[leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
(Sorry Izzy, I hit Reply and not Reply-All.) On 2/25/07, Izzy Blacklock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are you using to download? Do you maybe have ports that need to be forwarded to your laptop when it's behind the router? This is HTTP or FTP traffic. BitTorrent traffic seems to be equally affected although the multiple simultaneous connections seem to help. I do have my ports forwarded, as well: DNATnet loc:192.168.1.7 tcp 6900:6909 DNATnet loc:192.168.1.7 udp 6900:6909 DNATnet loc:192.168.1.6 tcp 6980:6999 DNATnet loc:192.168.1.6 udp 6980:6999 (I don't know if the UDP rules are needed for BitTorrent, but I think they are useful for eMule/eDonkey. BitTornado is configured for the above ports and I've tested this on several trackers including pj.sidewalkcrusaders and alluvion.org) If this isn't a simple port issue, then perhaps there is an issue with one of your NICs on the router. It's possible this old box is starting to ware out - it's got to be over 10 years old after all. It's about the only thing I can think of if you were getting better performance from this same router before. Unless something else has changed (different software or hardware?). Changing it's position in a network shouldn't make a difference to the speed traffic passing through it. It's not impossible that this is a problem with one of the NICs. I will try reseating them. Is there any good way that I can do something like a download of /dev/zero to test my download speeds from the router itself? I don't think I explained the different IP well enough. I get assigned an from a completely different range IP and also a different gateway: Slow LEAF box: linux-router-i486# ip addr show eth0 3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,NOTRAILERS,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:17:57:b2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 71.72.x.x/22 brd 255.255.255.255 scope global eth0 linux-router-i486# ip route 192.168.3.0/24 dev eth3 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.3.1 192.168.2.0/24 dev eth2 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.2.1 192.168.1.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.1 71.72.x.x/22 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 71.72.x.x default via 71.72.96.1 dev eth0 Fast WinXP box: (From Network Connection Details) IP Address: 75.185.x.x Subnet Mask: 255.255.252.0 Default Gateway: 75.185.24.1 DHCP Server: 65.24.6.194 (How do I get this on LEAF?) So the actual network that I'm connecting to is, to me, vastly different. It could be that my router is connecting to a very busy or poorly-configured network link and my laptop is connecting to a less-busy or correctly-configured network. Andy - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
[leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
(Sorry, Eric. I hit Reply and not Reply-All.) On 2/25/07, Eric Spakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It may be a duplex mismatch, you can check the link errors with 'ip -s link' I looked up a bit about duplexing and this NIC after a friend suggested that. Here's what I get from that command: 3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,NOTRAILERS,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:17:57:b2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 741077003 1773743 18161 0 18161 0 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 438580149 852431 0 0 219 2150 4: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:3f:53:d4 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 440479032 855735 42710 42710 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 680103683 783492 0 0 0 4193 eth0 is connected to the Internet and eth1 is on the local network side. There are errors showing up but I'm not too sure how to read the above output. I gave up attempting trying to fix any kind of duplexing issues when a document I was reading said that I must be using a switch and *not* a hub. I'm using a hub. It does appear, however, that the 3c509B (Sorry for forgetting the B earlier, I didn't know how important it is!) can do 10Mb/s duplex, but the hub kinda ruins that. Thanks for your reply. Andy - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
Re: [leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
Hi Andrew, (Sorry, Eric. I hit Reply and not Reply-All.) On 2/25/07, Eric Spakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It may be a duplex mismatch, you can check the link errors with 'ip -s link' I looked up a bit about duplexing and this NIC after a friend suggested that. Here's what I get from that command: 3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,NOTRAILERS,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:17:57:b2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 741077003 1773743 18161 0 18161 0 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 438580149 852431 0 0 219 2150 4: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:3f:53:d4 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 440479032 855735 42710 42710 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 680103683 783492 0 0 0 4193 eth0 is connected to the Internet and eth1 is on the local network side. There are errors showing up but I'm not too sure how to read the above output. I gave up attempting trying to fix any kind of duplexing issues when a document I was reading said that I must be using a switch and *not* a hub. I'm using a hub. It does appear, however, that the 3c509B (Sorry for forgetting the B earlier, I didn't know how important it is!) can do 10Mb/s duplex, but the hub kinda ruins that. Yes, hubs an full-duplex is a no-go. Those old 3com cards mostly have a (dos) utility diskette where you can set the duplex mode and speed. Those tools should be available on the net somewhere and can be run from a freedos bootdisk or so. You could try to force the cards in half-duplex mode, because I think the errors are because of a mismatch. You could also try the ethtool.lrp package first (if it supports your card, which I'm not sure about). But this can only set the duplex non-permanent. Thanks for your reply. Andy Eric - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/ - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
Re: [leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
Andrew Haninger wrote: I don't think I explained the different IP well enough. I get assigned an from a completely different range IP and also a different gateway: Slow LEAF box: Snip! 71.72.x.x/22 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 71.72.x.x default via 71.72.96.1 dev eth0 Fast WinXP box: (From Network Connection Details) IP Address: 75.185.x.x Subnet Mask: 255.255.252.0 Default Gateway: 75.185.24.1 DHCP Server: 65.24.6.194 (How do I get this on LEAF?) So the actual network that I'm connecting to is, to me, vastly different. It could be that my router is connecting to a very busy or poorly-configured network link and my laptop is connecting to a less-busy or correctly-configured network. This is, in fact, irrelevant, just to put your mind at ease. Most cable providers take a massive pool of IPs and toss them out there for a common pool of DHCP servers. I work for a cable provider in their tech support department, and I also live in their territory. If I were to take my PC from Connecticut, where I live, and move to central Jersey, odds are good that I'd get the exact same IP address, but my speeds would be drastically different (because NJ tends to be overcrowded, where CT is not). Regardless of which IP address you have, you're still going thru the same physical network structure, and the physical structure is where the delays are. This is almost certainly an issue of half vs. full duplex. The only reason a hub would cause a problem is if you were using a hub to connect the router and the cablemodem. If the cablemodem is directly connected to the LEAF box, you should have no collisions at all showing up, because the SB4200 is usually capable of 100BaseTX Full Duplex. Speaking of which, check your provider's top available speeds. More and more cable providers are realizing that going to rates higher than 10 Mbit/sec max gives them a significant advantage over DSL without causing much in the way of additional traffic. If you're with one of the providers doing 10-15 Mbit/sec, you'll probably want to get rid of the venerable old 3c509B and upgrade to something with a 100BaseTX ethernet port and PCI slots to run them from. When I moved to my employer's territory, I had to do the same thing because my 509Bs wouldn't give me the full 10Mbit, and they've since upgraded to 15Mbit. An upgrade to a more modern, autosensing card would also solve the issue of collisions and duplex mismatches. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
Re: [leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
On 2/25/07, George Metz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is almost certainly an issue of half vs. full duplex. The only
reason a hub would cause a problem is if you were using a hub to connect
the router and the cablemodem. If the cablemodem is directly connected
to the LEAF box, you should have no collisions at all showing up,
because the SB4200 is usually capable of 100BaseTX Full Duplex.
Here's my structure:
{Internet}-SB4200-3c509-LEAF-3c509-3Com 10/100 Hub-WinXP
The SB4200 is directly connected (via Cat 5) to the LEAF box. The
3c509B's default to half-duplex. When I use ethtool to force them to
full (eth0 and eth1) the speeds are no different.
Speaking of which, check your provider's top available speeds.
I'm with RoadRunner in the central Ohio area. I've just spent maybe 10
minutes browsing their site and I'm unable to find their listed top
speed. However, I'm fairly certain that it is only 5Mb/s. That is
around the speed I got on the speed tests when I connected the modem
to my laptop.
As far as I know, my 3c509B's should be able to easily handle those speeds.
Andy
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV
leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
Re: [leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
Andrew Haninger wrote:
On 2/25/07, George Metz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is almost certainly an issue of half vs. full duplex. The only
reason a hub would cause a problem is if you were using a hub to connect
the router and the cablemodem. If the cablemodem is directly connected
to the LEAF box, you should have no collisions at all showing up,
because the SB4200 is usually capable of 100BaseTX Full Duplex.
George is correct. I saw a similar issue with my business's switch. It
was set to force 100M Full duplex and the cards on the machines were set
to auto. They weren't switching to Full Duplex so while everything
worked, it was slow and very heavy with errorsspecifically overruns
and collisions. Once I set the cards to match, there are very few (VERY
few, a few dozen per 10M of traffic)
Here's my structure:
{Internet}-SB4200-3c509-LEAF-3c509-3Com 10/100 Hub-WinXP
The SB4200 is directly connected (via Cat 5) to the LEAF box. The
3c509B's default to half-duplex. When I use ethtool to force them to
full (eth0 and eth1) the speeds are no different.
So what was the output to the ip -s command? Without this, you're
assuming there's no difference.
Did you boot into a DOS environment and check the cards with the 3com
program?
Speaking of which, check your provider's top available speeds.
I'm with RoadRunner in the central Ohio area. I've just spent maybe 10
minutes browsing their site and I'm unable to find their listed top
speed. However, I'm fairly certain that it is only 5Mb/s. That is
around the speed I got on the speed tests when I connected the modem
to my laptop.
As far as I know, my 3c509B's should be able to easily handle those speeds.
Andy
Did you try dslreports.com to check what your neighbors might have
reported for their speeds?
They also have a speed test available in their tools section.
Make one change, then test, then another, then test.
Record the results so you can be sure of what's happening.
Don't rely on your memory.
Good Luck,
Tony
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV
leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user
Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
Re: [leaf-user] Fwd: Cable Modem speeds with Bering-uClibc
On 2/25/07, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: George is correct. I saw a similar issue with my business's switch. It was set to force 100M Full duplex and the cards on the machines were set to auto. They weren't switching to Full Duplex so while everything worked, it was slow and very heavy with errorsspecifically overruns and collisions. Once I set the cards to match, there are very few (VERY few, a few dozen per 10M of traffic) As I said, my 3c509B's default to half-duplex. When I used ethtool to force them to full, speeds were still slow. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something. You all seem to be suggesting that my 10Mbit card is only capable of ~1Mbit under this setup. Wouldn't that make it pretty pathetic on a normal LAN? So what was the output to the ip -s command? Without this, you're assuming there's no difference. 3: eth0: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,NOTRAILERS,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:17:57:b2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 741077003 1773743 18161 0 18161 0 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 438580149 852431 0 0 219 2150 4: eth1: BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast qlen 1000 link/ether 00:20:af:3f:53:d4 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff RX: bytes packets errors dropped overrun mcast 440479032 855735 42710 42710 TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns 680103683 783492 0 0 0 4193 I'm not too sure what the errors mean or how to really read them. Did you boot into a DOS environment and check the cards with the 3com program? I haven't booted them into DOS just yet as that wouldn't seem to tell me anything new. Ethtool tells me what sort of duplex they are using and lets me change it temporarily. If I determined that I just needed to set the cards to go to full duplex then I could go to the trouble to do this. Also, the router is running on an ISA-only motherboard with no IDE ports and I have no ISA VGA cards. When I installed the second pair of 3c509B's, I had to put them on my ASUS CUBX-E (AGP, PCI, ISA) which is in a fairly unwieldy case (Antec SX1030B) to change the IO ports before they would all work in Linux. Did you try dslreports.com to check what your neighbors might have reported for their speeds? I don't see why I would need to do this? I have seen myself that my modem is capable of providing excellent speeds depending on the machine it is plugged into. I have a housemate and he has seen the same. They also have a speed test available in their tools section. I've done this when my laptop is directly plugged in and when it is behind the router. Behind the router, the speeds are pretty slow. Plugged into the modem, speeds are excellent. Andy - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV leaf-user mailing list: leaf-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user Support Request -- http://leaf-project.org/
