Guus Thanks for your advice.
With respect to your comment regarding the congestion, it is very unlikely because I tested it inside my home network. In addition to that OpenVPN showed up similar throughput no matter what protocol is used (TCP/UDP). Anyway, I will continue to test tinc and report the findings for tinc's future. Again, thanks for your prompt and kind response! Regards --- "Guus Sliepen" <[email protected]> --- >On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:45:15PM +0900, Masateru KUWATA wrote: > >> I am testing tinc on Windows and found some interesting behavior. >> >> I used "TCPOnly" parameter for both end because I wanted to go through >> NAT. However, by using TCPOnly parameter, the response of PING slowed >> down significantly. >> >> The PING response with UDP is about 4ms, but it bumped up to 2000ms with >> TCP. >> >> I am just curious whether this is caused by using TCP. > >Yes, this is caused by TCP. However, if you consistently get very large >(>1000ms) ping times, it is probably because there is a lot of congestion >(maybe there is lots of other traffic on the same network), or a lot of packet >loss (bad reception or cable, or a bad ISP). > >With tinc 1.0.10 and later, you should not have to use the TCPOnly option >anymore, since it will now automatically detect whether communication via UDP >is possible, and will fall back to TCP when it isn't. > >-- >Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards, > Guus Sliepen <[email protected]> Masateru KUWATA Computer & Communications Consulting Phone: 070-5465-6505(Domestic)/+81-70-5465-6505(Oversea） Mobile mail:[email protected] Profile: http://www.geocities.jp/mki_ltd/page002.html BLOG : http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/mki_ltd/MYBLOG/ _______________________________________________ tinc mailing list [email protected] http://www.tinc-vpn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinc
