Re: Latency problems with Telnet
Sorry, I mistyped the speed. It is _exactly_ 57600, or pppd will fall back to a much more slow speed (28000?). ^ On Wed, 26 Aug 1998, Michele Bini wrote: > Maybe you have made the same error I made: to connect to my ISP I > wrongly specified 38400 as modem speed since it was the only speed I > found in the documentation (manual pages and HOWTOSs). After > replacing 38400 with 56400 (I found this value only in the setserial man ^ error use 57600, never 56400 > page) I noticed an incredible (probably ~2x) speedup. -Michele
Re: Latency problems with Telnet
On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, BG Lim wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the letter. However, my modem speed is set to 115000. pppd is _NOT_ able to use that speed and will fall back to another, much slower one (28000?) !!! (at least my (Bo) version of pppd, to check against this look at the output of plog, you will probably see a line like this: Aug 27 03:43:08 diamond pppd[1296]: speed 115000 not supported ) Or do you only mean that you have specified the spd_vhi option to setserial? Sorry, I mistyped the speed to give to pppd i told you before. It _is_ 57600, no more, no less. ^ > Actually, the reason for all this, is that I read somewhere, that linux is > able to set latencies for various programs, since it is so network > centric. And that article mentioned that telnet is set to low-latency, so > that it gets a good response. This sounds interesting... > So, I've been wondering is there is something I did, or didn't do, which > changed that. I've played with the MTU and MRU settings. Currently, its > 296 for both. No difference whatsoever. I am not an expert, but I think that using such low values can only be acceptable with very slow connections requiring very hi responsiveness (each packet contains an header, and using low values the header/data ratio is higher, wasting bandwidth). Ciao, Michele
Re: Latency problems with Telnet
>> "BL" == BG Lim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: BL> changed that. I've played with the MTU and MRU settings. Currently, its BL> 296 for both. No difference whatsoever. Most likely, your provider demands a setting for MTU, so the values you specify have no influence. You can check this with /sbin/ifconfig ppp0 IIRC. Also the debug option to pppd and the ppp.log will clarify this. Ciao, Martin
Re: Latency problems with Telnet
Hi, Thanks for the letter. However, my modem speed is set to 115000. Actually, the reason for all this, is that I read somewhere, that linux is able to set latencies for various programs, since it is so network centric. And that article mentioned that telnet is set to low-latency, so that it gets a good response. So, I've been wondering is there is something I did, or didn't do, which changed that. I've played with the MTU and MRU settings. Currently, its 296 for both. No difference whatsoever. BG On Wed, 26 Aug 1998, Michele Bini wrote: > > > I connect to my ISP with Win95 as well (cos there is no NetMeeting on > > > Linux :-(, and it is much more responsive. > > > > > Maybe you have made the same error I made: to connect to my ISP I > wrongly specified 38400 as modem speed since it was the only speed I > found in the documentation (manual pages and HOWTOSs). After > replacing 38400 with 56400 (I found this value only in the setserial man > page) I noticed an incredible (probably ~2x) speedup. > > > I had a problem with latency once and it was due to name resolution, and > > the particular order I had DNS' in my system. > > > > With the host that you are having the lag with, setup a /etc/hosts entry > > for that machine and try it again. If it take the same about of time, > > then not resolution. > > If it is quick then you know you have a problem with resolution. > > -Michele > > >
Re: Latency problems with Telnet
> > I connect to my ISP with Win95 as well (cos there is no NetMeeting on > > Linux :-(, and it is much more responsive. > > Maybe you have made the same error I made: to connect to my ISP I wrongly specified 38400 as modem speed since it was the only speed I found in the documentation (manual pages and HOWTOSs). After replacing 38400 with 56400 (I found this value only in the setserial man page) I noticed an incredible (probably ~2x) speedup. > I had a problem with latency once and it was due to name resolution, and > the particular order I had DNS' in my system. > > With the host that you are having the lag with, setup a /etc/hosts entry > for that machine and try it again. If it take the same about of time, > then not resolution. > If it is quick then you know you have a problem with resolution. -Michele
Re: Latency problems with Telnet
> I connect to my ISP with Win95 as well (cos there is no NetMeeting on > Linux :-(, and it is much more responsive. > I had a problem with latency once and it was due to name resolution, and the particular order I had DNS' in my system. With the host that you are having the lag with, setup a /etc/hosts entry for that machine and try it again. If it take the same about of time, then not resolution. If it is quick then you know you have a problem with resolution. --Jay Barbee
Re: Latency problems with Telnet
I connect to my ISP with Win95 as well (cos there is no NetMeeting on Linux :-(, and it is much more responsive. BG On Sat, 22 Aug 1998, George Bonser wrote: > On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, BG Lim wrote: > > > This poor responsiveness is bad when nothing else is using the ppp link, > > and very bad if I were to be downloading something at the same time. > > Maybe the machine at the other end is to blame. I have experianced no > trouble with Debian telnet over dialup connections. > > George Bonser > > The Linux "We're never going out of business" sale at an FTP site near you! > >
Latency problems with Telnet
I connect to my ISP with a 33.6kbps modem. My problem is that I get very poor response when I use Telnet. I believe that this is due to latency problems. I've read somewhere that in Linux, telnet is set to low-latency to improve responsiveness. How to find out what the settings are on my system. This poor responsiveness is bad when nothing else is using the ppp link, and very bad if I were to be downloading something at the same time. Come to think of it, is there a way to split the bandwidth of a line between several processes is determined ways? BG
