/* HINT: Search archives @ http://www.indyramp.com/masq/ before posting! 
/* ALSO: Don't quote this header. It makes you look lame :-) */


A classic MTU problem....

-JMS


|-----Original Message-----
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
|Of Anurag Jalan
|Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 2:49 PM
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: [Masq] Masqed FTP is slowwwww
|
|
|/* HINT: Search archives @ http://www.indyramp.com/masq/ before posting!
|/* ALSO: Don't quote this header. It makes you look lame :-) */
|
|
|Hi All,
|
|I've finally found a Win98 FTP client that works on my Masqueraded network
|.. FTP Voyager. But the throuput is painfully slow ( about 500 cps ) on an
|average ..when i have a 64kbps ISDN link .( From a standalone machine on
|33.6k modem PPP .. i get 1500 cps at least )
|
|FTP Voyager allows several adjustments in connection properties : Receive
|and send timeouts ( 61-600 seconds ), send / receive buffers ( 512-65536
|bytes ) , Active & passive modes ...
|
|What might help ?
|
|i) kernel upgrade from 2.2.14 to 2.2.16 ( I run Redhat 6.2 & SuSe 6.4 )
|
|ii) Ethernet card config ?
|
|iii ) Any other suggestions ?
|
|Regards
|
|Anurag
|
|-----From a post on a MASQ LIST ----------
|>I had a couple configuration problems, with one or more of them
|causing the
|>slowdown.  First, I upgraded the kernel to 2.2.14, since www.kernel.org
|>listed "MASQ bug fixes" as one of the updates.  This didn't help any, so I
|>continued searching.  I updated several things at once, and on the next
|>reboot, it all worked OK.  Here's the old configuration vs new config:
|>
|>DLink DE-220 ISA combo card as eth0 (external interface)
|>      Full duplex changed to half duplex (saw it on D. Ranch's forum)
|>      IRQ10 remained the same
|>DLink DE-220 ISA ...as eth1 (internal interface)
|>      Full duplex changed to half duplex
|>      IRQ3 changed to IRQ12 (eliminated the possible conflict
|with COM2 port)
|>Internal newtwork addresses
|>      192.168.1.x changed to 192.168.0.x - although 192.168.1.x is a valid
|>class-c, I was getting some odd pings so I changed it.
|
|_______________________________________________
|Masq maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Admin requests can be handled at http://www.indyramp.com/masq-list/ --
|THIS INCLUDES UNSUBSCRIBING!
|or email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
|PLEASE read the HOWTO and search the archives before posting.
|You can start your search at http://www.indyramp.com/masq/
|Please keep general linux/unix/pc/internet questions off the list.

_______________________________________________
Masq maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Admin requests can be handled at http://www.indyramp.com/masq-list/ -- 
THIS INCLUDES UNSUBSCRIBING!
or email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PLEASE read the HOWTO and search the archives before posting.
You can start your search at http://www.indyramp.com/masq/
Please keep general linux/unix/pc/internet questions off the list.

Reply via email to