Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Chris Wagner wrote: > I'm sorry, but ROFLMAO!!! It's sad and (sometimes) funny, that I have to work with those people ;) We are just changing our admin. He was a real mistake :| Now it's all funny for me, but It costed me time, lots of time... > >It' solved, there were 2 reasons. > > Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching > >it. > > Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450. > > It's a miracle it was working all together... -=Czaj-nick=-
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Chris Wagner wrote: > I'm sorry, but ROFLMAO!!! It's sad and (sometimes) funny, that I have to work with those people ;) We are just changing our admin. He was a real mistake :| Now it's all funny for me, but It costed me time, lots of time... > >It' solved, there were 2 reasons. > > Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching > >it. > > Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450. > > It's a miracle it was working all together... -=Czaj-nick=- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
I'm sorry, but ROFLMAO!!! At 05:18 PM 6/3/01 +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > >On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > >> On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: >> > Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: >> > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ more /proc/misc >> > Segmentation fault >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ >> >> some possible causes: >> >> 1. bad memory - most likely. >> >> 2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to >> not work) >> >> 3. other bad hardware >> >> 4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely. >> > >It' solved, there were 2 reasons. > Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching >it. > Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450. > It's a miracle it was working all together... > >-=Czaj-nick=- > > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ---==--- ___/``\___ 0100
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
I'm sorry, but ROFLMAO!!! At 05:18 PM 6/3/01 +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > >On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > >> On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: >> > Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: >> > >> > czajnik@earth:~$ more /proc/misc >> > Segmentation fault >> > czajnik@earth:~$ >> >> some possible causes: >> >> 1. bad memory - most likely. >> >> 2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to >> not work) >> >> 3. other bad hardware >> >> 4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely. >> > >It' solved, there were 2 reasons. > Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching >it. > Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450. > It's a miracle it was working all together... > >-=Czaj-nick=- > > > >-- >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ---==--- ___/``\___ 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ more /proc/misc > > Segmentation fault > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ > > some possible causes: > > 1. bad memory - most likely. > > 2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to > not work) > > 3. other bad hardware > > 4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely. > It' solved, there were 2 reasons. Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching it. Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450. It's a miracle it was working all together... -=Czaj-nick=-
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: > > > > czajnik@earth:~$ more /proc/misc > > Segmentation fault > > czajnik@earth:~$ > > some possible causes: > > 1. bad memory - most likely. > > 2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to > not work) > > 3. other bad hardware > > 4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely. > It' solved, there were 2 reasons. Core dumps - hmmm, our admin borken the kernel by incorrectly patching it. Ping times - some stupid guy inserted two different CPUs PII 400 and 450. It's a miracle it was working all together... -=Czaj-nick=- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ more /proc/misc > Segmentation fault > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ some possible causes: 1. bad memory - most likely. 2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to not work) 3. other bad hardware 4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt > > ?!? What do U mean ? he means you need to give your pigeons some time to rest between packets. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:41:54PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: > > czajnik@earth:~$ more /proc/misc > Segmentation fault > czajnik@earth:~$ some possible causes: 1. bad memory - most likely. 2. bad swap partition (or bad disk controller causing the swap partition to not work) 3. other bad hardware 4. bad libc6 or other library - not very likely. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt > > ?!? What do U mean ? he means you need to give your pigeons some time to rest between packets. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fabricati Diem, PVNC. -- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > > > > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt > > > > ?!? What do U mean ? > > It was a joke ... rfc 1149 is IP over avian carriers (birds) Ooooh, yeah, I didn't remember the rfc number, but I know this protocol : It's nice :) Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ more /proc/misc Segmentation fault [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ -=Czaj-nick=-
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > > On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt > > ?!? What do U mean ? It was a joke ... rfc 1149 is IP over avian carriers (birds) -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Patton pgpH2mBYhmXBg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt ?!? What do U mean ? isn't the ping time measured by storing system time the ICMP ECHO was sent, and comparng it to the system time the reply arrived ? I get it even when pinging my Cisco 1601 router, which is connected directly (I don't care 3com SSII 1100 now) -=Czaj-nick=- > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > > > Look at this: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 > > PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms > > ^^^ > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms > > > > What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... > > > > We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be > > the reason ? Overall stability is good... > > > > -=Czaj-nick=- > > > > > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > HoraPe > --- > Horacio J. Peńa > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > Look at this: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 > PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms > ^^^ > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms > > What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... > > We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be > the reason ? Overall stability is good... > > -=Czaj-nick=- > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- HoraPe --- Horacio J. Peña [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Nathan E Norman wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > > > > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt > > > > ?!? What do U mean ? > > It was a joke ... rfc 1149 is IP over avian carriers (birds) Ooooh, yeah, I didn't remember the rfc number, but I know this protocol : It's nice :) Anyway, my problem seems to be hardware: czajnik@earth:~$ more /proc/misc Segmentation fault czajnik@earth:~$ -=Czaj-nick=- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 08:47:38PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > > On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt > > ?!? What do U mean ? It was a joke ... rfc 1149 is IP over avian carriers (birds) -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Patton PGP signature
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, 30 May 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? > > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt ?!? What do U mean ? isn't the ping time measured by storing system time the ICMP ECHO was sent, and comparng it to the system time the reply arrived ? I get it even when pinging my Cisco 1601 router, which is connected directly (I don't care 3com SSII 1100 now) -=Czaj-nick=- > On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > > > Look at this: > > > > czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 > > PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms > > ^^^ > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms > > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms > > > > What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... > > > > We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be > > the reason ? Overall stability is good... > > > > -=Czaj-nick=- > > > > > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > HoraPe > --- > Horacio J. Peńa > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Ken Seefried wrote: > > I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without > "Enhanced Real Time Clock" support. The default clock driver apparently > isn't MP-safe. Thx, I'll check it tomorrow :).
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
Aren't you traveling several rfc1149 links? http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/pinglogg.txt On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 03:24:39PM +0200, Przemyslaw Wegrzyn wrote: > > Look at this: > > czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 > PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms > ^^^ > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms > > What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... > > We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be > the reason ? Overall stability is good... > > -=Czaj-nick=- > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- HoraPe --- Horacio J. Peña [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without "Enhanced Real Time Clock" support. The default clock driver apparently isn't MP-safe. Ken Seefried, CISSP Przemyslaw Wegrzyn writes: Look at this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms ^^^ 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be the reason ? Overall stability is good... -=Czaj-nick=-
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Ken Seefried wrote: > > I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without > "Enhanced Real Time Clock" support. The default clock driver apparently > isn't MP-safe. Thx, I'll check it tomorrow :). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ping - what the hell ?
Look at this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms ^^^ 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be the reason ? Overall stability is good... -=Czaj-nick=-
Re: Ping - what the hell ?
I think that you can get this if you have an MP kernel compiled without "Enhanced Real Time Clock" support. The default clock driver apparently isn't MP-safe. Ken Seefried, CISSP Przemyslaw Wegrzyn writes: > > Look at this: > > czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 > PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms > ^^^ > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms > 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms > > What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... > > We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be > the reason ? Overall stability is good... > > -=Czaj-nick=- > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ping - what the hell ?
Look at this: czajnik@earth:~$ ping 156.17.209.1 PING 156.17.209.1 (156.17.209.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=247 time=5427.7 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=23.2 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=429492829.5 ms ^^^ 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=247 time=429492907.1 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=247 time=16.5 ms 64 bytes from 156.17.209.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=247 time=21.4 ms What the hell can it be ?!? Every ping comes back in few milisecounds... We've recently added second CPU to this machine, can it (failed CPU) be the reason ? Overall stability is good... -=Czaj-nick=- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
