ping and trace [7:17802]
Dear All Can anyone tell me what is the difference doing a trace and a ping with the extended menu turn on ? Regards birdy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=17802&t=17802 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ping and trace [7:17802]
Brian Thanks for the response :) supposingly i do a trace from my router to 202.4.185.101 and it shows the following results : Type escape sequence to abort. Tracing the route to 202.4.185.101 1 202.161.130.18 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec 2 12.125.92.37 [AS 7018] 56 msec 52 msec 60 msec 3 12.123.195.18 [AS 7018] 100 msec 100 msec 100 msec 4 gbr6-p30.sffca.ip.att.net (12.123.13.162) [AS 7018] 52 msec 48 msec 48 msec 5 12.122.11.65 [AS 7018] 56 msec 52 msec 52 msec 6 12.122.11.218 [AS 7018] 48 msec 48 msec 48 msec 7 above-att-2.sjc2.above.net (208.184.232.153) [AS 6461] 56 msec 60 msec 60 msec 8 ord2-sjc2-oc48.ord2.above.net (208.184.233.46) [AS 6461] 136 msec 136 msec 132 msec 9 lga1-ord2-oc48-2.lga1.above.net (208.185.156.158) [AS 6461] 156 msec 156 msec 156 msec 10 lhr3-lga1-stm64.lhr3.above.net (64.125.31.181) [AS 6461] 268 msec 268 msec 264 msec 11 core2-lhr3-stm16.lhr1.above.net (208.185.156.1) [AS 6461] 260 msec 260 msec 260 msec 12 nss-above.lhr.above.net (208.185.188.34) [AS 6461] 260 msec 260 msec 260 msec 13 63-109-249-230.newskies.net (63.109.249.230) [AS 17175] 268 msec 268 msec 268 msec 14 63.100.208.26 [AS 17175] 764 msec 760 msec 764 msec however,when i do a ping with EXTENDED COMMANDS turn on (not extended menu,my apologies) this is the results kap-cdr-03>ping Protocol [ip]: Target IP address: 202.1 4.185.101 Repeat count [5]: Datagram size [100]: Timeout in seconds [2]: 1 Extended commands [n]: y Source address or interface: 202.161.130.25 49 Type of service [0]: Set DF bit in IP header? [no]: Validate reply data? [no]: y Data pattern [0xABCD]: Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]: rec Number of hops [ 9 ]: Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[RV]: Sweep range of sizes [n]: Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 202.4.185.101, timeout is 1 seconds: Packet has IP options: Total option bytes= 39, padded length=40 Record route: (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) (0.0.0.0) Request 0 timed out Reply to request 1 (924 ms). Received packet has options Total option bytes= 40, padded length=40 Record route: (202.161.130.22) (12.125.92.38) (12.123.195.17) gar3-p370.sffca.ip.att.net (12.123.13.161) gbr6-p100.sffca.ip.att.net (12.122.11.78) (12.122.11.217) att-above-2.sjc2.above.net (208.184.232.154) sjc2-ord2-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.184.233.45) core2-loop.ord2.above.net (209.249.254.58) End of list Reply to request 2 (796 ms). Received packet has options Total option bytes= 40, padded length=40 Record route: (202.161.130.22) (12.125.92.38) (12.123.195.6) gar1-p360.sffca.ip.att.net (12.123.13.57) (12.122.11.66) (12.122.11.217) att-above-2.sjc2.above.net (208.184.232.154) sjc2-ord2-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.184.233.45) core2-loop.ord2.above.net (209.249.254.58) End of list Reply to request 3 (772 ms). Received packet has options Total option bytes= 40, padded length=40 Record route: (202.161.130.22) (12.125.92.38) (12.123.195.9) gar3-p370.sffca.ip.att.net (12.123.13.161) gbr6-p100.sffca.ip.att.net (12.122.11.78) (12.122.11.217) att-above-2.sjc2.above.net (208.184.232.154) sjc2-ord2-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.184.233.45) core2-loop.ord2.above.net (209.249.254.58) End of list Reply to request 4 (768 ms). Received packet has options Total option bytes= 40, padded length=40 Record route: (202.161.130.22) (12.125.92.38) (12.123.195.6) gar1-p360.sffca.ip.att.net (12.123.13.57) (12.122.11.66) (12.122.11.217) att-above-2.sjc2.above.net (208.184.232.154) sjc2-ord2-oc48.sjc2.above.net (208.184.233.45) core2-loop.ord2.above.net (209.249.254.58) End of list Success rate is 80 percent (4/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 768/815/924 ms so now u see what i mean with trace it hit 63.100.208.26 [AS 17175] 764 msec 760 msec 764 msec with ping (extended command turn on) it hit core2-loop.ord2.above.net (209.249.254.58) even though i am trace and pinging to the same address which is 202.4.185.101,it seems that trace seems to provide a more information than ping with the extended menu turn on hope i have explained myself clearly :) thanks Rgds birdy ""Brian"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I think u need to elaborate a little. Non extended ping just sends 5 > packets to the host and spits results. Extended ping lets you manipulate > many facets of the test. > > Brian > > - Original Message - > From: "birdy" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:57 PM > Subject: ping and trace [7:17802] > > > > Dear All > > > > Can anyone tell me what is the difference doing a trace and a ping with > the > > extended menu turn on ? > > > > Regards > > birdy Message
Trace results [7:20878]
Dear all Can anyone tell me what is the meaning of !A as listed below also what does !H means as well Thanks Regards bird Tracing the route to krwww.yahoo.co.kr (211.32.119.135) 1 202.161.130.18 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec 2 12.126.195.45 [AS 7018] 52 msec 52 msec 52 msec 3 gbr1-p70.sffca.ip.att.net (12.123.13.58) [AS 7018] 52 msec 52 msec 52 msec 4 12.122.11.65 [AS 7018] 52 msec 56 msec 52 msec 5 12.122.11.218 [AS 7018] 52 msec 52 msec 52 msec 6 above-att-2.sjc2.above.net (208.184.232.153) [AS 6461] 56 msec 56 msec 56 ms ec 7 pao1-sjc2-oc48-2.pao1.above.net (208.185.175.162) [AS 6461] 56 msec 56 msec 56 msec 8 abovenet.paix.bora.net (209.133.31.36) [AS 6461] 60 msec 56 msec 60 msec 9 p4.bora.net (203.255.234.54) [AS 3786] 56 msec 60 msec p4.bora.net (203.255.234.44) [AS 3786] 56 msec 10 203.255.234.201 [AS 3786] 180 msec 203.255.234.133 [AS 3786] 180 msec 203.255.234.193 [AS 3786] 176 msec 11 203.233.35.110 [AS 3786] 180 msec 180 msec 203.233.35.106 [AS 3786] 180 msec 12 * 211.233.55.51 [AS 3786] 184 msec 184 msec 13 k1c9-4231.sw.kidc.net (211.233.55.238) [AS 3786] 184 msec * 180 msec 14 211.233.26.254 [AS 3786] 180 msec 180 msec 176 msec 15 * * !A Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=20878&t=20878 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IP unnumbered [7:21794]
Dear all can anyone tell me what is IP unnumbered ? Regards, birdy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=21794&t=21794 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VPN [7:22022]
Dear All Can anyone suggest where i can find information on VPN. Any suggested link for reading ? 10Q Regards Kok Wah Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=22022&t=22022 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bandwidth question [7:49002]
Can anyone tell me why I have 2 Mbps WAN connection that reached 95 % utilisation during peak time. When I try to ping to my provider serial interface(next hop),it register 10% packet loss My router serial interface is showing 1.9Mbps (incoming traffic). Since the router is receiving 1.9 Mbps out of the 2M pipe,which means that there is still a balance of 0.1 Mbps (100 k) and so therotically speaking, there should not be any packet loss. I think is time for me to upgrade my bandwidth Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49002&t=49002 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bandwidth question [7:49002]
Dear priscilla Thanks for your reply :) Wellthe 10% packet loss happen at the peak time...and that can happen for a period of 3-4 hours No packet loss was observed during off peak hours. I rememeber reading something on a cisco article which states that WAN performance will worsen when it gets over 70 % utilised. As for my link it is around 96-98% utilised so i guess the cisco guideline is right ... ""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > birdy wrote: > > > > Can anyone tell me why > > > > I have 2 Mbps WAN connection that reached 95 % utilisation > > during peak time. > > For how long was it at 95%? That would definitely worry me, unless it turned > out that "the peak" was just a few seconds or something. > > > When I try to ping to my provider serial interface(next hop),it > > register 10% > > packet loss > > > > My router serial interface is showing 1.9Mbps (incoming > > traffic). Since the > > router is receiving 1.9 Mbps out of the 2M pipe,which means > > that there is > > still a balance of 0.1 Mbps (100 k) and so therotically > > speaking, there > > should not be any packet loss. > > Pings may not be a good way to measure packet loss because the provider may > rate limit its responses to pings. But even if that's not the case, there > could be packet loss when the average utilization was 95%. Over how much > time was the average calculated? There could have been times when the > utilization was 50% and there could have been times (like right when you > were sending the pings) when the utilization was 100% and packets had to get > dropped. That could still work out to an average of 95%. > > > > > I think is time for me to upgrade my bandwidth > > That could be true, but you may want to do a more detailed study over a > longer timeframe, (unless users are already making a stink). > > Good luck. > > Priscilla Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49078&t=49002 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: bandwidth question [7:49002]
Dear Phil Thanks for the reply...:) The below is from my router and it seems that both the tx and rx load is not over 90% utilised. reliability 255/255, txload 81/255, rxload 162/255 This reading is taken when my bandwidth usage is around 1.96Mbps. My pipe is only 2Mbps. At this point in time, packet loss is still happening... ""Phil Barker"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Possibly, but is anyone actually complaining about the > speed ? > > Check the serial interface at your end also for > dropped packets, load, reliability etc over a period > of about a week. If that average is over 90% then you > may well do with an upgrade. > > Phil. > > --- birdy wrote: > Can anyone > tell me why > > > > I have 2 Mbps WAN connection that reached 95 % > > utilisation during peak time. > > When I try to ping to my provider serial > > interface(next hop),it register 10% > > packet loss > > > > My router serial interface is showing 1.9Mbps > > (incoming traffic). Since the > > router is receiving 1.9 Mbps out of the 2M > > pipe,which means that there is > > still a balance of 0.1 Mbps (100 k) and so > > therotically speaking, there > > should not be any packet loss. > > > > I think is time for me to upgrade my bandwidth > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49081&t=49002 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
private addressing [7:49083]
Can anyone tell me. 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.0.0 is used for class B private addressing.. That means that it can use 16 class B network address Now, let say I wan to use 172.35.0.0 block, so is this consider a private address or a public address ? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49083&t=49083 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WAN utilisation [7:49105]
Hi Does cisco recommends that if the WAN utilisation is above 70 % ,it will cause performance degradation ? I think i have read it somewhere in one of the ciscopress book. Can someone out there verify this for me ? Thanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49105&t=49105 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
