Scott, Nope... TelNor owns the telecommunications sector in Mexico... That is why I can't get a will answer to what the true bandwidth is. Although I will be using smokeping (hey, that is a good package for pfsense) to monitor to some degree the connectivity!
K. On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 03:28:28PM -0500, Scott Ullrich wrote: >In this case check with you're isp and see if they have a speedtest >site setup. That's what my ISP does atleast. > >On 2/21/06, Kim C. Callis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Scott, >> >> You were right on the money! >> >> # traceroute -I 200.76.246.66 >> traceroute to 200.76.246.66 (200.76.246.66), 64 hops max, 60 >> byte packets >> 1 red-corp-200.56.96.177.telnor.net (200.56.96.177) 3.315 >> ms 2.407 ms 2.000 ms >> 2 red-corp-200.23.251.193.telnor.net (200.23.251.193) >> 15.100 ms 13.217 ms 19.954 ms >> 3 red-corp-200.76.250.13.telnor.net (200.76.250.13) >> 14.373 ms 7.470 ms 17.098 ms >> 4 red-corp-200.38.27.94.telnor.net (200.38.27.94) 21.048 >> ms 16.939 ms 19.609 ms >> 5 red-corp-200.38.8.70.telnor.net (200.38.8.70) 25.062 ms >> 17.161 ms 17.297 ms >> 6 red-corp-200.76.246.66.telnor.net (200.76.246.66) >> 20.591 ms 17.237 ms 16.994 ms >> >> Now, since I can't use iperf to measure with the exception >> of the last of the last host 200.76.246.66, what can I do >> the measure the reported of the hosts in between the >> starting host and the end host. >> >> I need to prove that I am not having a full E-1 connection >> coming to me. Or at least show that there is some ADSL >> connection going... >> >> K. >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 03:03:27PM -0500, Scott Ullrich wrote: >> >ICMP vs UDP. See my last post. >> > >> >On 2/21/06, Craig FALCONER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Sounds like telnor.net is blocking stuff. >> >> >> >> Try mtr and see if it works. I can get to 200.76.246.66 without loosing >> >> anything if I use mtr..... >> >> >> >> My traceroute [v0.69] >> >> socks (0.0.0.0)(tos=0x0 psize=64 bitpattern=0x00) Wed >> >> Feb >> >> 22 09:00:22 2006 >> >> Keys: Help Display mode Restart statistics Order of fields quit >> >> Packets >> >> Pings >> >> Host Loss% Snt Last Avg >> >> Best Wrst StDev >> >> 1. lemonsqueezer.avonside.school.nz 0.0% 24 0.3 0.3 >> >> 0.2 0.4 0.0 >> >> 2. fe7-4-515-1.bertha.paradise.net.nz 0.0% 24 9.5 10.1 >> >> 8.8 12.7 1.1 >> >> 3. 203.96.153.102 4.2% 24 12.8 15.1 >> >> 12.8 20.5 1.6 >> >> 4. pe14-bertha.paradise.net.nz 0.0% 23 15.6 14.2 >> >> 10.5 21.3 2.3 >> >> 5. 203.167.223.129 0.0% 23 11.8 13.8 >> >> 10.8 19.9 2.1 >> >> 6. ge0-1-0-938.icore1.sym.telstraclear.net 0.0% 23 27.2 26.3 >> >> 23.6 33.2 2.0 >> >> 7. ge-0-2-0-1.xcore1.acld.telstraclear.net 0.0% 23 25.4 24.4 >> >> 22.2 28.8 1.8 >> >> 8. ge-0-2-0-914.xcore2.acld.telstraclear.net 0.0% 23 26.1 25.8 >> >> 22.7 41.3 3.9 >> >> 9. so.jb.wils.telstraclear.net 0.0% 23 159.8 154.4 >> >> 149.2 162.1 4.8 >> >> 10. 65.244.201.221 0.0% 23 150.0 150.8 >> >> 147.8 155.5 1.7 >> >> 11. GigabitEthernet3-0.GW1.LAX1.ALTER.NET 0.0% 23 153.8 151.6 >> >> 148.0 158.1 2.2 >> >> 12. 0.so-0-0-0.XL2.LAX1.ALTER.NET 0.0% 23 149.4 156.1 >> >> 148.4 215.7 13.7 >> >> 13. 0.so-6-0-0.CL2.LAX15.ALTER.NET 0.0% 23 153.4 152.7 >> >> 149.3 159.1 2.6 >> >> 14. POS5-0.GW1.LAX15.ALTER.NET 0.0% 23 151.0 152.4 >> >> 148.4 162.5 3.5 >> >> 15. wcgGigELAX-gw.customer.alter.net 0.0% 23 164.3 165.4 >> >> 161.5 172.9 3.0 >> >> 16. anhmca1wcx2-pos6-1-oc48.wcg.net 0.0% 23 167.2 165.5 >> >> 160.9 175.3 3.7 >> >> 17. anhmca1wcx4-pos6-0.wcg.net 0.0% 23 164.9 164.4 >> >> 161.6 170.3 2.7 >> >> 18. telmex-anhmca1wcx4-pos-10-0-wcg.net 0.0% 23 165.9 165.9 >> >> 163.4 171.0 1.9 >> >> 19. red-corp-200.76.250.45.telnor.net 0.0% 23 321.1 323.2 >> >> 321.1 328.1 1.6 >> >> 20. red-corp-200.38.27.94.telnor.net 0.0% 23 319.5 318.4 >> >> 315.6 320.9 1.4 >> >> 21. red-corp-200.38.8.70.telnor.net 0.0% 23 328.6 329.0 >> >> 326.8 334.9 2.0 >> >> 22. red-corp-200.76.246.66.telnor.net 0.0% 23 335.9 334.7 >> >> 330.7 347.4 3.5 >> >> >> >> ...but if I use traceroute I get this: >> >> >> >> >> >> socks:~# traceroute 200.76.246.66 >> >> traceroute to 200.76.246.66 (200.76.246.66), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets >> >> 1 lemonsqueezer (192.168.1.1) 0.494 ms 0.277 ms 0.283 ms >> >> 2 fe7-4-515-1.bertha.paradise.net.nz (202.0.37.1) 10.919 ms 11.620 ms >> >> 14.394 ms >> >> 3 203.96.153.102 (203.96.153.102) 16.474 ms 15.097 ms 16.545 ms >> >> 4 pe14-bertha.paradise.net.nz (203.96.155.226) 12.527 ms 12.516 ms >> >> 13.195 ms >> >> 5 203.167.223.129 (203.167.223.129) 13.993 ms 14.111 ms 12.632 ms >> >> 6 ge0-1-0-938.icore1.sym.telstraclear.net (203.98.48.1) 26.604 ms >> >> 25.879 >> >> ms 24.655 ms >> >> 7 ge-0-2-0-1.xcore1.acld.telstraclear.net (203.98.50.251) 27.084 ms >> >> 24.410 ms 24.100 ms >> >> 8 ge-0-2-0-914.xcore2.acld.telstraclear.net (203.98.42.18) 26.674 ms >> >> 24.462 ms 25.942 ms >> >> 9 so.jb.wils.telstraclear.net (203.98.42.66) 151.823 ms 153.014 ms >> >> 149.533 ms >> >> 10 65.244.201.221 (65.244.201.221) 151.059 ms 150.438 ms 150.465 ms >> >> 11 GigabitEthernet3-0.GW1.LAX1.ALTER.NET (157.130.245.21) 151.583 ms >> >> 148.077 ms 150.594 ms >> >> 12 0.so-0-0-0.XL2.LAX1.ALTER.NET (152.63.112.214) 154.385 ms 150.544 ms >> >> 149.351 ms >> >> 13 0.so-6-0-0.CL2.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.10.222) 153.938 ms 154.141 ms >> >> 149.308 ms >> >> 14 POS5-0.GW1.LAX15.ALTER.NET (152.63.115.213) 154.119 ms 149.706 ms >> >> 156.302 ms >> >> 15 wcgGigELAX-gw.customer.alter.net (157.130.42.202) 164.367 ms 165.480 >> >> ms 172.955 ms >> >> 16 anhmca1wcx2-pos6-1-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.140.161) 163.032 ms 163.138 >> >> ms >> >> 162.029 ms >> >> 17 anhmca1wcx4-pos6-0.wcg.net (64.200.141.94) 162.788 ms 162.340 ms >> >> 163.445 ms >> >> 18 telmex-anhmca1wcx4-pos-10-0-wcg.net (64.200.224.150) 166.515 ms >> >> 175.247 ms 171.111 ms >> >> 19 red-corp-200.76.250.45.telnor.net (200.76.250.45) 321.772 ms 327.205 >> >> ms 323.200 ms >> >> 20 red-corp-200.38.27.94.telnor.net (200.38.27.94) 317.589 ms 325.669 >> >> ms >> >> 317.674 ms >> >> 21 red-corp-200.38.8.70.telnor.net (200.38.8.70) 329.632 ms 327.279 ms >> >> 328.071 ms >> >> 22 * * * >> >> 23 * * * >> >> 24 * * * >> >> etc >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Kim C. Callis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2006 8:33 a.m. >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: [pfSense-discussion] [OT] Networking help >> >> >> >> >> >> 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. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
