Am 2014-04-22 10:38, schrieb h...@xx0r.eu:
Am 2014-04-20 23:49, schrieb Karl E. Jorgensen:
Hi
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 01:01:53PM +0200, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Hi List,
maybe you have a clue about the issues im having since several
months.
My Homeserver is running Debian Jessy right now, the
Am 2014-04-26 12:44, schrieb h...@xx0r.eu:
Am 2014-04-22 10:38, schrieb h...@xx0r.eu:
Am 2014-04-20 23:49, schrieb Karl E. Jorgensen:
Hi
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 01:01:53PM +0200, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Hi List,
maybe you have a clue about the issues im having since several
months.
My
Hi
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 01:01:25PM +0200, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Am 2014-04-26 12:44, schrieb h...@xx0r.eu:
Am 2014-04-22 10:38, schrieb h...@xx0r.eu:
Am 2014-04-20 23:49, schrieb Karl E. Jorgensen:
Hi
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 01:01:53PM +0200, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Hi List,
maybe you have
Am 2014-04-20 23:49, schrieb Karl E. Jorgensen:
Hi
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 01:01:53PM +0200, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Hi List,
maybe you have a clue about the issues im having since several months.
My Homeserver is running Debian Jessy right now, the network issues
where there with wheezy aswell.
Hello,
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 1:01 PM, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Hi List,
maybe you have a clue about the issues im having since several months.
My Homeserver is running Debian Jessy right now, the network issues where
there with wheezy aswell.
after a fresh boot my network behaves like it
Hi List,
maybe you have a clue about the issues im having since several months.
My Homeserver is running Debian Jessy right now, the network issues
where there with wheezy aswell.
after a fresh boot my network behaves like it should archiving near gbit
speeds which is nice, after a random
- TP-Link 8-Port gbit switches (2 of em between home-server and clients)
Try replacing this component with real quality switch like hp.
--
Eero
Am 2014-04-20 13:33, schrieb Eero Volotinen:
- TP-Link 8-Port gbit switches (2 of em between home-server and
clients)
Try replacing this component with real quality switch like hp.
As i wrote, i already tryed to eliminate the switches as cause by
crosslinking my client(s) with my server,
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 9:01 PM, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Ive tried diffrent things so far:
- Switched from a switched cabling setup to Crosslink.
- Swapped out the cheap asrock motherboard with asus
- Changed from onboard realtek network chip to PCI Intel Gbit card
- Reinstalled OS several
Am 2014-04-20 19:15, schrieb Chris Angelico:
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 9:01 PM, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Ive tried diffrent things so far:
- Switched from a switched cabling setup to Crosslink.
- Swapped out the cheap asrock motherboard with asus
- Changed from onboard realtek network chip to PCI
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 4:38 AM, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Am 2014-04-20 19:15, schrieb Chris Angelico:
Crazy-stupid idea, but is it possible there's some other traffic
happening? Pull up a monitor (gnome-system-monitor has a nice graph,
or you can just watch the numbers in ifconfig or equivalent)
Hi
On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 01:01:53PM +0200, h...@xx0r.eu wrote:
Hi List,
maybe you have a clue about the issues im having since several months.
My Homeserver is running Debian Jessy right now, the network issues
where there with wheezy aswell.
after a fresh boot my network behaves like it
-Original Message-
From: Bob Proulx [mailto:b...@proulx.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:27 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Slow network performance with KVM
You might also want to try the backported newer versions of
libvirt-bin kvm packages
-Original Message-
From: Bob Proulx [mailto:b...@proulx.com]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:15 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Slow network performance with KVM
I forgot that this module is only available in later kernels! Sorry.
It does not appear in Squeeze
improvements.
I don't recall but it is likely that in order to use the vhost-net
driver that the newer kvm and related packages are required.
I do know that I had a large network performance difference between
using the vhost-net driver and not using it. I would need to set up a
test case and benchmark
-Original Message-
From: Bob Proulx [mailto:b...@proulx.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 5:54 AM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Slow network performance with KVM
Katynski, Bogdan wrote:
I noticed a rather poor network guest-guest performance.
Have you
Katynski, Bogdan wrote:
Bob Proulx wrote:
What is the output:
$ lsmod | grep vhost_net
I don't have the module loaded and what's worse - I don't have this module :(
root@vmhost:~# modprobe vhost-net
FATAL: Module vhost_net not found.
...
I don't have these options In my kvm
Katynski, Bogdan wrote:
I noticed a rather poor network guest-guest performance.
Have you loaded the vhost-net kernel module? It is a huge lever for
network performance.
What is the output:
$ lsmod | grep vhost_net
Here are a couple of references:
http://www.linux-kvm.com/content/how
Thanks for the links. I followed the first one when I set these up
initially. I never got virt-install to work right. I create the
xml file and the disk image manually. I then just use virsh for
define, start and stop. My problem is the network performance is
the same
I have tried a KVM setup 2 different ways. The first was using a
straight bridge without using tap at all. The WinXP VM is using the
latest known version of the virtio drivers. The bridge is on a
gigabit nic.
The second setup was using a bridge containing a tap0
Robert, following
http://www.howtoforge.com/virtualization-with-kvm-on-a-debian-squeeze-server
i reach to the conclusion that using kvm network config is
"troublesome".
I ended using "--network=bridge:br0 " on startup the vm, with qemu .
Anyway, from another
On Sunday 15 April 2007 16:20, Alan Chandler wrote:
Firstly the case of direct downloading from my gateway. This is a
summary of a three protocol exchanges using wireshark
youtube-me http continuation seq 189688 next seq 191136
youtube-me http continuation seq 191136 next seq 192584
On Monday 16 April 2007 13:59, Alan Chandler wrote:
It appears to be frameing errors at the ethernet level. I am not sure
why forwarding packets causes the problem, but the wan interface shows
approx 1% of all packets have frameing errors.
Does anyone know what causes them
1% packet loss
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 23:02:17 +0100
Alan Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have spent all day looking for clues as to how to debug network
performance issues without success. Nobody seems to answered my
previous post on this subject - so I thought I would try again.
The problem I have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 11:02:17PM +0100, Alan Chandler wrote:
I have spent all day looking for clues as to how to debug network
performance issues without success. Nobody seems to answered my
previous post on this subject - so I thought I would
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 08:06:02AM -0400, Michael Pobega wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 11:02:17PM +0100, Alan Chandler wrote:
Downloading a video from youtube onto Machine D's desktop I get a
download speed of about 7Kbytes/sec. Which is very low. If I try to
download the same one by
On Sunday 15 April 2007 02:03, Mike Bird wrote:
On Saturday 14 April 2007 15:02, Alan Chandler wrote:
The problem I have is this. I have a linux desktop (machine D)
siting on a LAN in my home. This is connected to a linux
firewall/nat router (machine S) with two ethernet cards. One
On Sunday 15 April 2007 08:20, Alan Chandler wrote:
Now when I look at a similar exchange when I am using the gateway
machine just as a hop and there is a machine behind the gateway I get a
different pattern
youtube-me http cont seq 4344 next seq 5792
me-youtube tcp ack seq 5792
youtube-me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 11:09:29AM -0400, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2007 at 08:06:02AM -0400, Michael Pobega wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 11:02:17PM +0100, Alan Chandler wrote:
Downloading a video from youtube onto Machine
I have spent all day looking for clues as to how to debug network
performance issues without success. Nobody seems to answered my
previous post on this subject - so I thought I would try again.
The problem I have is this. I have a linux desktop (machine D) siting
on a LAN in my home
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 23:02:17 +0100
Alan Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have spent all day looking for clues as to how to debug network
performance issues without success. Nobody seems to answered my
previous post on this subject - so I thought I would try again.
The problem I have
On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 11:02:17PM +0100, Alan Chandler wrote:
I have spent all day looking for clues as to how to debug network
performance issues without success. Nobody seems to answered my
previous post on this subject - so I thought I would try again.
The problem I have is this. I
On Saturday 14 April 2007 15:02, Alan Chandler wrote:
The problem I have is this. I have a linux desktop (machine D) siting
on a LAN in my home. This is connected to a linux firewall/nat router
(machine S) with two ethernet cards. One links out to the internet,
the other connects to the
On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Alan Chandler wrote:
I have spent all day looking for clues as to how to debug network
performance issues without success. Nobody seems to answered my
previous post on this subject - so I thought I would try again.
The problem I have is this. I have a linux desktop
On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 22:12:43 BST, Matthew Sackman writes:
using original natsemi-driver from scyld.com
Well, that's all gone through and worked - not quite as simple as I
thought, but I got there. Network performance seems a little faster
than before but still a little slow compared with what I
through and worked - not quite as simple as I
thought, but I got there. Network performance seems a little faster
than before but still a little slow compared with what I thought
would have been possible with a 100TX crossover network. Must be
a limitation of the cheap cards.
Thanks for your
Ah ha!
Things are not as bad as they seem.
If I do cat /dev/zero | nc -u -p 1666 doris.namkas 1666
and set up doris.namkas to receive correctly then knetload reports
around 98000KBit/s which doesn't seem too bad.
Doing it the other way round reports the same (ish, though in this
case, the
On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 21:12:16 BST, Matthew Sackman writes:
Ah ha!
normally I´d snipped that, but..oh, so nice ;-)
Things are not as bad as they seem.
If I do cat /dev/zero | nc -u -p 1666 doris.namkas 1666
and set up doris.namkas to receive correctly then knetload reports
around 98000KBit/s
Hay Guys,
I've just set up a 100TX network with 2 computer both running debian.
Netgear FA311 cards and a single cross-over cable.
Generally it runs well, but occasionally I get weird freezed - using
dselect via an ssh session suffers from freezing of the session for
a minute or two every now
On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 06:36:05PM +0100, Matthew Sackman wrote:
I've just set up a 100TX network with 2 computer both running debian.
Netgear FA311 cards and a single cross-over cable.
What version of the kernel are you running? If it's 2.4, are you
running the natsemi driver included with
Yes, it's a 2.4.9 kernel on both machines with the included natsemi
driver.
dmesg reports much the same for both machines:
eth0: link is back. Enabling watchdog.
eth0: Setting full-duplex based on negotiated link capability.
eth0: Link changed: Autonegotiation advertising 05e1 partner .
Well, that's all gone through and worked - not quite as simple as I
thought, but I got there. Network performance seems a little faster
than before but still a little slow compared with what I thought
would have been possible with a 100TX crossover network. Must be
a limitation of the cheap cards
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Sackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Noah Meyerhans [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Debian User List
debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Strange network performance
Well, that's all gone through and worked - not quite as simple as I
thought
) and they
actually perform better when set to 100/half.
Charles
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Sackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Noah Meyerhans [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Debian User List
debian-user@lists.debian.org
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Strange network performance
how can i test my network performance
without copying one file from maschine a to maschine b ?
i dont want to test my harddrive speed!!
is there a tool out?
give me ideas...
thanks a lot
ag
--
in a world without fences
--- who needs gates
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Alexander Gun wrote:
how can i test my network performance
without copying one file from maschine a to maschine b ?
bing, ping, sing, depending on what your needs are...
i dont want to test my harddrive speed!!
is there a tool out?
give me ideas...
thanks a lot
ag
Alexander Gun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
how can i test my network performance
without copying one file from maschine a to maschine b ?
i dont want to test my harddrive speed!!
Set up a web server on one machine and download several large files
simultaneously from it on the other. After each file
hi all
what tools/method would one use to evaluate the performance of a
network? i'm mostly interested in tracking down bottle-necks in the
network.
--
As a general rule, if you have trouble
with the binary system, then probably it
is because you do not really understand
the decimal
48 matches
Mail list logo
