On Thursday 18 December 2003 09:07, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Wes Peters wrote:
> > On Tuesday 16 December 2003 03:35 pm, Charles Swiger wrote:
> > > On Dec 16, 2003, at 5:58 PM, Alex (ander Sendzimir) wrote:
> > > > I have a small home network with a PowerBook G4 and FBSD
> > > >
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:38:05PM -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>
> Can a brothah get a ping "as fast as we can get responses back" (like
> Juniper's ping rapid) around here?
Well, you can compile a kernel without options ICMP_BANDLIM or
(I believe) set sysctl net.inet.icmp.icmplim=0 .
--
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 08:32:32PM -0800, Bill Fumerola wrote:
> [ this isn't really -net material ]
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 07:50:57PM -0800, Kevin Stevens wrote:
>
> > >First, Barney was correct: using "ping -f" will run into the ICMP
> > >response limitation. Try using "ping -i 0.01 _hos
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Wes Peters wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 December 2003 03:35 pm, Charles Swiger wrote:
> > On Dec 16, 2003, at 5:58 PM, Alex (ander Sendzimir) wrote:
> > > I have a small home network with a PowerBook G4 and FBSD 4.9-STABLE
> > > connected through a Netgear DS108 hub (10/100).
> >
>
On Tuesday 16 December 2003 03:35 pm, Charles Swiger wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2003, at 5:58 PM, Alex (ander Sendzimir) wrote:
> > I have a small home network with a PowerBook G4 and FBSD 4.9-STABLE
> > connected through a Netgear DS108 hub (10/100).
>
> If the device works at both 10 and 100 speed, it's
On Dec 17, 2003, at 9:34 AM, Bill Vermillion wrote:
I've not tried the ping but I'm seeing exceptionally poor
performance on G4s to FreeBSD. The G4's can ftp to each other
at about 8-9MB/sec, as can the FreeBSDs. They are on a Cisco
2948 switch. But ftp from BSD to G4 is in the order of 20-40KB/
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 17:58 , while impersonating an expert on
the internet, Alex sent this to stdout:
> First, I know very little about networking, especially
> performance turning. I would really like to learn more but don't
> know where/how to start effectively.
> I have a small home networ
I apologize to the list for my results not being germane to the
conversation. I can confirm that OS X also implements an ICMP
restriction (net.inet.icmp.icmplim) which similarly limits responses
(default is 250), and would account for the OP's results when testing
toward the PowerBook.
As for
On Dec 16, 2003, at 20:32, Bill Fumerola wrote:
I wish I had a FreeBSD box to check this on, but from an OS X G5 to an
Athlon WinXP box (both at 100% CPU from distribfolding client:
which is completely irrelevant because your winxp machine doesn't have
the aforementioned icmp response limiter.
Tha
[ this isn't really -net material ]
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 07:50:57PM -0800, Kevin Stevens wrote:
> >First, Barney was correct: using "ping -f" will run into the ICMP
> >response limitation. Try using "ping -i 0.01 _hostname_", instead,
> >and you may find out that you don't have a problem wi
On Dec 16, 2003, at 17:32, Charles Swiger wrote:
On Dec 16, 2003, at 7:22 PM, Alex (ander Sendzimir) wrote:
[ ... ]
First, Barney was correct: using "ping -f" will run into the ICMP
response limitation. Try using "ping -i 0.01 _hostname_", instead,
and you may find out that you don't have a pro
On Dec 16, 2003, at 7:22 PM, Alex (ander Sendzimir) wrote:
[ ... ]
First, Barney was correct: using "ping -f" will run into the ICMP
response limitation. Try using "ping -i 0.01 _hostname_", instead, and
you may find out that you don't have a problem with packet loss at all
at this lower speed.
I'm responding to several people at once. References
to material to read is fine in place of personal
descriptions. However, you know, the 'personal touch'
is always good :-)
The only thing better than FBSD is the mailing lists.
Thanks, folks.
Alex
On Tuesday, D
Folks, see sysctl net.inet.icmp.icmplim for why you get packet loss
on a flood ping. It has nothing to do with duplex, hub/switch or
problems with equipment. Make it 0 to remove the limit, I believe.
Barney
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://list
In reply to Alex (ander Sendzimir) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
> First, I know very little about networking, especially performance
> turning. I would really like to learn more but don't know where/how to
> start effectively.
Take a look at the tools ttcp, netperf and iperf. They build
straight ou
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Charles Swiger wrote:
> If the device works at both 10 and 100 speed, it's a switch, not a hub.
It is sold as a hub. Most of these "dual-speed" hubs are/were two hubs,
one of each speed, with a two-port internal switch connecting them. The
physical ports would auto-join to
On Dec 16, 2003, at 6:32 PM, Barney Wolff wrote:
You're seeing icmp rate-limiting. Don't worry about it.
Whoops, I didn't pay particular attention to the "-f" option, but
you're absolutely right...
--
-Chuck
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://li
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Alex wrote:
> I have a small home network with a PowerBook G4 and FBSD 4.9-STABLE
> connected through a Netgear DS108 hub (10/100). The FBSD box is a dual
> Xeon 500MHz with Intel Etherexpress 100/Pro (MS440GX motherboard). If
> for some reason it makes a difference, there is
On Dec 16, 2003, at 5:58 PM, Alex (ander Sendzimir) wrote:
I have a small home network with a PowerBook G4 and FBSD 4.9-STABLE
connected through a Netgear DS108 hub (10/100).
If the device works at both 10 and 100 speed, it's a switch, not a hub.
Anyway, the very high rates of packet loss you rep
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 05:58:08PM -0500, Alex wrote:
> First, I know very little about networking, especially performance
> turning. I would really like to learn more but don't know where/how to
> start effectively.
You're seeing icmp rate-limiting. Don't worry about it.
--
Barney Wolff
First, I know very little about networking, especially performance
turning. I would really like to learn more but don't know where/how to
start effectively.
I have a small home network with a PowerBook G4 and FBSD 4.9-STABLE
connected through a Netgear DS108 hub (10/100). The FBSD box is a dual
21 matches
Mail list logo
