Michel,

>>If the delay wasn't so precise (12 seconds for every hit), I might agree. I have seen this enough in past months that I thought it might be an internal (UT) problem so I mentioned it. As no one else seems to have seen the problem, I have to assume somewhere else along the route was introducing the delay. If (when) I see it again, I'll give you a shout if you are online. I'll also get some ping data for the route.
>
>If it would have been internal, we wouldn't be able to process 4 hits per seconds during rush hour. If you do a small calculation, that would be 48 hits before yours kicks in. So, a rapid long line would completely jam the server after a few seconds. There is definitely something in the route you are using which is failing. Usual test in such circumstances is to hook to the Internet from another point of entry, such as dialup, and see if you could get better results.

As I said in my first message, I tried through 2 different ISP's with the same results - the tracert I included showed nothing unusual up to your IP address in either case. Pathping showed consistent results with zero data loss and similar response times for the route. At the time I posted, the delays were very consistent, later the delay had completely disappeared. The problem is very intermittent - when it occurs again I will try and provide better info. If the delay had not been so precise, I might not have ever mentioned it. This was not rush hour, it was 6AM with 35 users online and very little traffic - 8 messages within an hour possibly. I am not trying to point fingers here, but a consistent 12 second delay in response time seems very unusual to me - considering the very dynamic nature of Internet routing.