SG Broadband Community

Please my friend check this out,this is the result from Argonne NDT server,
TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.4e
click START to begin
Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done
running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 253.71Kb/s
running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 328.12kb/s
Warning! Client time-out while reading data, possible duplex mismatch exists
Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem
Information: The receive buffer should be 227381.25 Kbytes to maximize throughput.
What could be the cause of this time out?Below follow the complete results of the test:
WEB100 Enabled Statistics:
Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done
running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 253.71Kb/s
running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 328.12kb/s

------ Client System Details ------
OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1
Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.6.0

------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------
Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found.
Link set to Full Duplex mode
No network congestion discovered.
Good network cable(s) found
Normal duplex operation found.

Web100 reports the Round trip time = 606.35 msec; the Packet size = 1452 Bytes; and
There were 6 packets retransmitted, 38 duplicate acks received, and 43 SACK blocks received
The connection stalled 1 times due to packet loss
The connection was idle 0.7 seconds (6.99%) of the time
This connection is receiver limited 50.09% of the time.
Increasing the the client's receive buffer (62.0 KB) will improve performance
This connection is network limited 49.89% of the time.

Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to:
RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON
RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON
RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF
RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF
RFC 1323 Window Scaling: OFF
Information: Network Middlebox is modifying MSS variable
Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End
Client IP addresses are preserved End-to-End


WEB100 Kernel Variables:
Client: localhost/127.0.0.1
AckPktsIn: 203
AckPktsOut: 0
BytesRetrans: 8712
CongAvoid: 8
CongestionOverCount: 0
CongestionSignals: 2
CountRTT: 159
CurCwnd: 7260
CurMSS: 1452
CurRTO: 700
CurRwinRcvd: 63888
CurRwinSent: 5840
CurSsthresh: 2904
DSACKDups: 0
DataBytesIn: 0
DataBytesOut: 521268
DataPktsIn: 0
DataPktsOut: 359
DupAcksIn: 38
ECNEnabled: 0
FastRetran: 1
MaxCwnd: 65340
MaxMSS: 1452
MaxRTO: 1160
MaxRTT: 770
MaxRwinRcvd: 63888
MaxRwinSent: 5840
MaxSsthresh: 31944
MinMSS: 1452
MinRTO: 670
MinRTT: 260
MinRwinRcvd: 63888
MinRwinSent: 5840
NagleEnabled: 1
OtherReductions: 0
PktsIn: 203
PktsOut: 359
PktsRetrans: 6
X_Rcvbuf: 107520
RcvWinScale: 2147483647
SACKEnabled: 3
SACKsRcvd: 43
SendStall: 0
SlowStart: 45
SampleRTT: 290
SmoothedRTT: 450
X_Sndbuf: 107520
SndWinScale: 2147483647
SndLimTimeRwin: 5421937
SndLimTimeCwnd: 5400157
SndLimTimeSender: 2992
SndLimTransRwin: 1
SndLimTransCwnd: 2
SndLimTransSender: 1
SndLimBytesRwin: 304920
SndLimBytesCwnd: 216348
SndLimBytesSender: 0
SubsequentTimeouts: 0
SumRTT: 96410
Timeouts: 1
TimestampsEnabled: 0
WinScaleRcvd: 2147483647
WinScaleSent: 2147483647
DupAcksOut: 0
StartTimeUsec: 650926
Duration: 10826756
c2sData: 2
c2sAck: 2
s2cData: 9
s2cAck: 2
half_duplex: 0
link: 100
congestion: 0
bad_cable: 0
mismatch: 0
spd: 0.00
bw: 0.24
loss: 0.005571031
avgrtt: 606.35
waitsec: 0.70
timesec: 10.00
order: 0.1872
rwintime: 0.5009
sendtime: 0.0003
cwndtime: 0.4989
rwin: 0.4874
swin: 0.8203
cwin: 0.4985
rttsec: 0.606352
Sndbuf: 107520
aspd: 0.00000

Checking for mismatch on uplink
(speed > 50 [0>50], (xmitspeed < 5) [0.25<5]
(rwintime > .9) [0.50>.9], (loss < .01) [0.00<.01]
Checking for excessive errors condition
(loss/sec > .15) [5.57>.15], (cwndtime > .6) [0.49>.6],
(loss < .01) [0.00<.01], (MaxSsthresh > 0) [31944>0]
Checking for 10 Mbps link
(speed < 9.5) [0<9.5], (speed > 3.0) [0>3.0]
(xmitspeed < 9.5) [0.25<9.5] (loss < .01) [0.00<.01], (mylink > 0) [3.0>0]
Checking for Wireless link
(sendtime = 0) [3.0E=0], (speed < 5) [0<5]
(Estimate > 50 [0.24>50], (Rwintime > 90) [0.50>.90]
(RwinTrans/CwndTrans = 1) [1/2=1], (mylink > 0) [3.0>0]
Checking for DSL/Cable Modem link
(speed < 2) [0<2], (SndLimTransSender = 0) [1=0]
(SendTime = 0) [3.0E-4=0], (mylink > 0) [3.0>0]
Checking for half-duplex condition
(rwintime > .95) [0.50>.95], (RwinTrans/sec > 30) [0.1>30],
(SenderTrans/sec > 30) [0.1>30], OR (mylink <= 10) [3.0<=10]
Checking for congestion
(cwndtime > .02) [0.49>.02], (mismatch = 0) [0=0]
(MaxSsthresh > 0) [31944>0]

estimate = 0.24 based on packet size = 11Kbits, RTT = 606.35msec, and loss = 0.005571031
The theoretical network limit is 0.24 Mbps
The NDT server has a 105.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 1.35 Mbps
Your PC/Workstation has a 62.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 0.80 Mbps
The network based flow control limits the throughput to 0.82 Mbps

Client Data reports link is 'T1', Client Acks report link is 'T1'
Server Data reports link is '10 Gig', Server Acks report link is 'T1'

TCP ANALYSER RESULT
« SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results »
Tested on: 01.24.2007 06:29
IP address: 201.14.xxx.xxx

TCP options string: 020405ac01010402
MSS: 1452
MTU: 1492
TCP Window: 63888 (multiple of MSS)
RWIN Scaling: 0
Unscaled RWIN : 63888
Reccomended RWINs: 63888, 127776, 255552, 511104
BDP limit (200ms): 2556kbps (319KBytes/s)
BDP limit (500ms): 1022kbps (128KBytes/s)
MTU Discovery: ON
TTL: 55
Timestamps: OFF
SACKs: ON
IP ToS: 10001000 (136)
Precedence: 100 (flash override)
Delay: 0 (normal delay)
Throughput: 1 (low throughput)
Reliability: 0 (normal reliability)
Cost: 0 (normal cost)
Check bit: 0 (correct)
DiffServ: AF41 100010 (34) - Assured Forwarding class 4, low drop precedence (RFC 2597).

anderb wrote: Warning! Client time-out while reading data, possible duplex mismatch exists

------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------
Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found.
Link set to Full Duplex mode
No network congestion discovered.
Good network cable(s) found
Normal duplex operation found.

Web100 reports the Round trip time = 606.35 msec; the Packet size = 1452 Bytes; and
There were 6 packets retransmitted, 38 duplicate acks received, and 43 SACK blocks received
The connection stalled 1 times due to packet loss
The connection was idle 0.7 seconds (6.99%) of the time
This connection is receiver limited 50.09% of the time.
Increasing the the client's receive buffer (62.0 KB) will improve performance
This connection is network limited 49.89% of the time.

Your PC/Workstation has a 62.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 0.80 Mbps
The network based flow control limits the throughput to 0.82 Mbps

Client Data reports link is 'T1', Client Acks report link is 'T1'
Server Data reports link is '10 Gig', Server Acks report link is 'T1'

TCP ANALYSER RESULT
« SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results »
Tested on: 01.24.2007 06:29
IP address: 201.14.xxx.xxx

TCP options string: 020405ac01010402
MSS: 1452
MTU: 1492
TCP Window: 63888 (multiple of MSS)
RWIN Scaling: 0
Unscaled RWIN : 63888
Reccomended RWINs: 63888, 127776, 255552, 511104

I cannot remember which country you are in? But there is no cause for alarm regarding the test results with your settings.

Your RWIN at 63888 allows max latency of just over 500ms for a 1 mbps bandwidth.

In this test, your signals took 606ms, longer than the max 500ms, and thus, the warning and also a suggestion to increase your RWIN. There is no duplex mismatch in the later part of the report and your comp's throughput matches your ISP's throughput.

If you are in Asia, you will encounter some periods where your signal times may exceed 500ms, especially when the damaged underseas cables are not yet fully repaired.

trogers wrote:I cannot remember which country you are in? But there is no cause for alarm regarding the test results with your settings.

Your RWIN at 63888 allows max latency of just over 500ms for a 1 mbps bandwidth.

In this test, your signals took 606ms, longer than the max 500ms, and thus, the warning and also a suggestion to increase your RWIN. There is no duplex mismatch in the later part of the report and your comp's throughput matches your ISP's throughput.

If you are in Asia, you will encounter some periods where your signal times may exceed 500ms, especially when the damaged underseas cables are not yet fully repaired.

Dear Trogers I´m from Brazil,I don´t know why but I feel these time out while I´m browsing,for example when I type an adress it takes about 2 seconds to start opening the page,I unnistalled cfos,and my modem is in bridge mode using RASPPPOE that´s why my mtu is 1492,cause before was 1480.Thanks

anderb wrote:Dear Trogers I´m from Brazil,I don´t know why but I feel these time out while I´m browsing,for example when I type an adress it takes about 2 seconds to start opening the page,I unnistalled cfos,and my modem is in bridge mode using RASPPPOE that´s why my mtu is 1492,cause before was 1480.Thanks

I would rather have the router turned on and have a lower MTU than to run in bridge mode with MTU 1492. The router would provide a better firewall for security.

Does this lag time in web page loading happens only with a particular browser or with other browsers as well? I use 3 different browsers: FireFox, Opera and Maxthon.

If it is only with FireFox, then it may be due to some configuration within FireFox, probably the Rendering preferences.

trogers wrote:I would rather have the router turned on and have a lower MTU than to run in bridge mode with MTU 1492. The router would provide a better firewall for security.

Does this lag time in web page loading happens only with a particular browser or with other browsers as well? I use 3 different browsers: FireFox, Opera and Maxthon.

If it is only with FireFox, then it may be due to some configuration within FireFox, probably the Rendering preferences.

Dear Trogers as you advised I returned to router mode and to the settings for my mtu 1452,do you think in router mode my speed will be more stable and fast?
I did shields up and pcflank tests and my windows firewall passed!I think I´m secure,don´t you?
Thank

anderb wrote:Dear Trogers as you advised I returned to router mode and to the settings for my mtu 1452,do you think in router mode my speed will be more stable and fast?
I did shields up and pcflank tests and my windows firewall passed!I think I´m secure,don´t you?
Thank

Yes, a router provides a hardware firewall that stops unrequested signals from the internet getting into our comp. It is more secure than a software firewall and also save you processor time as a busy software firewall is run straight from the CPU while a router does it naturally on its own.

When your MTU is 1452, RWIN should be 64952 (= MSS x 46).