Use the -I flag on traceroute. It's using UDP for the path discovery. -I should force it to ICMP.
On 2/21/06, Kim C. Callis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have been using iperf to test between between the pfsense > connection that I have and another pfsense server that I run > at another location. But there is nothing to do to check the > connection else were. > > Even when I do a traceroute from the pfsense server local to > me to the second pfsense server, it gets lost trying to get > a full response.. > > # traceroute 200.76.246.66 > traceroute to 200.76.246.66 (200.76.246.66), 64 hops max, 40 > byte packets > 1 red-corp-200.56.96.177.telnor.net (200.56.96.177) 2.328 > ms 2.295 ms 2.404 ms > 2 red-corp-200.23.251.193.telnor.net (200.23.251.193) > 5.743 ms 5.815 ms 5.861 ms > 3 red-corp-200.76.250.13.telnor.net (200.76.250.13) 6.157 > ms 12.360 ms 6.203 ms > 4 red-corp-200.38.27.94.telnor.net (200.38.27.94) 8.108 > ms 8.945 ms 8.150 ms > 5 red-corp-200.38.8.70.telnor.net (200.38.8.70) 18.049 ms > 16.959 ms 19.318 ms > 6 * * * > 7 * * * > 8 * * * > 9 * * * > * * * > > So it makes for difficulties to really analyze what is going > on. > > K. > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 12:57:51PM -0600, Nick Buraglio wrote: > >Also understand that testing commodity internet access is very > >nebulous. So many things can affect the path. In my opinion the > >best way to test throughput is using iperf, to do so would require a > >host on either end running it. If you plan on testing using iperf > >I'd suggest testing in stages; Last mile, provider, some facility > >that has decent connectivity, etc.. > >How are you testing? > > > > > >On Feb 21, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Nick Buraglio wrote: > > > >>Take it out and test without it. If the results are the same then > >>you can point at them. Why is the Cisco in there? If I'm > >>understand correctly, you have: > >> > >>[some internet connecton] <=> [Cisco 2500] <=> [pfSense box] <=> [LAN] > >> > >>Is the cisco doing some kind of routing? What is the model of the > >>first box? > >> > >> > >>nb > >> > >> > >>On Feb 21, 2006, at 10:47 AM, Kim C. Callis wrote: > >> > >>>I have pfsense connected to a Cisco 2500 for the WAN > >>>connection. Attached to the Cisco via a high speed serial > >>>cable to a box that say World DSL. I can't get any specifics > >>>on the capabilities of the DSL box. When I did telnet the > >>>box, I get connected to another Cisco router which I cannot > >>>access. > >>> > >>>Allegedly, the connection is suppose to be an E-1 (2048 > >>>kbit/sec), but the speeds on my end fluctuates between > >>>800K-1100K/sec down and 40K-300K/sec up. I suspect that the > >>>connection to the Cisco that I have access to is actually > >>>some ADSL connection. > >>> > >>>Of course, the ISP that I am consulting with is blaming > >>>pfsense. What can I do to prove that pfSense it working > >>>optimally and the problem is with the telco? > >>> > >>>Any pointer would be greatly appreciated! > >>> > >>>K. > >>> > >> >
