Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:55:37 +0400 From: Roman Kurakin <rik@cronyx.ru> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ping delay, initial request Message-ID: <42D3CBD9.2090901@cronyx.ru> In-Reply-To: <20050712134925.GB1061@beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv> References: <42D3B9A8.6000803@cronyx.ru> <20050712134925.GB1061@beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >On 2005-07-12 16:38, Roman Kurakin <rik@cronyx.ru> wrote: > > >>Hi, >> >> I am starting to investigate some net problem and I wonder if this >>problem seen/known. >> The problem was observed with ce(4) (Cronyx Tau32-PCI/Lite, >>it is not in the tree yet, but similar to cp(4)/ctau(4) devices) and >>sppp(4). >>If you run usual ping you will see normal delay which is much less than >>1sec. >>But if you run flood ping, stop it, and run normal ping again you'll see >>delay >>about one sec. >> >>ping x.x.x.x >>delay << 1 sec >>ping -f x.x.x.x >>average delay << 1 sec >>ping x.x.x.x >>delay ~ 1 sec >> >>This was seen on FreeBSD 4.11 stable. >> >>Any ideas? Does any body observed such behaviour in other environment? >> >> > >Is it possible that flood ping hits an icmp rate-limiting watermark and >then every subsequent icmp packet gets penalized with a delay until a >fair amount of time passes? > > Wasn't observed on ethernet iface. But this is good idea to test delay by some other type of packets. Do you know any good ans simple tool for that? rik >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42D3CBD9.2090901>