

Does KAYAK query more flight providers than competitors?

Yes, KAYAK has access to more data and information than online travel agencies and consistently outperforms the competition in accuracy, globally.

How does KAYAK's flight Price Forecast tool help me choose the right time to buy?

KAYAK's flight Price Forecast tool uses historical data to determine whether the price for a given destination and date is likely to change within 7 days, so travelers know whether to wait or book now.

What is KAYAK's "flexible dates" feature and why should I care?

Sometimes travel dates aren't set in stone. If your preferred travel dates have some wiggle room, flexible dates will show you flights up to 3 days before/after your preferred dates. That way, you can see if leaving a day or two earlier will find you a better deal. You can also select the flexible "weekend" or "month" search options to widen your search range and find the cheapest price that works for you.

Search cheap flights with KAYAK. Search for the cheapest airline tickets for all the top airlines around the world, airports around the world and the top international flight routes . KAYAK searches hundreds of travel sites to help you find cheap airfare and book a flight that suits you best. Since KAYAK searches many plane tickets sites at once, you can find cheap tickets from cheap airlines and for trains and buses quickly.

KAYAK also helps you find the right hotels for your needs.

Jul 24, 2017

Diving deep into net/http : A look at http.RoundTripper

I have written quite a bit on HTTP . And this blog post is just yet another one that talks about another interesting concept in the way Go deals with HTTP and how it makes HTTP related stuffs even much more fun.

In this post, I would be covering what Round tripping is, it's applicable usecases and a tiny demo that shows it's application.

This concept I want to talk about is called Round tripping or as the godoc describes it the ability to execute a single HTTP transaction, obtaining the Response for a given Request . Basically, what this means is being able to hook into what happens between making an HTTP request and receiving a response. In lay man terms, it's like middleware but for an http.Client . I say this since round tripping occurs before the request is actually sent.

Although, it is possible to do anything within the RoundTrip method (as in like middleware for your HTTP handlers), it is recommended you don't inspect the response, return an error (nil or non nil) and shouldn't do stuffs like user auth (or cookies handling)..

Since http.RoundTripper is an interface. All you have to do to get this functionality is implement RoundTrip :

And this is just keeping in line with other one method interfaces in the stdlib.. Small and concise.

Caching http responses. For example, your web app has to connect to Github's API in other to fetch stuffs (with the trending repos one of it). In real life, this changes quite often but let's assume they rebuild that trending board once every 30 minutes and your app has tons of users. You obviously don't want to have to hit the api every time to request for the trending leaderboard . since it is always the same in a 30 minutes window and also considering the fact that API calls are rate limited and due to the high usage of your app, you almost always hit / cross the limit.

A solution to this is to make use of http.RoundTripper . You could configure your http.Client with a RoundTripper that does the following :

Does the cache store have this item ?

• Don't make the HTTP request.
• Return a new response by reading the data from the cache into the body of the response.

The cache store doesn't have this item (probably because the cache is invalidated every 31 minutes)

• Make the HTTP request to the api.
• Cache the data received from the api.

You don't have to make use of a RoundTripper for this as (inside a handler) you can check the cache for the existence of an item before you make the HTTP request at all. But with a RoundTripper implementation, you are probably distributing responsibilities properly ⁰

Adding appropriate (authorization) headers to the request as need be... An example that readily comes to mind is google/go-github , a Golang client for Github's api. Some part of Github's api require the request be authenticated, some don't. By default, the library doesn't handle authentication, it uses a default HTTP client, if you need to be able to access authenticated sections of the api, you bring your own HTTP client along, for example with oauth2 protected endpoints.. So how does this concern Round tripping, there is this ghinstallation that allows you authenticate Github apps with go-github. If you look at it's codebase, all it does is provide an http.Client that implements http.RoundTripper . After which it set the appropriate headers (and values) in the RoundTrip method.

Rate limiting. This is quite similar to the above, maybe you have a bucket where you keep the number of connections you have made recently. You check if you are still in acceptable standing with the API and decide if you should make the request, pull back from making the request or scheduling it to run in future.

Whatever have you.. Maybe not .

Real world usage

We would be looking at caching HTTP responses with an implementation of http.RoundTripper . We would be creating a server that responds to just one route, then a client package that connects to that server. THe client would make use of it's own implementation of http.Client so we can be able to provide our own RoundTripper, since we are trying to cache responses.

So here is what it is going to look like,

• Don't make the call to the server.
• Fetch the item from the store.
• Write it into the response and return it straight off.
• Make the request to the server.
• Write the body of the response into the cache store.
• Return the response.

This has been put up on github .

We would be building the server first since it's implementation is quite simple

Then we would build the client package. This is the most interesting part, while it is quite long (130+ LOCs), It should be relatively easy to follow.I highly recommend you head to the github repo .

First of all, we would need a cache store. Since this is a minimal project, a dictionary/map can help us get away ASAP. We would create a http.Transport that implements http.RoundTripper but is also a cache store.

In real life you'd want to separate them from each other though.

Then the main function where we bootstrap the program. We would set a timer to clear out the cache store, so we can make requests to the server, this is to enable us view which requests are being served from the cache or the original server.

To test this out, we have to build both programs - client/main.go and server/main.go . Run them in their respective directories with ./client and ./server . You should get something like this

And watch what gets printed to the terminal, you would notice that some places say "fetching from the cache" while some would be "fetching from the server".. The most interesting part is if you look at the implementation of server/main.go , we have a fmt.Println that would get executed only when the server is called, you would notice that you only see that when the client prints "Fetching from the server".

Another thing thing to note is that the body of the response stays the stay whether we hit the server or not.

0 SRP ? What really is a responsibility ? The term is quite overloaded but hey SRP all things.

A Comprehensive Guide To HTTP/3 And QUIC

The HTTP protocol lets browsers and other applications request resources from a server on the internet, for example, to load a web page. HTTP/3 is the latest version of this protocol, which was published by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) as a proposed standard under RFC 9114 in June 2022.

It aims to make the web faster and more secure by providing an application layer over QUIC, a next-generation transport protocol running on top of the lightweight User Datagram Protocol (UDP). We’ll discuss the different network layers in depth further down in this article.

Unlike the previous versions of HTTP, HTTP/3 doesn’t introduce any new features on its own. At a high level, it provides the same functionalities as HTTP/2, such as header compression and stream prioritization. However, under the hood, the new QUIC transport protocol entirely changes the way we transfer data over the web.

In this article, we’ll take an in-depth look at the new features in HTTP/3 and QUIC, see how they fit into the overall ecosystem of network protocols, how HTTP/3 compares to the previous versions of HTTP, and what its main limitations are.

What is HTTP/3? ​

HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) is an application-layer network communication protocol of the Internet Protocol Suite, or according to its official website , the “core protocol of the World Wide Web”.

It defines a request-response mechanism between client (e.g. a browser) and server applications on the web that allows them to send and receive hypertext (HTML) documents and other text and media files.

HTTP/3 was firstly known as ‘HTTP-over-QUIC’ because its main goal is to make the HTTP syntax and all the existing HTTP/2 functionality compatible with the QUIC transport protocol.

Thus, the new features of HTTP/3 are all coming from the QUIC layer, including built-in encryption, a new cryptographic handshake, zero round-trip time resumption on prior connections, the removal of the head-of-line blocking issue, connection migration to support mobile users on the go, and native multiplexing.

HTTP/2 is also referred to as H2 and HTTP/3 can be shortened to H3.

HTTP in the TCP/IP protocol stack ​

Delivering information over the internet is a complex operation that involves both the software and hardware level. One protocol cannot describe the entire communication flow due to the different characteristics of the devices, tools, and software used throughout the process.

As a result, network communication is based on a stack of communication protocols in which each layer serves a different purpose. Although there are various conceptual models that describe the structure of protocol layers, such as the seven-layer OSI Model , the internet is based on the four-layer TCP/IP model, also known as the Internet Protocol Suite. It’s defined in the RFC 1122 specification as follows:

“To communicate using the Internet system, a host must implement the layered set of protocols comprising the Internet protocol suite. A host typically must implement at least one protocol from each layer.”

Here is how the four layers of the TCP/IP model stack up, from top to bottom:

As the above table shows, HTTP is an application-layer protocol that makes communication possible between two software applications: a web server and a web browser. HTTP messages (requests or responses) are delivered over the internet by a transport-layer protocol: either TCP (for HTTP/2 and HTTP/1.1 messages) or QUIC (for HTTP/3 messages) — we’ll see how transport protocols work in detail later in the article.

A brief history of HTTP ​

Like most communication protocols, HTTP/3 is defined in the RFC (Request for Comments) Series used for publishing, editing, and cataloging technical documents related to the internet.

HTTP/3 has been standardized as RFC 9114 in 2022. However, two previous versions of the protocol, HTTP/2 and HTTP/1.1 are still in active use.

Here’s a brief summary of the evolution of the HTTP protocol since its inception:

See Cloudflare Radar for the current usage data of the three active versions of HTTP — 28% of Cloudflare’s traffic is already transferred via HTTP/3 and QUIC.

While most requests on Cloudflare’s global network still use HTTP/2, HTTP/3 traffic surpassed HTTP/1.1 in July 2022:

Image credit: Cloudflare Blog

What is QUIC? ​

QUIC (not an acronym; pronounced as ‘quick’) is a general-purpose transport-layer protocol published as an IETF Proposed Standard in 2021 — one year before HTTP/3. It can be used with any compatible application-layer protocol, but HTTP/3 is its most frequent use case.

QUIC runs on top of another transport protocol called UDP, which is responsible for the physical delivery of application data (e.g. an HTTP/3 message) between the client and server machines. UDP is a quite simple and lightweight protocol, which means that it’s fast, but on the other hand, it also lacks many features essential for reliable and secure communication. QUIC implements these higher-level transport features, so the two protocols work together to optimize the delivery of HTTP data over the network.

UDP has been around for more than 40 years — it was standardized back in 1980 . The acronym stands for ‘User Datagram Protocol’ as UDP exchanges connectionless datagrams (basic transfer units) between two end machines.

This is what a datagram looks like — it doesn’t include any data related to connection establishment or information about the success of delivery. It only includes a lightweight header and the message:

As you can see above, a UDP header is very lightweight: only 64 bits altogether (16 bits for the source port, 16 bits for the destination port, 16 bits for the length of the message, and 16 bits for the checksum). This makes pure UDP delivery very fast — however, QUIC makes delivery slower with the implementation of additional features.

With version 3, HTTP moves from TCP-based to UDP-based connections. As a result, the entire underlying structure of network communication changes.

TCP vs UDP ​

Like UDP, TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) is not a new transport protocol. It was created by two DARPA scientists in 1974 (first documented as RFC 675 ; the current version is standardized as RFC 9293 ).

It uses a different, connection-oriented, reliable approach to data transport that’s slower than the connectionless and fast but unreliable UDP. With UDP, we don’t know whether the packet has been delivered as it has no built-in feedback mechanism while with TCP, every dropped packet is retransmitted.

The diagram below shows the structure of a TCP packet and a UDP datagram side by side. For more information, see this TCP vs UDP comparison table by GeeksforGeeks:

Image source: The Network Encyclopedia

As you can see in the diagrams above, a TCP packet includes all the information necessary for performing the SYN/SYN-ACK/ACK handshake that establishes a reliable connection between the client and server. On the other hand, a UDP datagram only consists of a 64-bit header and the message.

The main advantage of UDP is its connectionless nature — as there’s no established connection between the client and server, network packets can use different delivery routes. In this way, each packet can use the most optimal path that’s available at that moment.

However, unlike TCP, UDP doesn’t guarantee delivery, which is its main shortcoming. As it has no loss detection mechanism, if a datagram doesn’t reach its destination, it’s simply dropped. Plus, as packets are delivered independently of each other, they arrive at their destination out of order.

Why do we need QUIC? ​

QUIC was created to replace TCP with a more flexible transport protocol with fewer performance issues, built-in security, and a faster adoption rate (we’ll see this feature in detail in the ‘Resistance to protocol ossification’ section below). It needs UDP as a lower-level transport protocol primarily because most devices only support TCP and UDP port numbers.

In addition, QUIC leverages UDP’s:

• connectionless nature that makes it possible to move multiplexing down to the transport layer and removes TCP’s head-of-line blocking issue (we’ll see this in detail later)
• simplicity that allows QUIC to re-implement TCP’s reliability and bandwidth management features in its own way

QUIC transport is a unique solution. While it’s connectionless at the lower level thanks to the underlying UDP layer, it’s connection-oriented at the higher level thanks to its re-implementation of TCP’s connection establishment and loss detection features that guarantee delivery. In other words, QUIC merges the advantages of both types of network transport.

It has another important purpose as well — implementing an advanced level of security at the transport layer. QUIC integrates most features of the TLS v1.3 security protocol and makes them compatible with its own delivery mechanism. In the HTTP/3 stack, encryption is not optional but a built-in feature.

Here’s a recap of how the three transport-layer protocols, TCP, UDP, and QUIC, compare to each other:

Differences between the HTTP/1.1 vs HTTP/2 vs HTTP/3 protocol stacks ​

Now that we looked into the differences and similarities of the three transport protocols, let’s see the main differences between the three HTTP stacks.

As discussed above, HTTP/3 comes with a new underlying protocol stack that brings UDP and QUIC to the transport layer. However, there’s another important change. As you can see in the diagram below, some of the roles and features of the application and transport layers also change:

The most important differences between the HTTP/3-QUIC-UDP stack and the TCP-based versions of HTTP communication are as follows:

• QUIC integrates most features of the TLS v1.3 security protocol, so encryption moves down from the application layer to the transport layer (we’ll discuss this in the next section in detail).
• HTTP/3 doesn’t multiplex the connection between different streams as this feature is performed by QUIC at the transport layer — transport-layer multiplexing removes the head-of-line blocking issue present in HTTP/2 (HTTP/1.1 doesn’t have this issue because it opens multiple TCP connections and offers the option of pipelining instead of multiplexing, which turned out to have serious implementation flaws and was replaced with application-layer multiplexing in HTTP/2).
• The UDP layer is more lightweight than the TCP layer because the latter has much more functionalities. In the HTTP/3 stack, QUIC is responsible for connection establishment, congestion control, and loss detection, which are handled by TCP in the two previous stacks.
• The QUIC layer has many responsibilities: it re-implements TCP’s features, integrates the TLS security protocol, and adds some new features, e.g. connection migration, to the transport layer.

Run A Free Page Speed Test

Test your website:.

• No Login Required
• Automated Recommendations
• Google SEO Assessment

The best features of HTTP/3 and QUIC ​

The new features in HTTP/3 and QUIC can help make server connections faster, more secure, and more reliable.

A QUIC note regarding HTTP/3 features ​

Even though the features below are frequently referred to as the features of HTTP/3, most of them come from the QUIC layer. As mentioned above, HTTP/3 simply provides the application layer on top of these transport-layer features.

Note that the following section only includes a selection of the features of HTTP/3 and QUIC. For the full feature list, consult RFC 8999 , 9000 , 9001 , and 9002 for QUIC and RFC 9114 , 9204 , and 9218 for HTTP/3.

The features discussed in the HTTP/3 specifications, such as the QPACK header, are not new features per se; they only make HTTP/2’s application-layer functionality compatible with the underlying QUIC transport.

1. Creating a secure and reliable connection in a single handshake ​

HTTP/2 needs at least two round-trips between the client and server to execute the handshake process: one for the TCP handshake for connection establishment and at least one for the TLS handshake for authentication (depending on the TLS version).

As QUIC combines these two handshakes into one, HTTP/3 only needs one round-trip to establish a secure connection between the client and server. The result is faster connection setup and lower latency .

QUIC integrates most features of TLS v1.3 , the latest version of the Transport Layer Security protocol, which means that:

• The encryption of HTTP/3 messages is not optional like with HTTP/2 and HTTP/1.1, but mandatory. With HTTP/3, all messages are sent via an encrypted connection by default.
• QUIC integrates this with its own handshake for connection establishment, which replaces the TCP handshake.
• In the HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2 stacks, TLS runs in the application layer, so only the HTTP data is encrypted while the TCP headers are sent as plain text, which comes with some security risks .
• In the HTTP/3 stack, TLS runs in the transport layer (inside QUIC), so not only the HTTP message is encrypted but most of the QUIC packet header too (except some flags and the connection ID — see later in the article).

In short, HTTP/3 uses a more secure transport mechanism than the previous, TCP-based versions of HTTP.

Here is how the structure of the TLS v1.3 handshake compares to the QUIC handshake:

As you can see in the diagram below, QUIC keeps TLS v1.3’s content layer that includes the cryptographic keys but replaces the record layer (responsible for fragmenting the data into smaller blocks/records to prepare it for transmission) with its own transport functionality:

2. Zero round-trip time resumption on prior connections ​

On pre-existing connections, QUIC leverages the 0-RTT feature of TLS v1.3.

0-RTT stands for zero round-trip time resumption, which is a new performance feature of the TLS protocol, introduced in version 1.3.

With 0-RTT resumption, the client can send an HTTP request in the first round-trip on prior connections because the cryptographic keys between the client and server have already been negotiated — data sent on the first flight is called early data .

The diagram below shows how the HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 stacks compare in terms of connection setup:

• If you use HTTP/2 with TLS v1.2, the client can send the first HTTP request in the fourth round-trip.
• With HTTP/2 and TLS v1.3, the first request for application data can be sent in the third or second (on prior connections) round-trip.
• With HTTP/3 and QUIC, which includes TLS v1.3 by default, the first HTTP request is sent in the second or first (on prior connections) round-trip.

3. Head-of-line blocking removal ​

As the HTTP/3 protocol stack has a different structure than HTTP/2, it removes HTTP/2's biggest performance problem: head-of-line (HoL) blocking. This issue happens when a packet is dropped on an HTTP/2 connection. Until the lost packet is retransmitted, the entire data transfer process stops and all the packets have to wait on the network, which leads to longer page load times .

In HTTP/3, head-of-line blocking removal is made possible by native multiplexing, one of QUIC’s most important features.

HoL blocking terminology ​

To understand what head-of-line blocking is and why QUIC only has non-blocking byte streams, let’s see the most important concepts related to this phenomenon:

Byte stream ​

A byte stream (or just stream) is a sequence of bytes (units of eight binary digits/bits) sent over a network. Bytes are transported as packets of different sizes — e.g. the minimum size of an IPv4 packet is 20 bytes while its maximum size is 65,535 bytes (an IP packet can carry a UDP datagram or a TCP segment ). A byte stream is essentially the physical manifestation of a single resource (file) sent over the network.

Multiplexing ​

Multiplexing makes it possible to deliver multiple byte streams over one connection, which means that the browser can load multiple files on the same connection simultaneously.

While HTTP/1.1 doesn’t support multiplexing (it opens a new TCP connection for each byte stream), HTTP/2 introduces application-layer multiplexing (it opens just one TCP connection and sends all the byte streams over it), which results in head-of-line blocking.

Head-of-line blocking ​

Head-of-line blocking is a performance issue caused by TCP’s byte stream abstraction. TCP doesn’t have any knowledge about the data it transports and sees everything as a single byte stream. So when a packet is dropped anywhere on the network, all the other packets on the multiplexed connection stop delivering and wait until the lost one is re-transmitted — even if they belong to a different byte stream.

As TCP uses in-order delivery, the lost packet blocks the entire delivery process at the head of the line. At a higher rate of packet loss, this can significantly harm site speed. Even though multiplexing was introduced as a performance optimization feature to HTTP/2, at a 2% packet loss, HTTP/1.1 connections are usually faster (see more in the HTTP/3 Explained GitBook by Daniel Stenberg).

Native multiplexing ​

In the HTTP/3 protocol stack, multiplexing is moved down to the transport layer — this is called native multiplexing. QUIC identifies each byte stream with a stream ID, so it doesn’t see black boxes like TCP but has some knowledge about the data it delivers (it only sees the stream IDs, but still doesn’t know what files it delivers).

How does QUIC remove head-of-line blocking? ​

QUIC runs on UDP, which uses out-of-order delivery, so each byte stream is transported independently over the network (by finding the most optimal route available). However, for reliability, QUIC still ensures the in-order delivery of packets within the same byte stream so that the data related to the same request arrives in a consistent way.

As QUIC identifies each byte stream and streams are delivered on independent routes, if a packet gets lost, the unaffected byte streams don’t have to wait for its re-transmission. These resources can keep downloading without being blocked by the lost packet at the head of the line.

Here’s a diagram of how QUIC’s native multiplexing compares to HTTP/2’s application-layer multiplexing:

As you can see in the diagram above, both HTTP/2 and QUIC open just one connection between the client and server, but QUIC transports the byte streams independently, on different delivery routes so that they don’t block each other.

Even though QUIC eliminates the HoL blocking issue of HTTP/2, out-of-order delivery also has a downside: byte streams will not necessarily arrive in the same order they were sent in. For example, it can happen that the least important resource arrives first, and the web page can’t start loading.

This additional head-of-line blocking can be mitigated by resource prioritization on HTTP clients (e.g. the browser downloads render-blocking resources first). With priority hints , you can also assign a relative priority to resources to help browsers prioritize your resources .

4. QPACK field compression ​

QPACK is a field compression format for HTTP/3 that makes HTTP/2’s HPACK header compression format compatible with the QUIC protocol (‘header’ and ‘field’ are used synonymously ; they refer to the metadata sent in the header or trailer of an HTTP message).

Field compression eliminates redundant metadata by assigning indexes to fields that are used multiple times during the connection. At a high level, HPACK and QPACK have the same functionality: both reduce the bandwidth required to transmit HTTP headers over the network. However, they use partly different mechanisms to address the different needs of the underlying transport protocols: TCP (HPACK) vs QUIC (QPACK).

How does HPACK work? ​

To reduce the size of the header, HPACK uses two indexing tables that assign indexes to fields:

• is read-only
• includes pre-defined fields that frequently occur in every HTTP message
• is empty initially
• is built up over the course of the connection and updated incrementally with every request
• includes the per-message changes either literally or as a reference to a field that was sent previously

To perform the header compression, both the client and server run an encoder and decoder. The HPACK header is encoded by the sender and decoded by the receiver application. As HTTP/2 sends and receives messages in order, HPACK can safely use references in the dynamic tables as they’ll always refer to a field that has already arrived.

Why is QPACK needed? ​

As opposed to HTTP/2, HTTP/3 cannot use the HPACK format which was created for TCP and assumes that byte streams arrive in order. If HTTP/3 used HPACK compression, it would result in additional head-of-line blocking because HPACK relies on references to previous fields.

However, with HTTP/3, byte streams don’t arrive in order, so it can happen that the dynamic table includes a reference to a message that hasn’t arrived yet — which would make the stream wait for the referenced one.

To solve this issue, QPACK introduces two unidirectional stream types: encoder and decoder streams . In addition to the bidirectional byte streams that deliver the HTTP/3 messages (including the compressed QPACK headers that also use indexes from the static and dynamic tables), the client and server can open encoder and decoder streams that deliver instructions to the other endpoint.

An encoder stream includes the encoder’s instructions for the decoder while a decoder stream includes the decoder’s instructions for the encoder . Each HTTP endpoint (client or server) can open one encoder and one decoder stream at most, however, they don’t necessarily have to do so — for instance, if they don’t want to use the dynamic table, they can avoid starting an encoder stream.

As opposed to the main bidirectional byte stream, the encoder and decoder streams are unidirectional, which means that they only deliver data in one direction without waiting for the response of the other endpoint. These are critical streams that stay open during the lifetime of the main connection and cannot be closed.

QPACK’s performance trade-off: field compression ratio vs. HoL blocking reduction ​

While adding extra (albeit lightweight) unidirectional byte streams to the communication comes with a performance overhead, it also mitigates the additional head-of-line blocking issue between independent byte streams arising from field compression.

The QPACK specification gives a fairly high level of freedom to client and server implementations to decide individually which one is more important and to what extent: head-of-line blocking mitigation or a higher level of field compression.

5. Flexible bandwidth management ​

Bandwidth management aims to distribute the available network capacity in the most optimal way between packets and streams. It’s essential functionality because the sender and receiver machines and the network nodes in-between them (e.g. routers and switches) all process packets at different speeds that also dynamically change over time.

Managing bandwidth helps avoid data overflow and congestion over the network, which result in slower server response times and also pose a security risk (e.g. vulnerability against flood attacks).

As UDP doesn’t have built-in bandwidth management, QUIC takes on this responsibility in the HTTP/3 stack. It re-implements the two pillars of TCP’s bandwidth management :

• flow control , which limits the send rate at the receiver to prevent the sender from overwhelming it
• congestion control , which limits the send rate at every node on the path between the sender and receiver to prevent congestion over the network

Per-stream flow control ​

To support independent streams, QUIC performs flow control on a per-stream basis. It controls the bandwidth consumption of stream data at two levels:

• on each stream individually, by setting the maximum amount of data that can be allocated to one stream
• across the entire connection, by setting the maximum cumulative number of active streams

Using per-stream flow control, QUIC limits the data that can be sent at the same time to prevent the receiver from being overwhelmed and to share the network capacity between the streams more or less fairly.

Note that QUIC uses a different flow control algorithm for cryptographic data used for authentication such as handshakes — this is controlled by TLS within QUIC.

Congestion control with optional algorithms ​

QUIC allows implementations to choose from different congestion control algorithms, as these are not specific to the transport protocol.

The most well-known algorithms are:

• NewReno – the congestion control algorithm used by TCP, defined in RFC 6582 , and used as an explanation of QUIC’s congestion control mechanism in RFC 9002
• CUBIC – defined in RFC 8312 , similar to NewReno, but uses a cubic function instead of a linear one to calculate the congestion window increase rate
• BBR (Bottleneck Bandwidth and Round-trip propagation time) – doesn’t have an RFC yet; it’s currently developed by Google

On poorer connections, there can be significant differences between the performance of different congestion control algorithms.

For example, according to the measurements of the Gumlet video streaming service , the BBR algorithm improves server response times by 21% compared to CUBIC on the slowest connections. The performance gains have the biggest impact on lossy network connections; faster connections experience less noticeable improvements.

In the chart below, you can see how the two congestion control algorithms impact server response times on lossy connections. While at the 75th percentile (on the slowest 25% of connections), BBR is just 4% faster than CUBIC, at the 99th percentile (on the slowest 1% of connections), it's 21% faster!

6. Seamless connection migration ​

Connection migration is a performance feature of QUIC that supports users who experience a network change, such as mobile users on the go. QUIC makes connection migration (more or less) seamless by making use of connection identifiers.

Connection IDentifier (CID) ​

By attaching an unencrypted connection identifier (CID) to each QUIC packet header, QUIC doesn’t have to reset the connection like TCP if the device switches to a new network (for example, from a 4G network to Wi-Fi, or vice versa) or the IP addresses or port numbers change for any other reason.

With the help of connection migration, QUIC doesn’t have to redo the handshake under the new conditions and HTTP/3 doesn’t have to re-request the files that were being downloaded when the network migration happened — which can be a problem in the case of larger files or video streaming.

Note, however, that the client and server still need to re-negotiate the send rates discussed above in the ‘Flexible bandwidth management’ section.

Linkability prevention ​

To avoid privacy issues, e.g. to prevent hackers from following the physical movement of a smartphone user by tracking the unencrypted CID across networks, QUIC uses a list of connection identifiers instead of just one.

This feature is called linkability prevention. At the beginning of the connection, the client and the server agree on a randomly generated list of connection IDs that all map to the same connection. With every network switch, a new CID from the list is attached to the QUIC header, so different networks cannot be linked to the same user.

7. Resistance to protocol ossification ​

One of the main reasons for creating QUIC, and subsequently HTTP/3, was to make a transport protocol that’s resistant to protocol ossification , which is an inherent characteristic of protocols implemented in the operating system (OS) kernel, such as TCP.

OSs are rarely updated, which applies even more to the operating systems of middleboxes , such as firewalls and load balancers, which sit between the client and server but are still essential parts of the network.

Protocol ossification is a problem because it makes it hard to introduce new features, as middleboxes with an older version of the protocol don’t recognize the new feature and drop the packets for security reasons. As a result, the adoption rate of new TCP features is slow. QUIC aims to solve this issue.

QUIC has a higher resistance to protocol ossification than TCP for three reasons:

• It runs in the user space (where native apps run) instead of the kernel, so it’s easier to deploy new implementations.
• It has a higher level of encryption (e.g. most of the QUIC header is encrypted), so middleboxes can’t read the content of the packet, therefore don’t drop them — which frequently happens to TCP packets that include a newer feature that middleboxes with older operating systems don’t recognize and deem a security risk.
• UDP is supported by every device, and the new features are added by the QUIC layer — on the other hand, adding new features via TCP extensions frequently requires an operating system update.

That said, QUIC streams can still be dropped for different reasons (we’ll see some of these in the next section), but the adoption of new QUIC features will be faster than TCP.

Limitations of HTTP/3 and QUIC ​

While the HTTP/3 protocol stack has several advantages, such as built-in encryption, head-of-line blocking reduction, 0-RTT connection setup on existing connections, and others, it also comes with some limitations.

Performance gains highly depend on the implementation ​

While the QUIC specifications give a lot of freedom to implementation developers, it’s still hard to correctly implement the features. For example, connection migration is great functionality, but many implementations don’t include it yet due to the complexity of its practical implications. Or, if a client implementation makes a poor choice of multiplexing algorithm, it can cause additional head-of-line blocking.

A research paper (2021) by Alexander Yu and Theophilus A. Benson also found that it’s difficult to deal with QUIC’s edge cases and properly implement congestion control algorithms. For now, HTTP’s real-world performance gains are not so high and show inconsistency across different implementations (in other words, it’s hard to tell why an implementation performs better under certain conditions than another one).

For more information on this subject, check out IETF’s list of all known QUIC implementations .

HTTP version negotiation is required before using HTTP/3 ​

HTTP/3 generally doesn’t work for the first request because browsers assume by default that the server doesn’t support HTTP/3 and send the first request via either HTTP/2 or HTTP/1.1 on a TCP connection.

If the server supports HTTP/3, it responds with an Alt-Svc (Alternative Service) header that informs the client that it can send HTTP/3 requests. The browser can respond in different ways: it can open a QUIC connection right away or wait until the TCP connection is closed.

Either way, an HTTP/3 connection is only set up after the initial resources have been downloaded over an HTTP/1.1 or HTTP/2 connection.

Increased difficulty of network management ​

As QUIC encrypts not only the payload but also most of the packet metadata, it becomes more difficult to troubleshoot network errors and optimize networks for performance and security, which makes the job of network engineers more challenging. Setting up blocking and reporting rules becomes harder for the same reason too.

Because of the high level of encryption, providing firewalling and network health tracking services also gets more difficult than for TCP streams that come and go with unencrypted metadata in the header. Due to this and the increased level of complexity, many firewalls don’t support QUIC yet, which creates a security risk for organizations that rely on these services.

Some networks block UDP ​

As UDP has historically been used for different kinds of cyberattacks (e.g. denial-of-service type of attacks), 3 - 5% of networks block UDP, except for essential UDP traffic such as DNS requests .

If UDP is blocked on a network, the traffic falls back to TCP-based HTTP/2 connections. However, as RFC 9308 , which discusses the applicability of QUIC, warns, “any fallback mechanism is likely to impose a degradation of performance and can degrade security”.

Browser and server support is still patchy ​

While there are many benefits to HTTP/3, the new functionalities can also be difficult to implement. Many server environments have just recently started to implement QUIC, and HTTP/3 is still an experimental feature in Safari browsers (see the current state of browser support ).

Learn more about HTTP/3 and QUIC ​

HTTP/3 and QUIC are extensive topics that are documented in several RFC documents (see a list of the most important RFCs related to HTTP/3 and QUIC on my blog).

For more knowledge on the subject, watch David Bombal’s discussion with Robin Marx on YouTube or Robin’s HTTP/3 talk at SmashingConf .

Wrapping up ​

HTTP/3 and QUIC change the way we use the internet by introducing a new, UDP-based protocol stack that makes use of independent streams and comes with built-in encryption and a new type of cryptographic handshake.

In theory, using HTTP/3 comes with many advantages related to performance, security, and connectivity, but in practice, it still needs time to be properly implemented and widely adopted.

Do you want to make your website faster? ​

With DebugBear , you can continuously monitor your website from 20 locations around the world and debug frontend performance issues.

Check out our interactive demo or sign up for our free trial and gain insight into the performance of your most important pages.

Monitor Page Speed & Core Web Vitals

Debugbear monitoring includes:.

• In-depth Page Speed Reports
• Real User Analytics Data

Get a monthly email with page speed tips

• HTTP in the TCP/IP protocol stack
• A brief history of HTTP
• Why do we need QUIC?
• Differences between the HTTP/1.1 vs HTTP/2 vs HTTP/3 protocol stacks
• A QUIC note regarding HTTP/3 features
• 1. Creating a secure and reliable connection in a single handshake
• 2. Zero round-trip time resumption on prior connections
• 3. Head-of-line blocking removal
• 4. QPACK field compression
• 5. Flexible bandwidth management
• 6. Seamless connection migration
• 7. Resistance to protocol ossification
• Performance gains highly depend on the implementation
• HTTP version negotiation is required before using HTTP/3
• Increased difficulty of network management
• Some networks block UDP
• Browser and server support is still patchy
• Learn more about HTTP/3 and QUIC
• Wrapping up
• Do you want to make your website faster?

Click OK to log in and restart your reservation. Click Cancel to continue with your reservation without logging in.

• Skip to global navigation
• Skip to content
• Skip to footer
• Travel alerts Travel alerts

We'll redirect you to the home page of the country / region site you choose.

• Search AA.com® Submit search

Book flights

( Required dot indicates required )

Select booking type

Cities and dates.

• Search flights round trip Round trip
• Search flights one way One way
• Search flights multiple cities Multi city

• Unaccompanied minors , Opens in a new window.
• Traveling with infants , Opens in a new window.
• For groups of 10 or more, contact Group & Meeting Travel , Opens in a new window.

Our system is having trouble

Please try again or come back later.

Please tell us where the airport is located.

Any searches or unfinished transactions will be lost.

Do you want to continue your session?

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of round trip

Examples of round trip in a sentence.

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'round trip.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

1837, in the meaning defined above

Dictionary Entries Near round trip

round-trip ticket

Cite this Entry

“Round trip.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/round%20trip. Accessed 8 Jun. 2024.

More from Merriam-Webster on round trip

Nglish: Translation of round trip for Spanish Speakers

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

What's the difference between 'fascism' and 'socialism', more commonly misspelled words, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, popular in wordplay, the words of the week - june 7, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, 9 superb owl words, 10 words for lesser-known games and sports, etymologies for every day of the week, games & quizzes.

Round The World Airline Tickets

Fly rtw with one world member airlines.

one world's Round The World tickets give you unprecedented access to hundreds of destinations in 170 territories. We offer three types of Round The World trips:

one world Explorer: a continent-based fare,

Global Explorer: a distance-based fare,

Circle Pacific: an inter-continental journey to explore continents that border the Pacific Ocean.

Where to first? The whole wide world is waiting for your Round The World trip.

one world Explorer

Continent-Based Air Travel

No matter where business or pleasure takes you,  one world's vast network means your Round The World trip via  one world Explorer fare makes it easy to travel from city to city, and continent to continent. And, for every dot you connect, you earn more miles and points to spend across the  one world Alliance.

Global Explorer

Distance-Based Air Travel

For an even wider choice of where to travel, book your Round The World trip via Global Explorer, which grants you access to an even more extensive list of airlines, including Aer Lingus, Bangkok Airways,  one world  connect   partner  Fiji Airways , Jetstar, Jetstar Asia, Jetstar Japan, Jetstar Pacific, WestJet, and  Qantas  code-share flights operated by Air Tahiti Nui.

Circle Pacific

Multi-Continent Air Travel

If you prefer to visit multiple continents without actually flying all the way around the world, our Circle Pacific fare lets you explore the continents that border the Pacific Ocean. You can choose to start and finish your journey in one of the following continents:

Asia  (Cambodia, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam)

Southwest Pacific  (Australia and New Zealand)

North America  (USA and Canada)

South America

Contact a  one world member airline or your travel agent to plan and book your Circle Pacific trip now.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a round the world ticket.

The one world Alliance offers a way to visit many countries, around the world, all in a single itinerary.

On oneworld.com, you can choose to book either one world Explorer, where the fare depends on the number of continents you visit, or Global Explorer, where the fare depends on the distance you travel.

Circle Pacific, an inter-continental journey to explore continents that border the Pacific Ocean, can be booked by your travel agent and is not currently available for booking on oneworld.com.

Where Can I Fly With Round The World?

For one world Explorer and Global Explorer, one world member airlines and affiliate airlines cover six continental regions: Europe/Middle East (including Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Georgia, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, and Yemen); Africa (excluding countries listed above); Asia (including the Indian subcontinent, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, but excluding countries named above); Australia, New Zealand, and the South West Pacific; North America (including the Caribbean, Central America, and Panama); and South America. Currently, it is not possible to begin your itinerary through Doha Hamad International Airport (DOH) through one world member Qatar Airways. Book both one world Explorer and Global Explorer on oneworld.com.

Through the one world Circle Pacific fare, one world member airlines and affiliate airlines cover four continental regions: Asia (including the Indian subcontinent, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan); Australia, New Zealand, and the South West Pacific; and North America. Ask your travel agent about booking a one world Circle Pacific fare. Routes are subject to change.

Where Can I Travel Now, Given COVID Restrictions?

View entry restrictions and COVID-19 travel requirements for countries around the world on our the one world Travel Requirements Information Portal . Use the map to get information on travel restrictions by country, including entry restrictions, as well as COVID-19 vaccination, testing, and quarantine requirements.

Is Round The World Ticket Business Class An Option?

Yes, Round The World tickets are available in Economy, Business, and First class. On our oneworld.com booking tool, there is a drop-down menu to select your preferred cabin class. Premium economy upgrades will show where available when you select flights.

Is Round The World Ticket First Class An Option?

How much does a round the world ticket cost.

Your Round the World fare is based on a few factors: the number of continents you visit or pass through or the distance travelled, the travel class selected, and the number of travelling passengers. Read on for more information about full fare rules and conditions [Note: Links open PDF in browser]:

What Are The Round The World Rules?

Read on for Round The World rules and conditions [Note: Links open PDF in browser]:

What Should I Know To Help Me Plan My one world Explorer Itinerary?

When planning your one world Explorer itinerary, here are tips to keep in mind:

Destinations are grouped into three zones and six continents:

Zone 1: North & South America

Zone 2: Europe, the Middle East and Africa

Zone 3: Asia and the South West Pacific

Your trip must be in a continuous forward direction, East or West, between Zone 1, Zone 2 and Zone 3. Backtracking within a continent is generally permitted, however some exclusions apply.

Your adventure can last from 10 days up to a year. Travel must be completed within 12 months of your original departure date.

Your trip must start and finish in the same city.

You must cross both the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean on your journey.

Your journey can include three to six continents, and anywhere between three and 16 flights.

Review complete one world Explorer fare rules and conditions .

Can I Change Or Update My Round The World Itinerary?

Yes, one world Explorer, Global Explorer and one world Circle Pacific itineraries can be modified to accommodate changes to your Round The World plans.

If you booked your Round The World trip through oneworld.com, contact the ticketing airline (the airline you are flying on the first leg of your journey) to make changes to your itinerary.

If you booked your Round The World tickets through a travel agent, please contact the travel agent to make changes to your itinerary.

Will I Earn Frequent Flyer Points On A Round The World Trip?

Short answer: Yes, you will earn frequent flyer points on your Round the World trip.

Long answer: Yes. one world works in collaboration with all of our partner and member airlines to ensure that you’re rewarded no matter where you travel. On all eligible flights, you will accrue points or miles toward the airline of your choice and toward your one world tier status .

How Can I Pay For A one world Round The World Trip With Frequent Flyer Points?

Currently, it is not possible to use frequent flyer points to pay for a one world Round The World trip.

Does Your one world Explorer ticket include checked-in baggage?

Two free pieces of 23 kilos each shall be permitted. Additional allowances may apply. Refer to individual carrier websites.

Find flight deals with United Airlines from $ 218 *

Changed bag rules and optional services          Cruise open_in_new Packages open_in_new

Fly United to destinations near and far

Choose United Airlines to fly to more than 210 destinations in the U.S. and more than 120 destinations internationally — every day we operate more than 4,500 flights across five continents. Our comprehensive route network means you can book a direct or connecting flight to and from airports all over the world. Our main U.S. hubs are located in the major cities of Chicago, Denver, Houston, New York/Newark, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. United is a founding member of Star Alliance™, whose entire network provides service to nearly 200 countries.

Explore United

View offers on popular domestic routes

United Airlines - Destinations and Route network

Checking in for your flight

Enjoy wi-fi, movie streaming and tasty food on board.

Book the best deals on flights to popular US States

Choose the United flight option that suits you best

United baggage allowances, don’t miss out on the perks of united mileageplus, find united's best fares to popular destinations.

Washington, D.C. (IAD) to

Denver (DEN) to

Houston (IAH) to

*Prices have been available for round trips within the last 48 hours and may not be currently available. For Economy class, fares listed may be Basic Economy, which is our most restrictive fare option and subject to additional restrictions . Additional baggage charges and fees for other optional service may apply. Other terms and conditions may apply.

United Airlines popular destinations from the United States

​ asia-pacific, ​ the americas, ​ the middle east, view additional offers on these popular domestic routes.

From New York/ Newark

• New York/Newark - San Francisco
• New York/Newark - Los Angeles
• New York/Newark - West Palm Beach
• New York/Newark - Fort Lauderdale
• New York/Newark - Chicago
• New York/Newark - Orlando
• New York/Newark - Tampa

From Chicago

• Chicago - New York
• Chicago - San Francisco
• Chicago - Newark
• Chicago - Los Angeles
• Chicago - Washington D.C.
• Chicago - Denver
• Chicago - Orlando

From San Francisco

• San Francisco - New York/ Newark
• San Francisco - Chicago
• San Francisco - Los Angeles
• San Francisco - Boston
• San Francisco - Denver
• San Francisco - Las Vegas
• San Francisco - San Diego

From Houston

• Houston - Newark
• Houston - Los Angeles
• Houston - Chicago
• Houston - New York
• Houston - Denver
• Houston - Las Vegas
• Houston - San Francisco

Book the best deals on flights to these popular US States

Flights to Alaska

Flights to California

Flights to Florida

Flights to Hawaii

Flights to Texas

Flights to Colorado

• Basic Economy - Ideal for travelers on a budget or looking for a quick getaway. This fare option gives you the opportunity to enjoy most benefits of United Economy® but at a lower fare with some restrictions. It is available only on select routes.
• United Economy - Our standard fare, which includes a full-sized carry-on bag.  
• Economy Plus® - A great option if you need more space to relax, follow up on work, or if you prefer to sit closer to the cabin. Upgrade to Economy Plus for your next flight or opt to upgrade for an entire year on all available flights.
• United First® or United Business® - Enjoy a plush seat with even more space, as well as dining, complimentary dining and alcoholic beverages, and more.
• United Polaris® - We've reimagined the international business class experience from lounge to landing to bring you the best sleep in the sky.

If you are unsure about your travel plans, opt for FareLock SM to hold your selected fare, ensuring that your price won’t increase, and the flight won’t sell out.

Easily check in online at united.com/checkin or by using the United app up to 24 hours prior to your departure. For travel outside of the United States, you can even scan your passport using the app.

At your departure airport, you can check in at a self-service kiosk or United check-in counter.

Please review our full check-in information page for more information.

Review all baggage details here , or use our handy baggage calculator .

On all mainline aircraft and two-cabin regional aircraft, enjoy inflight Wi-Fi . On select routes, personal device entertainment is also available, so you can stream TV shows and movies from our extensive library directly to your laptop or mobile device.

United offers a variety of food and drink selections, depending on the route and duration of your flight. For more information on United Economy dining, see additional details about United’s meal service .

Make the most of your travel by enrolling in MileagePlus, United’s award-winning frequent flyer program. This membership allows you to earn miles to book United award travel, earn travel benefits and much more. Learn all about the advantages of our MileagePlus program .

MileagePlus members can also earn and use miles when they travel with Star Alliance member airlines.

Browse destinations and flight offers on  united.com  and book your flight today.

Trending flights deals with United

Popular flights from united airlines.

• Sacramento - Indianapolis
• Washington, D.C. - Phoenix
• Denver - Mobile
• Houston - Miami
• Akron - Miami
• Akron - Phoenix
• Albany - Indianapolis
• Albany - Miami
• Albany - Phoenix
• Albuquerque - Indianapolis
• Albuquerque - Miami
• Albuquerque - Phoenix
• Allentown - Indianapolis
• Allentown - Miami
• Allentown - Phoenix
• Anchorage - Indianapolis
• Anchorage - Miami
• Anchorage - Mobile
• Anchorage - Phoenix
• Appleton - Indianapolis
• Appleton - Miami
• Appleton - Phoenix
• Arcata - Phoenix
• Asheville - Miami
• Asheville - Phoenix
• Aspen - Indianapolis
• Aspen - Miami
• Aspen - Phoenix
• Atlanta - Indianapolis
• Atlanta - Miami
• Atlanta - Phoenix
• Austin - Indianapolis
• Austin - Miami
• Austin - Mobile
• Austin - Phoenix
• Bakersfield - Phoenix
• Baltimore - Indianapolis
• Baltimore - Miami
• Baltimore - Phoenix
• Bangor - Miami
• Bangor - Phoenix
• Baton Rouge - Phoenix
• Billings - Indianapolis
• Billings - Phoenix
• Birmingham - Indianapolis
• Birmingham - Phoenix
• Bishop/Mammoth - Phoenix
• Bismarck - Indianapolis
• Bismarck - Phoenix
• Boise - Indianapolis

Flight search

• Adults Remove adult 1 Add adult
• Children Aged 2-11 Aged 2 to 11 Remove child 0 Add child
• Infants In seat Remove infant in seat 0 Add infant in seat
• Infants On lap Remove infant on lap 0 Add infant on lap
• Premium economy

Find cheap flights from Canada to anywhere Close dialog These suggestions are based on the cheapest fares to popular destinations in the next six months. Prices include required taxes + fees for 1 adult. Optional charges and bag fees may apply.

Useful tools to help you find the best deals, popular destinations from canada.

Frequently asked questions

Astronomical Unit: How far away is the sun?

Earth's distance from the sun does not stay the same throughout the year.

Difference between AU, light-year and parsec

Astronomical unit faqs.

• New definition

Our solar system in astronomical units

History of the astronomical unit, astronomical unit questions answered by an expert.

An astronomical unit (AU) is exactly 149,597,870,700 meters (92,955,807 miles or 149,597,871 kilometers), according to the International Astronomical Union (IAU). This is roughly the average distance between Earth and the sun.

Astronomers use astronomical units to describe how far away objects in space are, mostly in relation to the sun or other stars. For instance, Jupiter is about 5.2 AU from the sun, according to NASA .

Because Earth's orbit around the sun is elliptical (oval-shaped), it isn't always the same distance from the sun. An astronomical unit represents a practical average, rather than a precise measurement, of our distance from the sun.

Related: How big is Earth?  

Astronomical units are different from some other units of measurement researchers use to describe the distances of objects in space. Another unit is the light-year , or the distance light travels in one year — around 5.88 trillion miles ( 9.46 trillion km), according to NASA. In contrast, 1 AU is about 8.3 light-minutes, meaning it takes light about 8.3 minutes to travel from the sun to Earth.

Another unit is the parsec, which is equal to about 3.26 light-years, according to NASA. The parsec is a more technical measurement that is derived from an astronomical unit and is used mainly by scientists. 

Technically, a parsec is defined as the distance at which 1 AU subtends a one-arcsecond angle (see diagram to the right). The next-nearest star to the sun, Proxima Centauri, is about 1.3 parsecs, 4.25 light-years or 268,770 AU away .

What is the length of one astronomical unit?

One astronomical unit is exactly 149,597,870,700 meters (92,955,807 miles or 149,597,871 km), as defined by the International Astronomical Union.  

What are examples of astronomical units?

Earth, by definition, is 1 AU from the sun. Mercury, the closest planet to the sun, is about 0.39 AU from our star, while Neptune, the farthest planet from the sun, is 30.06 AU away from it.  

What's the difference between an astronomical unit and a parsec?

An astronomical unit is the distance between Earth and the sun and measures distances on the scale of star systems. A parsec is a unit used to measure vast distances in interstellar space, such as distances between stars and galaxies, and is partially defined using an AU. One parsec is about 19 trillion miles (31 trillion km). It takes light 8.3 minutes to travel between Earth and the sun but 3.26 years to travel one parsec.  

Changes to the definition

Before 2012, the definition of an astronomical unit was not defined as a constant and depended on several factors. The IAU, the international group that defines astronomical constants, decided to make the measurement simpler in August of that year.

Why the change? One reason was that the previous method of calculating an AU depended on knowing the mass of the sun , but that measurement is always changing as the sun converts its mass into energy, Nature reported . Another is related to Einstein's theory of general relativity , which posits that space-time is relative to the observer's location. The current definition addresses this problem by basing the distance on the speed of light in a vacuum, which always remains constant.

All of the bodies in the solar system — including the planets, asteroids and comets — orbit the sun at various distances. Like Earth, other planets have elliptical orbits and are not always the same distance from the sun. This is especially true for dwarf planets such as Pluto , which have highly irregular orbits. At its closest, Pluto is about 29.7 AU from the sun (closer than Neptune ); at its farthest, it is about 49.3 AU away, according to NASA.

The solar system extends for thousands of astronomical units away from the sun. Mercury , the closest planet to the sun, gets as near as 29 million miles (47 million km) in its elliptical orbit, while some objects in the Oort cloud , the solar system's icy shell, are thought to lie as far as 100,000 AU to 200,000 AU from the sun.

Source: NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (see planets data and dwarf planet Pluto data ) 

The first known person to measure the distance to the sun was Greek astronomer Aristarchus of Samos , who lived from about 310 B.C. to 230 B.C. He used the phases of the moon to measure the sizes and distances of the sun and moon. 

He postulated that when the half moon appears in Earth's sky, the center of our planet and the center of the moon create a line in space that forms a 90-degree angle with another line that could be drawn through space from the moon's center all the way to the sun's center. Using trigonometry, Aristarchus determined the hypotenuse of a triangle based on those two imaginary lines . The value of the hypotenuse provided the distance between the sun and Earth. 

Although his measurement was imprecise, Aristarchus provided a simple understanding of the sizes and distances of the three bodies, which led him to conclude that Earth goes around the sun about 1,700 years before Nicolaus Copernicus proposed his heliocentric model of the solar system.

In 1653, astronomer Christiaan Huygens calculated the distance from Earth to the sun. Much like Aristarchus, he used the phases of Venus to find the angles in a Venus-Earth-sun triangle. His more precise measurements for what exactly constitutes an AU were possible thanks to the existence of the telescope. 

Guessing (correctly, by chance) the size of Venus, Huygens was able to determine the distance from Venus to Earth. Knowing that distance, plus the angles made by the triangle, he measured the distance from Earth to the sun. However, because Huygens' method was partly guesswork and not completely scientifically grounded, he usually doesn't get the credit.

In 1672, Giovanni Cassini used a method involving parallax , or angular difference, to find the distance to Mars and, at the same time, figured out the distance to the sun. He sent a colleague, Jean Richer, to Cayenne, French Guiana (located just northwest of the modern-day Guiana Space Center, near Kourou) while he stayed in Paris. At the same time, they both took measurements of the position of Mars relative to background stars, and triangulated those measurements with the known distance between Paris and French Guiana. Once they had the distance to Mars, they could also calculate the distance from Earth to the sun. Because his methods were more scientific, Cassini usually gets the credit.

These techniques are also why astronomers continue to use the distance from Earth to the sun as a scale for interpreting the solar system.

"Expressing distances in the astronomical unit allowed astronomers to overcome the difficulty of measuring distances in some physical unit," Nicole Capitaine, an astronomer at the Paris Observatory, told Space.com in 2012. "Such a practice was useful for many years, because astronomers were not able to make distance measurements in the solar system as precisely as they could measure angles."

The sun is at the heart of the solar system. All of the bodies in the solar system — planets, asteroids, comets, etc. — revolve around it at various distances. 

Mercury, the planet closest to the sun, gets as close as 29 million miles (47 million km) in its elliptical orbit, while objects in the Oort Cloud, the solar system's icy shell, are thought to lie as far as 9.3 trillion miles (15 trillion km).

Everything else falls in between. Jupiter , for example, is 5.2 AU from the sun. Neptune is 30.07 AU from the sun. 

The distance to the nearest star, Proxima Centauri, is about 268,770 AU, according to NASA . However, to measure longer distances, astronomers use light-years, or the distance that light travels in a single Earth-year, which is equal to 63,239 AU. So Proxima Centauri is about 4.25 light-years away.  

Adam Riess is an astrophysicist who studies physical cosmology, measuring the universe using distance indicators such as supernovas (exploding stars) and Cepheids (pulsating stars). He also studies the expansion of the universe and was co-awarded the Nobel Prize in physics in 2011 for his role in discovering that the expansion rate of the universe is accelerating.  

What sort of astronomical objects are still usually measured in AU, and when might objects be too far away for the measurement to make sense?

The AU remains the baseline for any trigonometric parallax measurements, so nearly all distances measured in the Milky Way (MW), such as from the ESA [European Space Agency] Gaia mission , are calibrated to the AU. Outside the MW, distances based on standard candles like Cepheids are also calibrated by parallax so also depend on the AU. 

Geometry was a key part of how early astronomers calculated distances in space. Is it still, and how is it used?

Yes, geometry underlies all distance measurements. We just plug the physics into the geometry 

How can you use objects like supernovas and Cepheids to determine distances and other astronomical phenomena?

By calibrating their luminosity, we can use their brightness and the inverse square law to determine their distances. 

Additional resources

Watch a video explaining Aristarchus' approach to calculating the distance from Earth to the sun. NASA's sun fact sheet provides basic statistics about our star and its solar system exploration page offers details about solar science and missions studying the sun.

Bibliography

Brumfiel, G. "The astronomical unit gets fixed." Nature (2012). https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2012.11416

International Astronomical Union, "Measuring the Universe," accessed Jan. 21, 2022. https://www.iau.org/public/themes/measuring/

Kish, G. "A Source Book in Geography," accessed via Google Books. Harvard University Press, 1978.

Luque, B. and Ballesteros, F. "To the Sun and beyond." Nature Physics (2019). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-019-0685-3

NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, “Solar System Sizes and Distances,” accessed Oct. 19, 2023. https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/pdfs/scaless_reference.pdf

NASA Exoplanet Exploration, “What is a light-year?” accessed Oct. 19, 2023. https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/faq/26/what-is-a-light-year/

NASA Science, “Cosmic Distances,” accessed Oct. 19, 2023. https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/cosmic-distances/

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, “The Nearest Neighborhood Star,” accessed Oct. 19, 2023. https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/features/cosmic/nearest_star_info.html

NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. “Planet Distance Chart,” accessed Oct. 19, 2023. https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/pdfs/ssbeads_answerkey.pdf

Physics Explained. “Greek Physics: Calculating the distance to the Sun and Moon,” accessed Oct. 19, 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urgYWNCN-RA&t=137s  

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: [email protected].

Get the Space.com Newsletter

Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!

Rebecca Sohn is a freelance science writer. She writes about a variety of science, health and environmental topics, and is particularly interested in how science impacts people's lives. She has been an intern at CalMatters and STAT, as well as a science fellow at Mashable. Rebecca, a native of the Boston area, studied English literature and minored in music at Skidmore College in Upstate New York and later studied science journalism at New York University. 

China lands Chang'e 6 sample-return probe on far side of the moon, a lunar success (video)

Science and music festival Starmus VII is about to rock Bratislava with a stellar lineup

Massive 'El Gordo' galaxy cluster suggests dark matter smashes into itself

Most Popular

• 2 A billionaire wanted to save the Hubble Telescope — here's why NASA politely declined
• 3 Thruster glitches and helium leaks can't stop Boeing's Starliner astronaut test flight — but why are they happening?
• 4 The 'hole' on Mars making headlines could be crucial to Red Planet exploration
• 5 'Most unique tree here:' Artemis Moon Tree planted at US Capitol

Saar: Moscow Format meeting on Afghanistan in Tehran reviewed

Saar: Russian president’s remarks on Afghanistan discussed

You may like

Second round of regional meeting on Afghanistan held in Tehran

50 dead, injured due to floods over past month in Badakhshan

Tahawol: Reactions to interior minister’s trip to UAE discussed

Kazakhstan ‘to boost trade’ substantially with Afghanistan

German chancellor vows to deport criminals following brutal attack by Afghan migrant

Saar: Acting interior minister’s trip to UAE discussed

Saar: OSCE Calls For Action On Afghan Women’s Rights

Israeli forces rescue four live hostages from Gaza, military says

US forces remain postured outside Afghanistan to address threats: Biden

Tehran meeting on Afghanistan important for regional security: Pakistan

TikTok to label AI-generated content from OpenAI and elsewhere

Turkey says it killed 17 Kurdish militants in northern Iraq, Syria

Israel strikes eastern Rafah as ceasefire talks end with no deal

T20 World Cup warm-up match schedule released, Afghanistan to face Oman and Scotland

Afghanistan, Pakistan agree on new travel mechanism for truckers

Tahawol: Moscow format meeting on Afghanistan discussed

Afghanistan thrash Uganda by 125 runs at T20 World Cup

City Medical Complex Kabul Premier League 2024 gets underway

Defending T20 World Cup champions England washed out after Scotland scare

China’s Chang’e-6 probe lifts off from far side of moon

Tajikistan claims risk of radicalism from Afghanistan increasing

Early India vote count shows Modi alliance in majority but short of landslide

Tens of thousands of children in Afghanistan affected by ongoing flash floods

India’s Modi set for a record third term, but with much smaller majority

Ukraine can use U.S. weapons for limited strikes in Russia, Biden says

The dramatic policy shift follows the Kremlin’s assault on the city of Kharkiv and a chorus of pressure from European allies.

President Biden will allow Ukraine to use U.S.-provided weaponry against limited military targets inside Russia, officials said Thursday, a dramatic reversal of a long-standing precautionary measure that comes as Kyiv struggles to defend its second-largest city from a withering onslaught.

The policy shift, disclosed by U.S. officials on the condition of anonymity to discuss the president’s decision, authorizes Ukrainian commanders to “hit back against Russian forces that are attacking them or preparing to attack them” in and around Kharkiv, near the border in northeast Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelensky and other top officials in his government have campaigned for the shift with increasing urgency as Russia has pressed its assault there, emboldened by the Kremlin’s knowledge of Washington’s red lines, officials in Kyiv say.

The decision draws Biden even deeper into a war in which Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly raised the prospect of a nuclear strike, a concern for a U.S. leader who matured amid the U.S.-Soviet nuclear confrontations of the 1960s. Biden has been cautious about escalation — but also mindful that the Ukrainians have repeatedly been granted greater capabilities and faced down a Kremlin that did little in response.

A growing number of the United States’ European allies in recent days also had urged the administration to lift its opposition, signaling an intent to allow their own weapons to be used against military targets on Russian soil. Although Ukraine has used some European arms as well as their own to fight back, Washington’s say-so has been the most important because of the quantity and the quality of its equipment.

GET CAUGHT UP Summarized stories to quickly stay informed

A punishing heat dome will test Phoenix’s strategy to reduce heat-related deaths

Trump plans to claim sweeping powers to cancel federal spending

North Korea sent trash balloons. Activists in the South sent K-pop.

U.S. notches historic upset of Pakistan at cricket World Cup

Has tipping gone too far? Here’s a guide on when to tip.

The shift allows Ukraine to use U.S.-provided artillery and rocket launchers to hit Russian troops and equipment just across the border from Kharkiv and to strike missiles headed toward Ukrainian territory, U.S. officials said. They emphasized that the Biden administration’s policy barring longer-range strikes inside Russia “has not changed.”

“This is in response to the Ukrainian request, which was to be able to respond to attacks that are emanating from that area” in Russia’s Belgorod region, “to be able to hit Russian forces and arms depots,” one U.S. official said, adding that “Ukraine is not asking for a blanket policy change, and we’re not changing that policy.”

The Russian Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Speaking earlier Thursday, Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s chief spokesman, chastised the United States and its NATO allies, saying the alliance was responsible for setting off “a new round of escalating tension.”

“They are doing this deliberately,” Peskov said. “We are hearing a lot of belligerent statements.”

Biden’s reassessment, first reported by Politico, was several weeks in the making. It is a byproduct, officials said, of Russia’s renewed cross-border assault on Kharkiv, the mounting pressure from across Europe and a visit to Kyiv this month by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken that reinforced the peril facing Ukraine after more than two years of war.

Ukraine had been holding off Russian forces with increasing difficulty in recent months as U.S. military aid all but dried up last fall after congressional Republicans came out in opposition to further aid. Kyiv faced dwindling stocks of ammunition and antiaircraft missiles — to the point where diplomats posted in the Ukrainian capital started to worry this spring about a sudden collapse on the front lines and a major Ukrainian defeat.

That changed after Congress approved aid last month. But Ukrainian morale remains low, and shortages of trained soldiers mean that the front lines are still vulnerable despite the resumption of U.S. military assistance. Russia, meanwhile, has taken advantage of the moment, driving against Kharkiv and throughout other parts of the long front line as it tries to exploit the window before more U.S. aid helps stabilize Kyiv’s troops.

Ukrainian officials first asked the White House for permission weeks ago, on May 13, days after the assault on Kharkiv began and the day before Blinken arrived in Kyiv, another U.S. official said. National security adviser Jake Sullivan, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. agreed to recommend a policy shift to Biden, the official said.

Sullivan took the recommendation to the president two days later, as Blinken was departing Kyiv, and Biden agreed to it that same day, May 15, this official said. Blinken, meeting Biden later that week after his Ukraine trip, agreed that the shift made sense, the official said, adding that Biden asked for top officials to work through the details and the risks before a final approval.

Biden signed off on the change several days ago, and the policy went info effect Thursday.

Blinken, during a visit to Moldova this week, became the first senior Biden administration official to publicly indicate that Washington was considering the policy shift, telling reporters that “as the battlefield has changed, as what Russia does has changed in terms of how it’s pursuing its aggression, escalation, we’ve adapted and adjusted, too.”

Blinken emerged from his trip to Kyiv this month convinced that some form of limited policy shift was necessary, officials said. At a closed-door meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Prague on Thursday, the top U.S. diplomat hinted at an impending policy shift but did not provide details, one participant said. When he was asked directly about it at one point, he smiled but stayed silent, the person said.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in a recent interview with the Economist that the time had come for allies to rethink their restrictions. “Especially now when a lot of the fighting is going on in Kharkiv, close to the border, to deny Ukraine the possibility of using these weapons against legitimate military targets on Russian territory makes it very hard for them to defend themselves.”

In the days since, allies including France, the Netherlands, Canada and Finland echoed the sentiment.

In a visit to Kyiv this month, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said Ukraine has the right to use London-provided weapons to strike targets in Russia. “Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it’s defending itself.”

Although Moscow claims that five regions of Ukraine, including Crimea, are Russian territory, it has been highly sensitive to the increasing calls to allow Ukraine to use Western weapons to strike military targets within Russia itself. Putin earlier this week warned this could lead to “serious consequences.”

In a sign of the Kremlin’s anxiety, Putin hinted that Russia could use nuclear strikes against small European nations if NATO allowed Ukraine to attack what he called “deep in Russian territory.” He warned that NATO officials “should be fully aware of what is at stake.”

“If Europe were to face those serious consequences, what will the United States do, considering our strategic arms parity? It is hard to tell,” he said, referring to U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals. “Are they looking for a global conflict?”

Under pressure from Kyiv and European allies, Biden’s risk appetite has changed repeatedly over the course of the war when he decided to expand Ukraine’s arsenal with Stinger missiles, HIMARS launchers, advanced missile defense systems, drones, helicopters, M1 Abrams tanks and fighter jets.

Amid the restrictions on U.S. support for cross-border attacks, Ukraine has been using its own long-range attack drones to hit Russian civilian and military targets. But those aircraft have payload limitations and are not as effective.

U.S. officials remain concerned about Ukrainian cross-border attacks on Russian territory, including the targeting of oil refineries and nuclear early - warning systems, fearing that they could dangerously unsettle Moscow. Washington conveyed its concerns to Kyiv about two attempted attacks over the past week against radar stations that provide conventional air defense as well as warning of nuclear launches by the West. At least one strike in Armavir, in Russia’s Krasnodar region, appeared to have caused some damage.

Russia’s advances have also spurred discussion between allies about sending military trainers to Ukraine — another move long seen as potentially escalatory. But conditions on the battlefield seem to have convinced some allies that it makes sense to take the training closer to Ukraine’s troops, allowing them to move more quickly and easily to the front line afterward.

In February, French President Emmanuel Macron surprised many by suggesting that “nothing should be ruled out” when it comes to sending trainers to Ukraine, but he did not offer concrete details.

Ukraine’s top general, Oleksandr Syrsky, announced this week that Ukraine and France had signed an agreement for French soldiers to train troops on Ukrainian soil, then quickly walked it back, saying the issue was still up for discussion.

But French officials pointedly did not deny that talks were advancing, leading to speculation that an announcement about some sort of training mission could come soon.

Any training, NATO diplomats stressed, would be organized between member states and Ukraine bilaterally, not by NATO itself, which has kept an official distance from the war.

Biden has long ruled out sending U.S. troops to Ukraine. Whether that prohibition falls by the wayside like his other red lines remains to be seen.

Hudson and Rauhala reported from Prague. Robyn Dixon in Riga, Latvia, and Alex Horton, Tyler Pager and Dan Lamothe in Washington contributed to this report.