Re: ADSL: Ping-tests enclosed
Still not ready to give up on ADSL with linux box. ADSL works so well on my clunky p166 / 64megs. of RAM, windows machine. ADSL should be slammin' on the 800Mhz Athlon box with 256 megs. RAM. Linux box is using PCI 3COM 905C-TX ethernet card. Windows box is using PCI Kingston KNE-110TX ethernet card. Tonight's ping tests look worse than last night's. I don't know why. Results: bash-2.04# adsl-start .... Connected! bash-2.04# ifconfig -a eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:01:03:24:E3:FA UP BROADCAST RUNNING MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:19 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:29 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:4 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 Interrupt:5 Base address:0x8800 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:3924 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:64.252.2.5 P-t-P:64.252.0.1 Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1492 Metric:1 RX packets:15 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:21 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:10 bash-2.04# route -n Kernel IP routing table Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface 64.252.0.1 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0 127.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 U 0 0 0 lo 0.0.0.0 64.252.0.1 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0 bash-2.04# ping -c 10 204.60.7.22 PING 204.60.7.22 (204.60.7.22): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 204.60.7.22: icmp_seq=0 ttl=252 time=21.991 ms 64 bytes from 204.60.7.22: icmp_seq=2 ttl=252 time=19.729 ms 64 bytes from 204.60.7.22: icmp_seq=4 ttl=252 time=20.352 ms 64 bytes from 204.60.7.22: icmp_seq=5 ttl=252 time=20.194 ms --- 204.60.7.22 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 60% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 19.729/20.566/21.991 ms bash-2.04# ping -c 10 dns.snet.net ping: unknown host: dns.snet.net bash-2.04# ping -c 10 dns.snet.net ping: unknown host: dns.snet.net bash-2.04# ping -c 25 64.252.0.1 PING 64.252.0.1 (64.252.0.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=23.054 ms 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=25.953 ms 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=26.062 ms 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=25.940 ms 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=25.970 ms 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=25.877 ms 64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=25.682 ms ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 ping: sendto: Network is unreachable ping: wrote 64.252.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 --- 64.252.0.1 ping statistics --- 25 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 72% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 23.054/25.505/26.062 ms
A. The speed of your CPU and the amount of RAM is not going to make much of a difference in your network speeds..the difference would be between the Win TCP stack and the Linux TCP stack. B. On a DSL connection the difference between the 3Com card and the Tulip based Kingston card would be slim to none. C. By the pasted in info on your pings. I would stay that your DNS is not set up in /etc/resolv.conf and this will slow everything down as it searchs...and you won't be able to use name resolution..hence having to use ip addresses. I would get your networking properly setup before you blame Linux. I myself haven't really screwed with PPPOE and I avoid any ISP that would use it. There are others here who can give you pointers on better living with PPPOE... * mhf (michael.flug@snet.net) [010322 22:28]: =>Still not ready to give up on ADSL with linux box. ADSL works so well on my clunky p166 / 64megs. of RAM, windows machine. ADSL should be =>slammin' on the 800Mhz Athlon box with 256 megs. RAM. =>Linux box is using PCI 3COM 905C-TX ethernet card. =>Windows box is using PCI Kingston KNE-110TX ethernet card. =>Tonight's ping tests look worse than last night's. I don't know why. =>Results: => =>bash-2.04# ping -c 10 dns.snet.net =>ping: unknown host: dns.snet.net => =>bash-2.04# ping -c 25 64.252.0.1 =>PING 64.252.0.1 (64.252.0.1): 56 data bytes =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=23.054 ms =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=25.953 ms =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=26.062 ms =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=25.940 ms =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=25.970 ms =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=25.877 ms =>64 bytes from 64.252.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=25.682 ms -- Ben Rosenberg mailto:ben@whack.org ----- If two men agree on everything, you can be sure that only one of them is doing the thinking.
participants (2)
-
Ben Rosenberg -
mhf