Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Aug 1997 00:27:53 +1000 (EST) | From | Alan Donald <> | Subject | Re: UDP network problem |
| |
I actually got the same problem, althought it occured when pinging an NT4 box from a Linux box, any packet over 10450 bytes, and the NT box just dropped it, no major increase in utilization tho. Of course, this isn't a linux issue :)
Just an aside here, i also have a Netware 4.11 box, i could run about 5 concurrent flood pings on it from my linux box, no packet loss (linux box was a 486-100, netware box was a 486-d2/66), i then tried my nt4 server (6x86-p200, and sp3), ran 1 flood ping, went ok, then another, 100% packet loss on the second, about 33% on the first.
Adding to the spam, but i thought it was interesting. Al
On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, J.D. Bakker wrote:
> >> > 4008 bytes from 163.164.61.245: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=10.9 ms > >> > 4008 bytes from 163.164.61.245: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=11.0 ms > >> > >> That's a little different. mshar's problem is on sending UDP packets > >> but ping send ICMP echo packets. It can't prove the UDP code in kernel > >> do not have bugs. > > > >Follow the kernel code path for both - it goes the same way > > Ah, so this shouldn't be happening: > > [bakker@jolan bakker]# ping -f -c 10 -s 7988 -v leon > PING leon.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.42.51): 7988 data bytes > . > --- leon.et.tudelft.nl ping statistics --- > 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 2.2/2.2/2.3 ms > [bakker@jolan bakker]# ping -f -c 10 -s 7989 -v leon > PING leon.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.42.51): 7989 data bytes > ................................................................................ > ................................................................................ > ................................................................................ > ................................................................................ > .............. > [^C] > --- leon.et.tudelft.nl ping statistics --- > 336 packets transmitted, 2 packets received, 99% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 2.2/2.2/2.3 ms > > ...and... > > [bakker@leon bakker]# ping -f -c 10 -s 7988 -v jolan > PING jolan.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.40.92): 7988 data bytes > . > --- jolan.et.tudelft.nl ping statistics --- > 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 2.2/2.2/2.5 ms > [bakker@leon bakker]# ping -f -c 10 -s 7989 -v jolan > PING jolan.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.40.92): 7989 data bytes > ................................................................................ > ................................................................................ > ........................................................................... > [^C] > --- jolan.et.tudelft.nl ping statistics --- > 235 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss > > ...but... > > [bakker@inpc28 bakker]# ping -f -c 10 -s 7989 -v leon > PING leon.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.42.51): 7989 data bytes > . > --- leon.et.tudelft.nl ping statistics --- > 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 2.6/4.3/6.0 ms > [bakker@inpc28 bakker]# ping -f -c 10 -s 7989 -v jolan > PING jolan.et.tudelft.nl (130.161.40.92): 7989 data bytes > ................................................................................ > ................................................................................ > ................................................................................ > ............ > [^C] > --- jolan.et.tudelft.nl ping statistics --- > 252 packets transmitted, 0 packets received, 100% packet loss > > inpc28: P5, 2.1.36, KNE100TX (de4x5 v0.5) > leon: 4P6 (Goliath), 2.0.30 SMP, KNE100TX (de4x5 v0.442) > jolan: 2P6 (Asus), 2.1.38 SMP, KNE100TX (de4x5 v0.52) > > All are connected (half-duplex) to a Bay Fast Ethernet-switch. > > jolan seems to have trouble with sending/receiving anything over 7988 bytes. > Is this a known 2.1.38 problem ? > > Sincerely, > > Jan-Derk Bakker. > > Jan-Derk Bakker > Official Usenet Net.scum; see http://www.netscum.net > >
| |