You are not logged in.
I notied internet is very slow so I traceroute and ping my local router:
$ ping 192.168.1.254
PING 192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=1971 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=1996 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=1803 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=1583 ms
$ traceroute 8.8.8.8
traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 30 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 gateway.gateway.2wire.net (192.168.1.254) 19.362 ms 9.989 ms 6.033 ms
2 bb115-66-131-254.singnet.com.sg (115.66.131.254) 17.091 ms 33.238 ms 12.193 ms
3 202.166.126.66 (202.166.126.66) 22.506 ms 7.483 ms 19.349 ms
4 ae2-10.shiraz.singnet.com.sg (202.166.126.65) 1390.232 ms 1140.845 ms 1280.849 ms
...
Wonder if this is the normal result? 192.168.1.254 is the local router, thats very slow? What might be the cause? I am on Power Line networking, most times its OK enough
Computer Science Student, Web Developer
Offline
Unless your connection is completely saturated, it's not.
This is on my LAN.
Server (wired):
$ ping -c 5 zeus
PING zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.216 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.275 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.244 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.226 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=0.226 ms
--- zeus.borromini.net ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 3996ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.216/0.237/0.275/0.025 ms
Laptop (wireless):
$ ping -c 5 zeus
PING zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=2.46 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=2.48 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=2.53 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=2.52 ms
64 bytes from zeus.borromini.net (10.0.0.1): icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=2.48 ms
--- zeus.borromini.net ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.465/2.498/2.530/0.040 ms
Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy
Offline
That ping is not normal... However the traceroute appears better. (Although not great)
I noticed seq 1 is missing from the ping output; I'm guessing that means there is packet loss as well as the slow round times?
Last edited by fukawi2 (2012-05-02 23:21:22)
Are you familiar with our Forum Rules, and How To Ask Questions The Smart Way?
BlueHackers // fscanary // resticctl
Offline
Hmm ... heres one I just did ...
$ ping 192.168.1.254
PING 192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=3.70 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=5.06 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=13.1 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=94.3 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=3.61 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=6 ttl=64 time=15.0 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=7 ttl=64 time=7.56 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.254: icmp_req=8 ttl=64 time=4.80 ms
Better, but still slow, how might I debug this? I think its probably my power line networking?
Computer Science Student, Web Developer
Offline
If there's a possibility to hook up your computer directly on to the router (bypassing the powerline) and run the same test; then you'll have some sort of idea of where the issue might be.
Burninate!
Offline
I am using power line networking, and I just pinged my router and got an average of 2.588 ms. My powerline adapters are just cheap little Actiontec 85 mbps models.
So, I don't think powerline is your problem, either.
Tim
Offline
It's really funny that ping and traceroute give different results - traceroute in fact only pings with mangled TTL.
The only difference, besides TTL, is that traceroute uses 52bytes packages while ping uses 56 - perhaps try to force ping to simulate traceroute by pinging with TTL 1 and only 52 bytes package and see what happens.
What happened to Arch's KISS? systemd sure is stupid but I must have missed the simple part ...
... and who is general Failure and why is he reading my harddisk?
Offline
It doesn't necessarily have to be the Powerline adapters - if the wiring in your house is old and/or not of the best quality, that might affect performance as well. Same if there are different circuits involved.
Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy
Offline