I find that my internet connection is very slow. I speed test my conection and it comes out at ~170 kilo bytes per second, which sits well with a 1.5 MBS line. When I ping google, I have about 80% packet loss, and the packets take 200-300 ms.
My ISP says that the infrastuture company is to blame. The infrastructure says that there is no problem with them, and that my router or computer is to blame. They have a windows tool to check it, but I've no winbox here right now. Until I run their tool and eliminated my machine as the source of the problem, they won't help me pinpoint the problem.
What can I do to pinpoint the problem, or at least discount my machine and my router as problematic? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 08:58, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I find that my internet connection is very slow. I speed test my conection and it comes out at ~170 kilo bytes per second, which sits well with a 1.5 MBS line. When I ping google, I have about 80% packet loss, and the packets take 200-300 ms.
My ISP says that the infrastuture company is to blame. The infrastructure says that there is no problem with them, and that my router or computer is to blame. They have a windows tool to check it, but I've no winbox here right now. Until I run their tool and eliminated my machine as the source of the problem, they won't help me pinpoint the problem.
What can I do to pinpoint the problem, or at least discount my machine and my router as problematic? Thanks.
Run traceroute to various places and note where the delays or dropped packets start. Normally you will see a response from every router in the path and the round trip time for three packets. Some may block the ports used or the icmp response so a '*' response isn't necessarily a problem, especially if it picks up on subsequent hops. Keep in mind that the time is for the round trip and problems can happen in either direction. If you see consistent delays or drops happening somewhere, paste the traceroute into an email to your ISP.
On 02/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
Run traceroute to various places and note where the delays or dropped packets start. Normally you will see a response from every router in the path and the round trip time for three packets. Some may block the ports used or the icmp response so a '*' response isn't necessarily a problem, especially if it picks up on subsequent hops. Keep in mind that the time is for the round trip and problems can happen in either direction. If you see consistent delays or drops happening somewhere, paste the traceroute into an email to your ISP.
Thanks, Les. I started doing mtr, and discovered that the router is dropping ~2% of the packets, the infrastructure is dropping ~14% of the packets, and the ISP is dropping ~8% of the packets. all the other hops are losing between 2% to 10% as well. What values are considered normal? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://gmail-com.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 12:17, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 02/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
Run traceroute to various places and note where the delays or dropped packets start. Normally you will see a response from every router in the path and the round trip time for three packets. Some may block the ports used or the icmp response so a '*' response isn't necessarily a problem, especially if it picks up on subsequent hops. Keep in mind that the time is for the round trip and problems can happen in either direction. If you see consistent delays or drops happening somewhere, paste the traceroute into an email to your ISP.
Thanks, Les. I started doing mtr, and discovered that the router is dropping ~2% of the packets, the infrastructure is dropping ~14% of the packets, and the ISP is dropping ~8% of the packets. all the other hops are losing between 2% to 10% as well. What values are considered normal? Thanks.
I'd consider 'none' to be normal. But keep in mind that you are always testing the whole round trip even though it is only reported as the path to something. If something nearby is dropping packets it is probably also responsible for the ones reported on the path to more distant things. Clean up the problem with your router before looking anywhere else. If you are dropping packets on your ethernet connection to your own router, you almost certainly have a duplex mismatch on the switch connection to the router or pc. If it is on the T1 side, it is probably overloaded. Look for compromised machines spreading viruses/spam or file sharing. Do you have access to the router to see the interface statistics for traffic and errors?
On 02/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
I'd consider 'none' to be normal. But keep in mind that you are always testing the whole round trip even though it is only reported as the path to something. If something nearby is dropping packets it is probably also responsible for the ones reported on the path to more distant things. Clean up the problem with your router before looking anywhere else.
Up until here, everything is clear. I also agree that the router shouldn't be droping packets.
If you are dropping packets on your ethernet connection to your own router, you almost certainly have a duplex mismatch on the switch connection to the router or pc.
Huh? Do you mean a twisted cable (I don't know how you call them in English, but it's the cable that you use to connect two computers together instead of computer-router) instead of a regular cable? I'm pretty sure that it's a regular cable, but I'll check that.
If it is on the T1 side, it is probably overloaded.
For the time being, I've only one machine on the router. So I'm modem-router-linbox. Which side is T1?
Look for compromised machines spreading viruses/spam or file sharing.
The only machine on this network at the moment is this linbox. It's a week-old install at that.
Do you have access to the router to see the interface statistics for traffic and errors?
Yes, I've access to the router, and I just enabled the log. It was apparently disabled until now. This is a home network and I've access to all the equiptment.
Thank you, Les. I appreciate the time you take to help.
Dotan Cohen http://ie-only.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 15:14, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 02/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
I'd consider 'none' to be normal. But keep in mind that you are always testing the whole round trip even though it is only reported as the path to something. If something nearby is dropping packets it is probably also responsible for the ones reported on the path to more distant things. Clean up the problem with your router before looking anywhere else.
Up until here, everything is clear. I also agree that the router shouldn't be droping packets.
Where is 'here'? If you run traceroute you should see each hop separately.
If you are dropping packets on your ethernet connection to your own router, you almost certainly have a duplex mismatch on the switch connection to the router or pc.
Huh? Do you mean a twisted cable (I don't know how you call them in English, but it's the cable that you use to connect two computers together instead of computer-router) instead of a regular cable? I'm pretty sure that it's a regular cable, but I'll check that.
If it is on the T1 side, it is probably overloaded.
For the time being, I've only one machine on the router. So I'm modem-router-linbox. Which side is T1?
I took your '1.5Mbs' connection to mean a T1 which would normally be an interface directly on a router. If you have a separate modem, perhaps you have DSL instead. Anyway, wiring problems are rare but possible. More likely is a duplex mismatch where one end is set to full duplex and one to half. Check that on both the router and PC first. On the linux side, ifconfig will show errors and total transmits/receives but you have to do some math to compute bandwidth or you can run something like gkrellm to show it as a graph. mii-tool or ethtool will show the speed and duplex settings.
Look for compromised machines spreading viruses/spam or file sharing.
The only machine on this network at the moment is this linbox. It's a week-old install at that.
Did you do a 'yum update' immediately after the install? And if you have ssh enabled and reachable from inbound connections, do you have a complex password that would be difficult to guess?
Do you have access to the router to see the interface statistics for traffic and errors?
Yes, I've access to the router, and I just enabled the log. It was apparently disabled until now. This is a home network and I've access to all the equiptment.
Try to find something that shows traffic and errors on the router side. And if the errors are on the next hop out past the router, report that to your isp.
On 03/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
Up until here, everything is clear. I also agree that the router shouldn't be droping packets.
Where is 'here'? If you run traceroute you should see each hop separately.
'Here' is up until this point in the letter :) The rest gets confusing.
I took your '1.5Mbs' connection to mean a T1 which would normally be an interface directly on a router. If you have a separate modem, perhaps you have DSL instead. Anyway, wiring problems are rare but possible. More likely is a duplex mismatch where one end is set to full duplex and one to half. Check that on both the router and PC first. On the linux side, ifconfig will show errors and total transmits/receives but you have to do some math to compute bandwidth or you can run something like gkrellm to show it as a graph. mii-tool or ethtool will show the speed and duplex settings.
I'm on a cable connection. Cable Coming Into House Through Hole In Wall -> Modem -> Router -> Linbox.
I'll look into the duplex problem, but where do I start? I did a bit of googling but I apparently don't know which keywords to google. How can I check linux's duplex setting, and how can I check the routers? Here, this may help: $ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C1:26:02:91:50 inet addr:192.168.123.131 Bcast:192.168.123.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::2c1:26ff:fe02:9150/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:90596 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:82693 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:88603039 (84.4 MiB) TX bytes:12217393 (11.6 MiB) Interrupt:11 Base address:0xf00
lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:24 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:24 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:1532 (1.4 KiB) TX bytes:1532 (1.4 KiB)
Did you do a 'yum update' immediately after the install? And if you have ssh enabled and reachable from inbound connections, do you have a complex password that would be difficult to guess?
The machine is completly up-to-date.
Try to find something that shows traffic and errors on the router side. And if the errors are on the next hop out past the router, report that to your isp.
Wouldn't mtr do that? But I need to correct or eliminate the router first.
Dotan Cohen http://song-lirics.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 16:20, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I'll look into the duplex problem, but where do I start? I did a bit of googling but I apparently don't know which keywords to google. How can I check linux's duplex setting, and how can I check the routers? Here, this may help: $ ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:C1:26:02:91:50 inet addr:192.168.123.131 Bcast:192.168.123.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::2c1:26ff:fe02:9150/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:90596 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:82693 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:88603039 (84.4 MiB) TX bytes:12217393 (11.6 MiB) Interrupt:11 Base address:0xf00
The '0 errors' part looks good. If you see an equivalent on the router side you are probably OK locally.
Try to find something that shows traffic and errors on the router side. And if the errors are on the next hop out past the router, report that to your isp.
Wouldn't mtr do that? But I need to correct or eliminate the router first.
I don't think I believe what mtr says. Try running it with an address just one or two hops out.
On 03/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
The '0 errors' part looks good. If you see an equivalent on the router side you are probably OK locally.
How do I check the router side?
Les, I appreciate the time you're taking on this.
Dotan Cohen http://technology-sleuth.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 17:06, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 03/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
The '0 errors' part looks good. If you see an equivalent on the router side you are probably OK locally.
How do I check the router side?
It probably has a web interface with some kind of status/statistics info.
From: "Dotan Cohen" dotancohen@gmail.com
If you are dropping packets on your ethernet connection to your own router, you almost certainly have a duplex mismatch on the switch connection to the router or pc.
Huh? Do you mean a twisted cable (I don't know how you call them in English, but it's the cable that you use to connect two computers together instead of computer-router) instead of a regular cable? I'm pretty sure that it's a regular cable, but I'll check that.
What happens when you ping the router?
{^_^}
On 03/07/06, jdow jdow@earthlink.net wrote:
What happens when you ping the router?
$ ping 192.168.123.254 PING 192.168.123.254 (192.168.123.254) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.399 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.381 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.388 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.384 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.362 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.382 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.381 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.377 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.378 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.374 ms
--- 192.168.123.254 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9007ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.362/0.380/0.399/0.023 ms
Dotan http://what-is-what.com
From: "Dotan Cohen" dotancohen@gmail.com
On 03/07/06, jdow jdow@earthlink.net wrote:
What happens when you ping the router?
$ ping 192.168.123.254 PING 192.168.123.254 (192.168.123.254) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.399 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.381 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.388 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.384 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.362 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.382 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.381 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.377 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.378 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.123.254: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.374 ms
--- 192.168.123.254 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9007ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.362/0.380/0.399/0.023 ms
If you let it ping a long time and see no lost packets then the connection to the router is happy. Then you can take the MTR results and stretch your pings out into the network and see where the packet loss begins. Just go outwards one hop at a time. When you find the source of the problem you then know who to bother about it. (The MTR results MAY be indicative of where the problem lies. And if you put a "-i 5" in the ping any rate limiting will probably not be triggered.)
{^_^}
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 20:17 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 02/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
Run traceroute to various places and note where the delays or dropped packets start. Normally you will see a response from every router in the path and the round trip time for three packets. Some may block the ports used or the icmp response so a '*' response isn't necessarily a problem, especially if it picks up on subsequent hops. Keep in mind that the time is for the round trip and problems can happen in either direction. If you see consistent delays or drops happening somewhere, paste the traceroute into an email to your ISP.
Thanks, Les. I started doing mtr, and discovered that the router is dropping ~2% of the packets, the infrastructure is dropping ~14% of the packets, and the ISP is dropping ~8% of the packets. all the other hops are losing between 2% to 10% as well. What values are considered normal? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://gmail-com.com
If you google internet transfer speed you should find sites that allow you to test your upload and download speeds. I just did that and a site with pitstop in its name, for example, provides that free service.
-- ======================================================================= We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on when it's necessary to compromise. -- Larry Wall ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
On 02/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
If you google internet transfer speed you should find sites that allow you to test your upload and download speeds. I just did that and a site with pitstop in its name, for example, provides that free service.
Yes, Aaron, I checked that via Shimi's Speed test, which is hosted nearby.
Dotan Cohen http://lyricslist.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 23:29 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 02/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
If you google internet transfer speed you should find sites that allow you to test your upload and download speeds. I just did that and a site with pitstop in its name, for example, provides that free service.
Yes, Aaron, I checked that via Shimi's Speed test, which is hosted nearby.
Dotan Cohen http://lyricslist.com
I see, looking back at what you originally said, that the overall transfer speed is ok but you are loosing packets in the transfer. I need to read things more carefully.
I assume the conclusion you were leaning towards was a problem in the route between you and google. Which seems right to me.
However, I need to learn something. tracroute when I run it does not report lost packets, even if I use the -I option. What am I missing?
-- ======================================================================= Please, won't somebody tell me what diddie-wa-diddie means? ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
On 02/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I see, looking back at what you originally said, that the overall transfer speed is ok but you are loosing packets in the transfer. I need to read things more carefully.
No problem, you probably picked up that trait studying at the Technion :)
I assume the conclusion you were leaning towards was a problem in the route between you and google. Which seems right to me.
However, I need to learn something. tracroute when I run it does not report lost packets, even if I use the -I option. What am I missing?
Have you seen mtr? I just discovered it. Great tool- give it a shot.
Dotan Cohen http://linux-apache-mysql-php.org/
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 00:07 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 02/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I see, looking back at what you originally said, that the overall transfer speed is ok but you are loosing packets in the transfer. I need to read things more carefully.
No problem, you probably picked up that trait studying at the Technion :)
I assume the conclusion you were leaning towards was a problem in the route between you and google. Which seems right to me.
However, I need to learn something. tracroute when I run it does not report lost packets, even if I use the -I option. What am I missing?
Have you seen mtr? I just discovered it. Great tool- give it a shot.
mtr certainly seems to be more useful for the problem you are trying to solve. I guess I learned something.
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 16:22, Aaron Konstam wrote:
mtr certainly seems to be more useful for the problem you are trying to solve. I guess I learned something.
I don't think I believe the results though. For me it shows up to 50% loss at one point yet 0% for many things beyond it. That doesn't make a lot of sense because the more distant points have to traverse the hop where it claims losses are happening.
On 03/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think I believe the results though. For me it shows up to 50% loss at one point yet 0% for many things beyond it. That doesn't make a lot of sense because the more distant points have to traverse the hop where it claims losses are happening.
Yes, I was seeing that, too.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 16:39, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 03/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think I believe the results though. For me it shows up to 50% loss at one point yet 0% for many things beyond it. That doesn't make a lot of sense because the more distant points have to traverse the hop where it claims losses are happening.
Yes, I was seeing that, too.
I'd guess it is some kind of rate-limiting firewalling on the ICMP responses if it is even real - something that wouldn't affect normal traffic at all.
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 15:54, Aaron Konstam wrote:
However, I need to learn something. tracroute when I run it does not report lost packets, even if I use the -I option. What am I missing?
Traceroute sends three packets with each time-to-live. If you get three times reported at each hop, no packets were lost. You should see a '*' for missing results. However, realize that a lost packet for any hop could have been lost at any point along the way or back.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 15:54, Aaron Konstam wrote:
However, I need to learn something. tracroute when I run it does not report lost packets, even if I use the -I option. What am I missing?
Traceroute sends three packets with each time-to-live. If you get three times reported at each hop, no packets were lost. You should see a '*' for missing results. However, realize that a lost packet for any hop could have been lost at any point along the way or back.
Also some machines like Solaris (at least version 2.6 and earlier) would drop the second traceroute packet. And if one of the hops is configured to drop high port UDP packets all will be dropped for that hop only.
Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 20:17 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 02/07/06, Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
Run traceroute to various places and note where the delays or dropped packets start. Normally you will see a response from every router in the path and the round trip time for three packets. Some may block the ports used or the icmp response so a '*' response isn't necessarily a problem, especially if it picks up on subsequent hops. Keep in mind that the time is for the round trip and problems can happen in either direction. If you see consistent delays or drops happening somewhere, paste the traceroute into an email to your ISP.
Thanks, Les. I started doing mtr, and discovered that the router is dropping ~2% of the packets, the infrastructure is dropping ~14% of the packets, and the ISP is dropping ~8% of the packets. all the other hops are losing between 2% to 10% as well. What values are considered normal? Thanks.
I'd say its normal, and expected when the mtr utility uses its default ping interval of 1 second. I controlled that by increaseing the ping interval to 5 seconds, at which point all the random losses (some as high as 40%) it reported before went away. 1 second to get all the responses from a site that may be 30 hops away is a very un-realistic assumption on the part of the mtr author, it does not match the real world when it is apparently throwing away any ping return more than 1 second old.
I'd make a SWAG that mtr, when checking the echo's, cuts the time permissible to recognize a legit echo down to that same second, and if its not back by then, its a packet loss. By increasing the ping times to 5 seconds, aka "mtr -i 5 location-to-ping" then all the packets do get back in time and the losses are then zero across the board. Now if mtr were to recognize a packet return as a packet from a previous ping, that would be much more realistic. But from the clues its giving, it is not checking for any packet thats not the result of the currently issued icmp ping.
Dotan Cohen http://gmail-com.com
If you google internet transfer speed you should find sites that allow you to test your upload and download speeds. I just did that and a site with pitstop in its name, for example, provides that free service.
--
We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on when it's necessary to compromise. -- Larry Wall ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
Dotan Cohen wrote:
I find that my internet connection is very slow. I speed test my conection and it comes out at ~170 kilo bytes per second, which sits well with a 1.5 MBS line. When I ping google, I have about 80% packet loss, and the packets take 200-300 ms.
My ISP says that the infrastuture company is to blame. The infrastructure says that there is no problem with them, and that my router or computer is to blame. They have a windows tool to check it, but I've no winbox here right now. Until I run their tool and eliminated my machine as the source of the problem, they won't help me pinpoint the problem.
What can I do to pinpoint the problem, or at least discount my machine and my router as problematic? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
This whole problem is funny. I see it all the time where everyone claims "not my problem, must be these people..." anyway, the reason I find it funny is that they all seem to think that windows is all that anyone every runs. When I am debugging a network problem, I always plug in my linux laptop, and if it works fine, then I tell the windows users, its a windows problem and I walk away. I then call desktop support for them.
On 15/07/06, Michael P. Brininstool mikepb@hoplite.org wrote:
Dotan Cohen wrote:
I find that my internet connection is very slow. I speed test my conection and it comes out at ~170 kilo bytes per second, which sits well with a 1.5 MBS line. When I ping google, I have about 80% packet loss, and the packets take 200-300 ms.
My ISP says that the infrastuture company is to blame. The infrastructure says that there is no problem with them, and that my router or computer is to blame. They have a windows tool to check it, but I've no winbox here right now. Until I run their tool and eliminated my machine as the source of the problem, they won't help me pinpoint the problem.
What can I do to pinpoint the problem, or at least discount my machine and my router as problematic? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
This whole problem is funny. I see it all the time where everyone claims "not my problem, must be these people..." anyway, the reason I find it funny is that they all seem to think that windows is all that anyone every runs. When I am debugging a network problem, I always plug in my linux laptop, and if it works fine, then I tell the windows users, its a windows problem and I walk away. I then call desktop support for them.
Funny it may be, but it makes using the system very frustrating. Luckily, I use the internet more than the wife, otherwise there would be pressure to use something else.
Dotan Cohen htp://technology-sleuth.com
On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 22:24 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 15/07/06, Michael P. Brininstool mikepb@hoplite.org wrote:
Dotan Cohen wrote:
I find that my internet connection is very slow. I speed test my conection and it comes out at ~170 kilo bytes per second, which
sits
well with a 1.5 MBS line. When I ping google, I have about 80%
packet
loss, and the packets take 200-300 ms.
My ISP says that the infrastuture company is to blame. The infrastructure says that there is no problem with them, and that
my
router or computer is to blame. They have a windows tool to check
it,
but I've no winbox here right now. Until I run their tool and eliminated my machine as the source of the problem, they won't
help me
pinpoint the problem.
What can I do to pinpoint the problem, or at least discount my
machine
and my router as problematic? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
I am sorry you are still having this problem. I thought you had already found a solution. Maybe its the bits are going right to left and not left to right (sorry a private joke related to Dotan being in Israel)
I just tried something that might help. I pinged my router. No packets lost. If you do that you could eliminate traffic from your machine to the router. Then as was suggested a combination of ping and traceroute should pinpoint where on the route trace the packets are beginning to be lost. It seems to me that would localize the problem.
As an OT comment I was sorry to hear Haifa was now being attacked. I hope that has not impacted your life too much. I read a story that there is a Hasidic sect in Jerusalem that each night goes out on "Hitbodadut" to be alone to scream. That is want I want to do when I think of the situation is your region of the world at this time.
Hi,
This is a really big email :) .. i got lost, finally the problem was solved? was it all about DNS problem if yes .. try to use 4.2.2.2 it work great for me even i am in south america and the DNS server is in US.
regards,
Guillermo.
On 7/15/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 22:24 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 15/07/06, Michael P. Brininstool mikepb@hoplite.org wrote:
Dotan Cohen wrote:
I find that my internet connection is very slow. I speed test my conection and it comes out at ~170 kilo bytes per second, which
sits
well with a 1.5 MBS line. When I ping google, I have about 80%
packet
loss, and the packets take 200-300 ms.
My ISP says that the infrastuture company is to blame. The infrastructure says that there is no problem with them, and that
my
router or computer is to blame. They have a windows tool to check
it,
but I've no winbox here right now. Until I run their tool and eliminated my machine as the source of the problem, they won't
help me
pinpoint the problem.
What can I do to pinpoint the problem, or at least discount my
machine
and my router as problematic? Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
I am sorry you are still having this problem. I thought you had already found a solution. Maybe its the bits are going right to left and not left to right (sorry a private joke related to Dotan being in Israel)
I just tried something that might help. I pinged my router. No packets lost. If you do that you could eliminate traffic from your machine to the router. Then as was suggested a combination of ping and traceroute should pinpoint where on the route trace the packets are beginning to be lost. It seems to me that would localize the problem.
As an OT comment I was sorry to hear Haifa was now being attacked. I hope that has not impacted your life too much. I read a story that there is a Hasidic sect in Jerusalem that each night goes out on "Hitbodadut" to be alone to scream. That is want I want to do when I think of the situation is your region of the world at this time. -- Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
On 16/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I am sorry you are still having this problem. I thought you had already found a solution. Maybe its the bits are going right to left and not left to right (sorry a private joke related to Dotan being in Israel)
Actually the router modem had abducted 3 bits and injured 7 more- the router is retaliating.
I just tried something that might help. I pinged my router. No packets lost. If you do that you could eliminate traffic from your machine to the router. Then as was suggested a combination of ping and traceroute should pinpoint where on the route trace the packets are beginning to be lost. It seems to me that would localize the problem.
I had run mtr many times, the router itself does have some loss, as do other nodes in the system. So I'd like to connect the machine directly to the router, but then I can't dial in to the ISP. Maybe someone here could advise me on how to do that? This is my dial-in connection information, taken from the routers' control panel: WAN Type: L2TP IP Mode: Dynamic IP Address Server IP Address: Lns4.actcom.net.il L2TP Account: etykot@CActcom L2TP Password: SecretPassword
Windows machines can dial in using the ISP's dialer, or using the built-in windows dialer.
As an OT comment I was sorry to hear Haifa was now being attacked. I hope that has not impacted your life too much. I read a story that there is a Hasidic sect in Jerusalem that each night goes out on "Hitbodadut" to be alone to scream. That is want I want to do when I think of the situation is your region of the world at this time.
Well, if I am called up for service then I won't have to think about packet loss for a few weeks. Wait- explosions-gotta go....
On 7/16/06, Dotan Cohen dotancohen@gmail.com wrote:
On 16/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I am sorry you are still having this problem. I thought you had already found a solution. Maybe its the bits are going right to left and not left to right (sorry a private joke related to Dotan being in Israel)
Actually the router modem had abducted 3 bits and injured 7 more- the router is retaliating.
I just tried something that might help. I pinged my router. No packets lost. If you do that you could eliminate traffic from your machine to the router. Then as was suggested a combination of ping and traceroute should pinpoint where on the route trace the packets are beginning to be lost. It seems to me that would localize the problem.
I had run mtr many times, the router itself does have some loss, as do other nodes in the system. So I'd like to connect the machine directly to the router, but then I can't dial in to the ISP. Maybe someone here could advise me on how to do that? This is my dial-in connection information, taken from the routers' control panel: WAN Type: L2TP IP Mode: Dynamic IP Address Server IP Address: Lns4.actcom.net.il L2TP Account: etykot@CActcom L2TP Password: SecretPassword
Did you checked your half/full duplex configurations on the router, your PC and your LAN switch? you should not loose packet on your own network.
Windows machines can dial in using the ISP's dialer, or using the
built-in windows dialer.
As an OT comment I was sorry to hear Haifa was now being attacked. I hope that has not impacted your life too much. I read a story that there is a Hasidic sect in Jerusalem that each night goes out on "Hitbodadut" to be alone to scream. That is want I want to do when I think of the situation is your region of the world at this time.
Well, if I am called up for service then I won't have to think about packet loss for a few weeks. Wait- explosions-gotta go....
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 09:47 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 16/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I am sorry you are still having this problem. I thought you had already found a solution. Maybe its the bits are going right to left and not left to right (sorry a private joke related to Dotan being in Israel)
Actually the router modem had abducted 3 bits and injured 7 more- the router is retaliating.
I just tried something that might help. I pinged my router. No packets lost. If you do that you could eliminate traffic from your machine to the router. Then as was suggested a combination of ping and traceroute should pinpoint where on the route trace the packets are beginning to be lost. It seems to me that would localize the problem.
I had run mtr many times, the router itself does have some loss, as do other nodes in the system. So I'd like to connect the machine directly to the router, but then I can't dial in to the ISP. Maybe someone here could advise me on how to do that? This is my dial-in connection information, taken from the routers' control panel: WAN Type: L2TP IP Mode: Dynamic IP Address Server IP Address: Lns4.actcom.net.il L2TP Account: etykot@CActcom L2TP Password: SecretPassword
Windows machines can dial in using the ISP's dialer, or using the built-in windows dialer.
I am missing something. If the windows dialer can dial in why can't a dialer program on Linux like kppp? -- ======================================================================= Very few profundities can be expressed in less than 80 characters. ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
On Sunday July 16 2006 9:33 am, Aaron Konstam wrote:
I am missing something. If the windows dialer can dial in why can't a dialer program on Linux like kppp?
Unless I'm missing something, he's probably talking about a Winmodem, which work great under Windows, but can become a life-sucker trying to get working in Linux. My advice to him would be, if he's trying to dialup anything with Linux, that he get an external serial modem, if that's one of the things he's seeking help with.
On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 16:16 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
On Sunday July 16 2006 9:33 am, Aaron Konstam wrote:
I am missing something. If the windows dialer can dial in why can't a dialer program on Linux like kppp?
Unless I'm missing something, he's probably talking about a Winmodem, which work great under Windows, but can become a life-sucker trying to get working in Linux. My advice to him would be, if he's trying to dialup anything with Linux, that he get an external serial modem, if that's one of the things he's seeking help with. -- Claude Jones Brunswick, MD, USA
You might be right, and if so I would give him the same advice. -- ======================================================================= Check me if I'm wrong, Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers... they're gonna lock me up and throw away the key! ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 16:34 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 16:16 -0400, Claude Jones wrote:
On Sunday July 16 2006 9:33 am, Aaron Konstam wrote:
I am missing something. If the windows dialer can dial in why can't a dialer program on Linux like kppp?
Unless I'm missing something, he's probably talking about a Winmodem, which work great under Windows, but can become a life-sucker trying to get working in Linux. My advice to him would be, if he's trying to dialup anything with Linux, that he get an external serial modem, if that's one of the things he's seeking help with. -- Claude Jones Brunswick, MD, USA
You might be right, and if so I would give him the same advice.
If he wants any connection at all with the darn thing examine the init strings listed at the manufactures site while in Windows, and set the compression to off in the Linux dialup init string. Change the speed to 9600 and it will work reliably at 9600 baud. I had a bunch of external winmodems that were given to me when I had an 8 line BBS, back in the day. None would work for anything until one guru turned me on to turning off compression and lowering the speed. Then it worked just like it was out of the box, a cheapo 9600 baud modem, without a bunch of software choking the processor chicken trying to make it look like a 28.8
DC Hayes!! A modem like that will do what it needs to do, without software. It's all in hardware and does cost more. It works. I believe they can still be bought, but you have to almost get it in writing that it will stand-alone without some blooming driver.
A reliable external modem, priceless. Ric
No, it's not an internal winmodem, it's a regular cable modem.
I would imagine that a linux dialer program could do it. I did not know about the aformentioned kppp, and I'll look into it.
As for Guillermo's suggestion about checking half/ full duplex on the modem, I see nothing of the sort in the modem's control panel. So I don't know one way or the other.
In any case, the computer and modem in question are in Haifa and because of the current situation we are not returning there for at least a few more days. Good thing that I backed up the previous night and I have all my files, email, etc on disk with me here. When I return I'll look into kppp and see where that leads me.
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://dotancohen.com
On Tuesday July 18 2006 2:44 am, Dotan Cohen wrote:
No, it's not an internal winmodem, it's a regular cable modem.
I would imagine that a linux dialer program could do it. I did not know about the aformentioned kppp, and I'll look into it.
You're trying to use a cable modem to dial out? Am I understanding you?
Dotan Cohen wrote:
No, it's not an internal winmodem, it's a regular cable modem.
I would imagine that a linux dialer program could do it. I did not know about the aformentioned kppp, and I'll look into it.
As for Guillermo's suggestion about checking half/ full duplex on the modem, I see nothing of the sort in the modem's control panel. So I don't know one way or the other.
In any case, the computer and modem in question are in Haifa and because of the current situation we are not returning there for at least a few more days. Good thing that I backed up the previous night and I have all my files, email, etc on disk with me here. When I return I'll look into kppp and see where that leads me.
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://dotancohen.com
I think we have a terminology problem here. You do not dial out on a cable modem. Depending on what your cable system uses, and what modem you have, you may need to create a PPPoE connection, or another type of link of the same type. Some cable modems, as well as some DSL modems, can be configured to create this link for you, so all you need to do is make a standard Ethernet connection to it.
The Windows software from the cable company creates the connection between your computer and the cable company. There is probably Linux software to do the same thing, but because your cable company does not supply a pre-configured software package for Linux, we have to know what they are using so we can advise you about the software to use, and how to set it up. (This is why I prefer to set up the modem to create the connection - it becomes an OS neutral connection.) You can probably get all the information you need from your router. Look at the WAN connection information. It should tell you the connection type, and the username/password you need to use.
Mikkel
On 18/07/06, Mikkel L. Ellertson mikkel@infinity-ltd.com wrote:
I think we have a terminology problem here. You do not dial out on a cable modem.
I'm sorry for the confusion. We say "to dial" instead of "to make the conneciton" because that is the meaning of "to dial" in our language. I now know that in English "to dial" is the making of a connection on a telephone _only_. Sorry.
Depending on what your cable system uses, and what modem you have, you may need to create a PPPoE connection, or another type of link of the same type. Some cable modems, as well as some DSL modems, can be configured to create this link for you, so all you need to do is make a standard Ethernet connection to it.
The particular modem in question cannot be configured to make the connection on it's own. The ocmputer must be the component making the connection.
The Windows software from the cable company creates the connection between your computer and the cable company. There is probably Linux software to do the same thing, but because your cable company does not supply a pre-configured software package for Linux, we have to know what they are using so we can advise you about the software to use, and how to set it up. (This is why I prefer to set up the modem to create the connection - it becomes an OS neutral connection.) You can probably get all the information you need from your router. Look at the WAN connection information. It should tell you the connection type, and the username/password you need to use.
Thanks, Mikkel. This is the information:
WAN Type: L2TP IP Mode: Dynamic IP Address Server IP Address: Lns4.actcom.net.il L2TP Account: etykot@CActcom L2TP Password: SecretPassword
What program is capable of creating this type of connection?
Thanks in advance. I very much appreciate the help.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
Dotan Cohen kirjoitti viestissään (lähetysaika torstai, 20. heinäkuuta 2006 08:55):
WAN Type: L2TP IP Mode: Dynamic IP Address Server IP Address: Lns4.actcom.net.il L2TP Account: etykot@CActcom L2TP Password: SecretPassword
What program is capable of creating this type of connection?
L2TP is a VPN protocol developed by Cisco and Microsoft. Fedora Extras has package l2tpd that you could try to use.
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 08:44 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
No, it's not an internal winmodem, it's a regular cable modem.
I would imagine that a linux dialer program could do it. I did not know about the aformentioned kppp, and I'll look into it.
As for Guillermo's suggestion about checking half/ full duplex on the modem, I see nothing of the sort in the modem's control panel. So I don't know one way or the other.
In any case, the computer and modem in question are in Haifa and because of the current situation we are not returning there for at least a few more days. Good thing that I backed up the previous night and I have all my files, email, etc on disk with me here. When I return I'll look into kppp and see where that leads me.
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://dotancohen.com
I am sorry I mentioned kppp. I was confused by the dial in phrase also. But I need some clarification. Plugging in you computer to the internet port of the cable modem should just work. The Windows configuration stuff that comes from the cable company is for configuring the cable modem to talk to cable company's server. When I was in this position (with my dsl company, and I believe my cable modem colleagues did the same) I called the internet suppler and told them to help me configure the modem by hand. They can do that. At least they did for me.
I hope things quiet down soon.
On 20/07/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 08:44 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
No, it's not an internal winmodem, it's a regular cable modem.
I would imagine that a linux dialer program could do it. I did not know about the aformentioned kppp, and I'll look into it.
As for Guillermo's suggestion about checking half/ full duplex on the modem, I see nothing of the sort in the modem's control panel. So I don't know one way or the other.
In any case, the computer and modem in question are in Haifa and because of the current situation we are not returning there for at least a few more days. Good thing that I backed up the previous night and I have all my files, email, etc on disk with me here. When I return I'll look into kppp and see where that leads me.
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://dotancohen.com
I am sorry I mentioned kppp. I was confused by the dial in phrase also. But I need some clarification. Plugging in you computer to the internet port of the cable modem should just work. The Windows configuration stuff that comes from the cable company is for configuring the cable modem to talk to cable company's server. When I was in this position (with my dsl company, and I believe my cable modem colleagues did the same) I called the internet suppler and told them to help me configure the modem by hand. They can do that. At least they did for me.
I hope things quiet down soon.
Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net
Sorry for the late reply, Aaron. I've been away from the computer for a while (you know why) but now I'm back.
The parrots at the ISP don't know how to configure the modem via direct connection to a linux box. Their only solution is to use the windows dialer. When they hear "linux" they get quiet. I can connect via the router, though, I want to eliminate the router as a possible source of problems.
What is a typical IP for a modem? Maybe if I just knew it's IP, then I could get into the control panel and figure out what to do.
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen
On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 10:44 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
What is a typical IP for a modem? Maybe if I just knew it's IP, then I could get into the control panel and figure out what to do.
192.168.1.254 and 192.168.0.1 are two common ones. One moderately simple way to find it would be to connect just one computer and that device together, then use one of the network scanning tools. You should get some response from it.
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 10:44:42 +0300, Dotan Cohen dotancohen@gmail.com wrote:
What is a typical IP for a modem? Maybe if I just knew it's IP, then I could get into the control panel and figure out what to do.
It would be in one of the reserved for private use IP blocks. I have seen modems default to 10.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.1 (but I haven't seen a lot of samples).
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sun, Sep 17, 2006 at 10:44:42 +0300, Dotan Cohen dotancohen@gmail.com wrote:
What is a typical IP for a modem? Maybe if I just knew it's IP, then I could get into the control panel and figure out what to do.
It would be in one of the reserved for private use IP blocks. I have seen modems default to 10.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.1 (but I haven't seen a lot of samples).
My Belkin DSL modem at home defaulted to 192.168.2.X, it's the first one I've ever seen default to the subnet.
Dotan Cohen wrote:
What is a typical IP for a modem? Maybe if I just knew it's IP, then I could get into the control panel and figure out what to do.
Depends. Some of them like to act in "bridge" mode, in which case they can be virtually invisible (once they're working).
Otherwise, they're very likely to have a DHCP server installed. If you configure a computer to pick up a DHCP address (and there are no other DHCP servers on the network), and the computer does pick up a DHCP address, *and* if the IP address is in the 192.168.x.y range, the 10.x.y.z range or possibly the 172.16.0.0 to 172.31.255.255 range, then this is almost certainly what's happening. (If it gets another address, then it might be getting that from the ISP).
In this case, you'd just look for the "gateway" address (e.g. in /sbin/route), and that would be the IP address.
Or you could always Google on the brand of the modem (but you knew that).
James.
I've tried all the addresses mentioned, but none of them led anywhere. And I've had no luck googleing for the modem, nor any luck talking to the geniuses at the ISP.
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen
Dotan Cohen wrote:
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
I'm a bit confused here -- you've got a PC plugged into a router plugged into a cable modem plugged into your cable? What's the router <-> modem connection -- Ethernet? And it works if you go through the router, but you want to configure the modem and need an IP address? Yes, I'd try just connecting straight to the modem. I'd power-cycle the modem, too -- some modems need that if they see a different device on the other end of their link.
Two other questions -- does the modem have a USB port? It might be worth using lsusb and Googling what that reports. It's not uncommon for OEMs to make a device, and then resellers put their own branding on the outside. You might get more support if you can work out that it's identical to something else.
Likewise, does arp -a report an Ethernet (MAC) address, something like 00:01:02:AE:56:F0 ? If it does, then you can look that up at http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.shtml and find out who made the device (or the Ethernet bit of it). (This won't work if you've got a router between you and the modem).
James.
On Tuesday 19 September 2006 12:30, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I've tried all the addresses mentioned, but none of them led anywhere. And I've had no luck googleing for the modem, nor any luck talking to the geniuses at the ISP.
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
I assume we're talking about a dsl modem here. If the router is doing its job, then the only place you'll see your 'outside' address is in one of the routers status/config pages, usually at 192.168.0.1 or 1.1. You should be able to extract all the info you'd need from the routers web server. Just hit with firefox at one of the above addresses, log in (see the routers docs for the password) and read it all.
If you remove the router, then you'll have to fight with Roaring Penguins PPPoE utility, which I didn't have exactly stellar luck with 3.5 years ago. It may be improved since.
That will also require you to setup a firewall thats pretty bulletproof since the router now is protecting you as best it can. Which in my case is pretty good, 3 logged hits in 3.5 years now have made it through the router to the logs only to trigger portsentry into shutting the connection down by dropping it into a black hole.
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen
Gene Heskett wrote:
On Tuesday 19 September 2006 12:30, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I've tried all the addresses mentioned, but none of them led anywhere. And I've had no luck googleing for the modem, nor any luck talking to the geniuses at the ISP.
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
I assume we're talking about a dsl modem here. If the router is doing its job, then the only place you'll see your 'outside' address is in one of the routers status/config pages, usually at 192.168.0.1 or 1.1. You should be able to extract all the info you'd need from the routers web server. Just hit with firefox at one of the above addresses, log in (see the routers docs for the password) and read it all.
If you remove the router, then you'll have to fight with Roaring Penguins PPPoE utility, which I didn't have exactly stellar luck with 3.5 years ago. It may be improved since.
That will also require you to setup a firewall thats pretty bulletproof since the router now is protecting you as best it can. Which in my case is pretty good, 3 logged hits in 3.5 years now have made it through the router to the logs only to trigger portsentry into shutting the connection down by dropping it into a black hole.
A couple of other things to keep in mind. If the router is set up to do something like PPPoE, then the modem does not have an outside address. In that case, there is a status page on the router that tells if the PPPoE connection is up. The logs on the router will usually tell you went wrong if the connection is not up. On the other hand, if the modem is configured to do the PPPoE connection, then you may be able find the IP address of the modem by looking at the router status page for the router. A lot of times the modem IP address is listed in the WAN section. In my case, the modem IP address is listed as the Domain Name Server address, and the IP address of my Internet connection is listed as the IP address. The router also has an option for keeping Dynamic DNS up to date.
Mikkel
On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 19:30 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I've tried all the addresses mentioned, but none of them led anywhere. And I've had no luck googleing for the modem, nor any luck talking to the geniuses at the ISP.
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen
I am still not sure what your problem really is. If you are connected to the Internet what are you trying to determine? But if you are trying to find out the ip address to the modem and or router it seems to me using a traffic monitoring program like tcpdump, nmap or tethereal would allow you to find out the ip of machines you machine is communicating with. One of them must be at the ip of your router. You router should have a web interface that will tell you the ip assigned by the DHCP server of your ISP.
That the technical people of your ISP can't tell you how to do this is very strange. Chauvinism would make me think that the CS department or the Computer Center at the Technion could help you with this. -- ======================================================================= She was good at playing abstract confusion in the same way a midget is good at being short. -- Clive James, on Marilyn Monroe ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@sbcglobal.net
Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 19:30 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I've tried all the addresses mentioned, but none of them led anywhere. And I've had no luck googleing for the modem, nor any luck talking to the geniuses at the ISP.
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen
I am still not sure what your problem really is. If you are connected to the Internet what are you trying to determine? But if you are trying to find out the ip address to the modem and or router it seems to me using a traffic monitoring program like tcpdump, nmap or tethereal would allow you to find out the ip of machines you machine is communicating with. One of them must be at the ip of your router. You router should have a web interface that will tell you the ip assigned by the DHCP server of your ISP.
That the technical people of your ISP can't tell you how to do this is very strange. Chauvinism would make me think that the CS department or the Computer Center at the Technion could help you with this. --
I think that this issue is out of the hands of the ISP anyways. They don't know anything but Windoze but do know how to ensure that the modem is working. It sounds like the modem is working.
There should have been a CD or manual with the modem. In the manual, there should be a description of how to connect to the modem with your browser of choice.
My ISP has a customized modem that is a modified D-Link. With a bit of digging, I found that all the D-Link settings are available, just needed a bit of work. Of course the ISP was lost as soon as I said I used Linux.
Now if you can connect through the modem, then it is working. If you cannot, then you need to find what IP address is working for that modem.
It should be in the 192.168.x.x range. My two different routers used 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1 for their web setup. You also have to ensure that your computer IP address and netmask are configured to work within the range of your router. If your router is using 192.168.1.1, your computer will have to have an IP address of 192.168.1.x with a netmask of 255.255.255.0. I don't know but you may be able to setup a netmask of 255.255.0.0 that will allow you to connect to all the 192.168.x.x range.
On 20/09/06, Robin Laing Robin.Laing@drdc-rddc.gc.ca wrote:
I think that this issue is out of the hands of the ISP anyways. They don't know anything but Windoze but do know how to ensure that the modem is working. It sounds like the modem is working.
I do believe that the modem is working. I have many lost packets and I think that the router is responsible. I'd like to eliminate it as a potential source of problems. Also, my mother-in-law has received an old computer that's about to have windows 2000either going to get Fedora or Kubuntu. She's not about to buy a modem, and I'd like to connect her to the 'net when I set up her machine. So I need to know how to do that without a router.
There should have been a CD or manual with the modem. In the manual, there should be a description of how to connect to the modem with your browser of choice.
The modem was intalled by a technician of the phone company. I got nothing but a bill.
My ISP has a customized modem that is a modified D-Link. With a bit of digging, I found that all the D-Link settings are available, just needed a bit of work. Of course the ISP was lost as soon as I said I used Linux.
Now if you can connect through the modem, then it is working. If you cannot, then you need to find what IP address is working for that modem.
It should be in the 192.168.x.x range. My two different routers used 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1 for their web setup. You also have to ensure that your computer IP address and netmask are configured to work within the range of your router. If your router is using 192.168.1.1, your computer will have to have an IP address of 192.168.1.x with a netmask of 255.255.255.0. I don't know but you may be able to setup a netmask of 255.255.0.0 that will allow you to connect to all the 192.168.x.x range.
Thanks. Can I access the modem while connected through the router, or would I need to connect to the modem directly to access the control panel?
Dotan Cohen http://gmail-com.com
On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 12:20 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
Can I access the modem while connected through the router, or would I need to connect to the modem directly to access the control panel?
Hi Dotan,
I know I'm coming into this thread rather late, and I may have missed some of the earlier posts, but here are my 2 cents:
Some cable/xDSL modems do not possess a GUI or means by which you can interact with it. I have a pretty old Motorola cable modem that is like that. It just grabs an IP address from the ISP and I can't control it in any way, except to unplug the power and re-plug it back.
Instead of wrestling with the IP address and the modem, you may want to consider another alternative: look around for a combination router/modem that will handle the connection details for you and provide a GUI which you can use to configure your network. There are quite a few models from NetGear, Linksys and D-Link. Of course, you would probably need to do a little homework before buying by asking subscribers to the same service what models they purchased or what they are successfully using.
Besides avoiding the hassles of configuration, there are 2 other reasons why I think this approach is better:
1. With cable/xDSL connections, you will want to keep the connection "always on", if you are not subscribed to a plan that limits you by time or bandwidth. Using a computer as a router will tend to heat up the room and introduce noise (if you have noisy fans). If it is always on, and if you are in a small room, it can get quite uncomfortable very quickly.
2. Some devices provide features for wireless networking. Until I actually installed it, I did not realize how useful it would be -- not having to lay cables all over the place, the freedom to move about as I wished, etc.
I am currently using a rather old NetGear MR814 which provides a GUI and 802.11b access, and which connects to my also-old Motorola cable modem.
Well, anyway, that's just my 2 cents. Oh, and welcome back !;)
On 25/09/06, Chong Yu Meng chongym@cymulacrum.net wrote:
Hi Dotan,
I know I'm coming into this thread rather late, and I may have missed some of the earlier posts, but here are my 2 cents:
Some cable/xDSL modems do not possess a GUI or means by which you can interact with it. I have a pretty old Motorola cable modem that is like that. It just grabs an IP address from the ISP and I can't control it in any way, except to unplug the power and re-plug it back.
Instead of wrestling with the IP address and the modem, you may want to consider another alternative: look around for a combination router/modem that will handle the connection details for you and provide a GUI which you can use to configure your network. There are quite a few models from NetGear, Linksys and D-Link. Of course, you would probably need to do a little homework before buying by asking subscribers to the same service what models they purchased or what they are successfully using.
I'd like to get by without buying hardware. I live on a student grant, and in any case, the equiptment is very expensive (and not widely available for purchase, with the exeption of a router) in Israel.
Besides avoiding the hassles of configuration, there are 2 other reasons why I think this approach is better:
- With cable/xDSL connections, you will want to keep the connection
"always on", if you are not subscribed to a plan that limits you by time or bandwidth. Using a computer as a router will tend to heat up the room and introduce noise (if you have noisy fans). If it is always on, and if you are in a small room, it can get quite uncomfortable very quickly.
I've only one computer. So I've no real need for a router, if I can connect to the 'net without one.
- Some devices provide features for wireless networking. Until I
actually installed it, I did not realize how useful it would be -- not having to lay cables all over the place, the freedom to move about as I wished, etc.
The machine is a desktop one, so I've no need for wireless. This is good to keep in mind, though.
I am currently using a rather old NetGear MR814 which provides a GUI and 802.11b access, and which connects to my also-old Motorola cable modem.
Well, anyway, that's just my 2 cents. Oh, and welcome back !;)
Thank you. Always good to be home!
Dotan Cohen
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 18:32:04 +0800, Chong Yu Meng chongym@cymulacrum.net wrote:
Instead of wrestling with the IP address and the modem, you may want to consider another alternative: look around for a combination router/modem that will handle the connection details for you and provide a GUI which you can use to configure your network. There are quite a few models from NetGear, Linksys and D-Link. Of course, you would probably need to do a little homework before buying by asking subscribers to the same service what models they purchased or what they are successfully using.
I would suggest staying away from combined routers and modems. I would prefer to not have the ISP have control over routing on my local network. With your own router, you can filter traffic going to the modem so that you don't leak stuff that you don't want to. This also makes testing easier in the case where there are problems as you can pull the router and test the modem without any acls getting in the way. This can make diagnosing whose equipment is at fault simpler.
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I would suggest staying away from combined routers and modems. I would prefer to not have the ISP have control over routing on my local network.
Depends on the router, the ISP and the technology (and who provides it). It's quite normal in the UK to buy an ADSL router and configure it yourself. The ISP doesn't get any control over the device.
James.
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 21:39:58 +0100, James Wilkinson fedora@aprilcottage.co.uk wrote:
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
I would suggest staying away from combined routers and modems. I would prefer to not have the ISP have control over routing on my local network.
Depends on the router, the ISP and the technology (and who provides it). It's quite normal in the UK to buy an ADSL router and configure it yourself. The ISP doesn't get any control over the device.
In the US we normal get ours from the ISP. The advantage of them owning that is they need to support it. If you are running your own router, reflashed with an open system, it is going to be very hard to keep the ISP from blaming your modem for any problems. If you stick with the delivered firmware you risk backdoor passwords put in to make support easier and law enforcement back doors reaching down to consumer gear (this probably hasn't happened yet, but things are moving in that direction).
On 26/09/06, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 18:32:04 +0800,
I would suggest staying away from combined routers and modems. I would prefer to not have the ISP have control over routing on my local network. With your own router, you can filter traffic going to the modem so that you don't leak stuff that you don't want to. This also makes testing easier in the case where there are problems as you can pull the router and test the modem without any acls getting in the way. This can make diagnosing whose equipment is at fault simpler.
That is exactly what I'm trying to do! I suspect that my router is faulty, and I want to diagnos it. That is why I must eliminate the router and connect just by using the modem. How on earth can I do that on Fedora? Where do I enter my ISP username and password? The ISP only provids instructions on how to do that in Windows.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
On Saturday 30 September 2006 11:40, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 26/09/06, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 18:32:04 +0800,
I would suggest staying away from combined routers and modems. I would prefer to not have the ISP have control over routing on my local network. With your own router, you can filter traffic going to the modem so that you don't leak stuff that you don't want to. This also makes testing easier in the case where there are problems as you can pull the router and test the modem without any acls getting in the way. This can make diagnosing whose equipment is at fault simpler.
That is exactly what I'm trying to do! I suspect that my router is faulty, and I want to diagnos it. That is why I must eliminate the router and connect just by using the modem. How on earth can I do that on Fedora? Where do I enter my ISP username and password? The ISP only provids instructions on how to do that in Windows.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
Hi Dotan. I'm on dialup through a serial modem, but I understand that you need to setup pppoE for ADSL connections.
Have a look at the man page for it (man pppoe), and also (man 8 adsl-setup) which appears to be a script that asks you for info.
This is the link to the pppoe website. http://www.roaringpenguin.com/penguin/open_source_rp-pppoe.php
I havn't run the script, so don't know what it asks, and don't want to risk messing up my connection.
Nigel.
On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 12:40 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I suspect that my router is faulty, and I want to diagnos it. That is why I must eliminate the router and connect just by using the modem. How on earth can I do that on Fedora? Where do I enter my ISP username and password? The ISP only provids instructions on how to do that in Windows.
Look into PPPoE (PPP over Ethernet), that's the usual one. There was a client for it called "Roaring Penguin". But I thought the network GUI, neat, would lead you through setting up a new ADSL connection (or other types).
On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 20:32 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 12:40 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I suspect that my router is faulty, and I want to diagnos it. That is why I must eliminate the router and connect just by using the modem. How on earth can I do that on Fedora? Where do I enter my ISP username and password? The ISP only provids instructions on how to do that in Windows.
Look into PPPoE (PPP over Ethernet), that's the usual one. There was a client for it called "Roaring Penguin". But I thought the network GUI, neat, would lead you through setting up a new ADSL connection (or other types).
AFAIK, I'm just using ethernet to my DSL modem which is set to passthrough with a static IP address. You may not need PPPoE at all. What is the name and model of your DSL modem? Mine from BellSouth lets you use an IP address in a browser to set it up, without a stinking CD.
Then, I just used the network mangler (manager) that comes with Fedora. If you do not have a static IP address, using DHCP settings works just fine as well. You go into services and enable network manager. Fill in the blanks, in network-manager, just like you do with windows.
My username and password are still handled by the modem though. I have not had to get software that didn't already come with Fedora. If you need PPPoE it will handle that as well. As I have ranted about in previous posts, I sure would use the FC6 bind* and and the network setup scripts rpms. I spent an entire weekend working with software that didn't work for me, suffered emotional and intellectual abuse until I upgraded manually. Then the problem was over in 15 minutes. I still wince over it.
I still want a free set of FC6 CD's as recompense! And a T-shirt. Yeaaaaah, that's the ticket! Eat Fresssh!
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 26/09/06, Bruno Wolff III bruno@wolff.to wrote:
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 18:32:04 +0800,
I would suggest staying away from combined routers and modems. I would prefer to not have the ISP have control over routing on my local network. With your own router, you can filter traffic going to the modem so that you don't leak stuff that you don't want to. This also makes testing easier in the case where there are problems as you can pull the router and test the modem without any acls getting in the way. This can make diagnosing whose equipment is at fault simpler.
That is exactly what I'm trying to do! I suspect that my router is faulty, and I want to diagnos it. That is why I must eliminate the router and connect just by using the modem. How on earth can I do that on Fedora? Where do I enter my ISP username and password? The ISP only provids instructions on how to do that in Windows.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
I went through that exercise, a year or so ago, and found a LIVE CD to be very handy. While setting up the PPPoE connection is really a trivial matter, it's comforting (to me, at least) to know that any changes I've made to a working system as well as any bad stuff that might come into an exposed system will all be gone when I reboot. (The problem wasn't my router, BTW...)
On 20/09/06, Aaron Konstam akonstam@sbcglobal.net wrote:
On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 19:30 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I've tried all the addresses mentioned, but none of them led anywhere. And I've had no luck googleing for the modem, nor any luck talking to the geniuses at the ISP.
Of course, I'm trying this while connected to the 'net via the router. Should I disconnect from the net, eliminate the router, and try these addresses again?
Thanks.
Dotan Cohen
I am still not sure what your problem really is. If you are connected to the Internet what are you trying to determine? But if you are trying to find out the ip address to the modem and or router it seems to me using a traffic monitoring program like tcpdump, nmap or tethereal would allow you to find out the ip of machines you machine is communicating with. One of them must be at the ip of your router. You router should have a web interface that will tell you the ip assigned by the DHCP server of your ISP.
The internet connection has many lost packets. I'd like to know who's loosing them.
That the technical people of your ISP can't tell you how to do this is very strange. Chauvinism would make me think that the CS department or the Computer Center at the Technion could help you with this.
Hmm, maybe I should go ask them. Good idea- thanks.
Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com
-
Aaron Konstam -
Bruno Wolff III -
Chong Yu Meng -
Claude Jones -
Dotan Cohen -
Gene Heskett -
Guillermo Garron -
James Wilkinson -
jdow -
Les Mikesell -
Mark Haney -
Markku Kolkka -
Michael P. Brininstool -
Mikkel -
Nigel Henry -
Ric Moore -
Robert -
Robin Laing -
Tim