From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 12 13:49:31 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49B5916A438 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:49:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: from kane.otenet.gr (kane.otenet.gr [195.170.0.95]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8852643D48 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:49:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: from beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv (aris.bedc.ondsl.gr [62.103.39.226]) by kane.otenet.gr (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-1) with SMTP id j6CDnP6N006358; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:49:25 +0300 Received: from beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j6CDnP1A001075; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:49:25 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from keramida@localhost) by beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3/Submit) id j6CDnPpC001074; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:49:25 +0300 (EEST) X-Authentication-Warning: beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv: keramida set sender to keramida@freebsd.org using -f Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:49:25 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Roman Kurakin Message-ID: <20050712134925.GB1061@beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv> References: <42D3B9A8.6000803@cronyx.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42D3B9A8.6000803@cronyx.ru> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ping delay, initial request X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:49:31 -0000 On 2005-07-12 16:38, Roman Kurakin 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?