On 20 Jun 2013 at 14:45, Mayuresh wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:53:42AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > > Use ping, not ssh, to be able to have a more isolated test case and get > > quantitative data. In particular, separate loss from delay; both > > present as delay over TCP. > 64 bytes from 192.168.169.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=6.781 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.169.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.283 ms ..... > 64 bytes from 192.168.169.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=1.965 ms > ^C > ----router PING Statistics---- > 25 packets transmitted, 16 packets received, 36.0% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.937/2.639/6.781/1.253 ms > > I think 36% is a large number for packet loss?
It is unless the link is very busy when icmp might be dropped. What was your "ping" commandline? Here with 100Mbit ethernet I get: $ ping -c 100 me6000g ..... 100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.327/0.470/0.527/0.035 ms I could probably get some packet loss if I was to flood ping and the link was not otherwise idle. Traffic between pcs on my lan is mostly ipv6: $ ping6 -c 100 me6000g 100 packets transmitted, 100 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 0.246/0.393/0.461/0.036 ms David > > How can this be checked further? > > Actually my main router is not DD-WRT. It runs proprietary firmware (Lava > W150). I was using WRT160NL DD-WRT more as a range extender. But to reduce > the variables, currently I am directly connecting to the main router. > where I don't have a way to examine the packets. > > Mayuresh
