From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 25 20:37:44 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B96916A418 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:37:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@sequestered.net) Received: from kwisatz.haderach.net (kwisatz.haderach.net [208.116.11.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA58213C4A5 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:37:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@sequestered.net) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: macbook@sequestered.net) with ESMTP id 3EA952882A for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4720FE95.7090007@sequestered.net> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:37:41 -0700 From: Jay Chandler User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD Mailing List References: <54733.74.1.12.115.1193324672.squirrel@mail.el.net> <20071025222849.45d36615@attila> In-Reply-To: <20071025222849.45d36615@attila> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: xorg/gnome slow on different network X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:37:44 -0000 Bahman M. wrote: > On 2007-10-25 kalin mintchev wrote: >> hi all... >> >> i noticed that when i take my laptop to work and change the network >> settings in rc.conf before starting xorg after i do startx the whole >> xorg/gnome experience gets slowed down. first xorg takes it's time to >> start and then load gnome, window manager etc. >> and then all applications in gnome take about 30 - 60 seconds to >> start. when i get back home and change the rc.conf back to my home >> settings th xorg starts quickly and all the applications start at >> normal speed - 4 - 5 sec. >> > Just a wild guess but it could be a (D/DoS) worm active on that network. > Not likely, but you could do a tcpdump and see what the relative traffic on both networks is... I think DNS is a likelier fix. A lot of things depend upon it working correctly. -- Jay Chandler / KB1JWQ Living Legend / Systems Exorcist Today's Excuse: Melting hard drives