No, I don't think it's Red Hat specific (as far as 'thinking' can go if you are clueless). As I indicated, with other & earlier distros I experienced things similar to some extend, but w/o ever documenting transfer rates.
Can you expand on what "maybe they trhottle base on uname -r ?" means ? - Horst ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Linux Rocks ! wrote: > Yet another reason to not use RedScat. > so... do you think at&t is optimized for win98? maybe they trhottle base on > uname -r ? > > Jamie > > On Tuesday 17 December 2002 09:57 pm, Horst wrote: > : Recently I installed RH 8.0 from the demo CDs and noticed very slow > : download rates over cable (for the time being completely ignoring > : upload). Though I did a custom install there was little to config since RH > : detected and suggested DHCP (except the funny thing(*) below). For > : security I picked 'medium', that's iptables with DHCP traffic allowed plus > : ssh and http service, which I added. > : > : Web browsing under RH 8.0/cable is slower than on a good phone line > : connection under win98. Similar for plain console operation, like scp -- > : putty scp on win98 is about 10 times faster (see clips below for a 70MB > : download, server far away). I noticed slower transfer rates with older > : 'nix installations before, but those were installed before adding cable > : (so I just blamed myself for not tweaking). > : In short, this is not distro specific, and doesn't seem to be application > : layer dependent (on both GUI and console): always, transfer using win98 > : applications is much faster )-: > : I also added traceroute for both OS's, though only the 1st hop should be > : of interest(if at all), right? > : > : Any hints? --for either cure or diagnostic ? (I am willing to dig through > : long logs of ngrep or ethereal *if* needed) > : > : - Horst > : (*) the funny thing on RH 8.0 is that DHCP client doesn't seem to be able > : to get a hostname from ATT, thus using the entire MAC address of eth0 plus > : other crap as my host name in the command line prompt (leaving only 50% > : for me to type commands... until I manually set hostname) > : > : THe following records follow... > : > : ===== win98 / putty scp ======= > : xyz.sql.zip | 23480 kB | 119.2 kB/s | ETA: 00:06:24 |33% > : xyz.sql.zip | 69311 kB | 109.8 kB/s | ETA: 00:00:00 |100% > : => about 10 min for 70 MB > : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > : > : ======= RH 8.0 ======== > : xyz.sql.zip 10% |****** <snip>| 7004 KB 1:36:31 ETA > : ...Killed by signal 2. > : => would have taken 1.5 hrs > : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > : > : ===== win98: ============ > : Tracing route to 66.178.136.22 (www.efn.org) over a maximum of 30 hops > : > : 1 14 ms 9 ms 10 ms 10.139.x.y > : 2 8 ms 9 ms 8 ms 12.244.85.1 > : 3 10 ms 25 ms 10 ms 12.244.64.213 > : 4 66 ms 13 ms 12 ms 12.244.64.209 > : 5 12 ms 18 ms 13 ms 12.244.64.205 > : 6 17 ms 18 ms 18 ms 12.244.72.42 > : 7 17 ms 16 ms 17 ms 12.123.44.57 > : 8 17 ms 21 ms 17 ms 12.122.5.157 > : 9 75 ms 32 ms 34 ms 12.122.2.61 > : 10 33 ms 32 ms 37 ms 12.123.13.69 > : 11 37 ms 37 ms 41 ms 12.123.221.2 > : 12 37 ms 39 ms 41 ms 208.186.87.13 > : 13 41 ms 38 ms 40 ms 207.173.114.141 > : 14 88 ms 38 ms 75 ms 208.186.21.33 > : 15 42 ms 45 ms 42 ms 207.173.114.58 > : 16 45 ms 42 ms 43 ms 208.186.20.241 > : 17 60 ms 57 ms 61 ms 207.173.115.41 > : 18 149 ms 93 ms 202 ms 208.186.20.129 > : 19 57 ms 58 ms 59 ms 216.190.151.142 > : 20 62 ms 61 ms 64 ms 66.178.135.110 > : 21 68 ms 68 ms 61 ms 206.96.130.251 > : 22 * * * Request timed out. > : 23 64 ms 67 ms 66 ms 66.178.137.37 > : 24 67 ms 100 ms 77 ms 66.178.136.22 > : > : Trace complete. > : > : ======== RH 8.0: =============== > : 1 10.139.x.y 9.869 ms 8.270 ms 9.986 ms > : 2 12.244.85.1 9.472 ms 11.891 ms 24.743 ms > : 3 12.244.64.213 29.435 ms 9.673 ms 8.349 ms > : 4 12.244.64.209 15.013 ms 24.729 ms 9.878 ms > : 5 12.244.64.205 11.819 ms 13.417 ms 12.651 ms > : 6 12.244.72.42 14.729 ms 23.798 ms 19.512 ms > : 7 12.123.44.57 18.581 ms 18.220 ms 14.856 ms > : 8 12.122.5.157 27.143 ms 14.280 ms 16.127 ms > : 9 12.122.2.61 31.305 ms 32.376 ms 37.096 ms > : 10 12.123.13.69 32.957 ms 31.939 ms 35.193 ms > : 11 12.123.221.2 37.626 ms 37.957 ms 38.613 ms > : 12 208.186.87.13 38.813 ms 39.686 ms 38.005 ms > : 13 207.173.114.141 73.291 ms 62.231 ms 53.878 ms > : 14 208.186.21.33 41.366 ms 40.519 ms 39.219 ms > : 15 207.173.114.58 41.493 ms 53.242 ms 42.126 ms > : 16 208.186.20.241 46.523 ms 46.071 ms 44.927 ms > : 17 207.173.115.41 54.712 ms 94.296 ms 77.950 ms > : 18 208.186.20.129 57.697 ms 59.497 ms 56.909 ms > : 19 216.190.151.142 56.408 ms 68.434 ms 57.192 ms > : 20 66.178.135.110 61.916 ms 65.592 ms 63.018 ms > : 21 206.96.130.251 67.022 ms 61.514 ms 102.045 ms > : 22 * * * > : 23 66.178.137.37 63.124 ms 64.825 ms 65.743 ms > : 24 66.178.136.22 64.106 ms 64.196 ms 95.871 ms > : > : > : _______________________________________________ > : Eug-LUG mailing list > : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > : http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug > > -- > No microsoft products were used to produce this message. > EUG-LUG Mailing List: > http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug > > _______________________________________________ > Eug-LUG mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug > _______________________________________________ Eug-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
