Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Connection, sometimes fast sometimes slow...

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10

    Connection, sometimes fast sometimes slow...

    Well for the most part, my connection speed is consistent enough to load pages near instant, but at random intervals, everything will take minutes to load randomly; this happens pretty often too.

    I doubt its the DNS servers, but i am using OpenDNS.

  2. #2
    SG Enthusiast Rollingstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    HoChiMinh, Vietnam
    Posts
    3,161
    Do a tracert yahoo.com and post
    Firefox Extreme Speed Edition

    What makes you: "...waking up in the morning so excited about & wanna FLY out of the door ?"

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    I did 2 tracerts.

    One on my main computer, and another on my laptop running ubuntu.

    XP machine:

    Tracing route to yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.254
    2 * * * Request timed out.
    3 * * * Request timed out.
    4 * * * Request timed out.
    5 * * * Request timed out.
    6 * * * Request timed out.
    7 * * * Request timed out.
    8 * * * Request timed out.
    9 * * * Request timed out.
    10 * * * Request timed out.
    11 * * * Request timed out.
    12 78 ms 78 ms 79 ms b1.www.vip.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]

    Trace complete.

    Ubuntu:

    Tracing route to yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.254
    2 * * * Request timed out.
    3 * * * Request timed out.
    4 * * * Request timed out.
    5 * * * Request timed out.
    6 * * * Request timed out.
    7 37 ms 38 ms 39 ms b1.www.vip.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]

    Trace complete.

    Now I'm curious as to why the ubuntu one would timeout finish on the 7th hop while the xp finish on the 12 hop.

    By the way, if i is the DNS server, I'm already running OpenDNS.
    Just in case someone suggest it.

  4. #4
    All this information provided by this forum helped
    me a lot to know abut the broadband.Thank you very much.please
    suggest me some ideas about SEO.

  5. #5
    XP + akbarri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Caterpillar Inc
    Posts
    938
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by blue4paper View Post
    I did 2 tracerts.

    One on my main computer, and another on my laptop running ubuntu.

    XP machine:

    Tracing route to yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.254
    2 * * * Request timed out.
    3 * * * Request timed out.
    4 * * * Request timed out.
    5 * * * Request timed out.
    6 * * * Request timed out.
    7 * * * Request timed out.
    8 * * * Request timed out.
    9 * * * Request timed out.
    10 * * * Request timed out.
    11 * * * Request timed out.

    12 78 ms 78 ms 79 ms b1.www.vip.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]

    Trace complete.

    Ubuntu:

    Tracing route to yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.254
    2 * * * Request timed out.
    3 * * * Request timed out.
    4 * * * Request timed out.
    5 * * * Request timed out.
    6 * * * Request timed out.

    7 37 ms 38 ms 39 ms b1.www.vip.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]

    Trace complete.

    Now I'm curious as to why the ubuntu one would timeout finish on the 7th hop while the xp finish on the 12 hop.

    By the way, if i is the DNS server, I'm already running OpenDNS.
    Just in case someone suggest it.
    try DEFAULT DNS Server and post NEW TRACERT, with ur TCP/IP Analizer will be better!!

    # OS: Windows, Linux # Browser: Blink, Gecko, Presto, Webkit + Squid + Bind

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    Tracert:

    XP desktop:

    Tracing route to yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.254
    2 * * * Request timed out.
    3 * * * Request timed out.
    4 * * * Request timed out.
    5 * * * Request timed out.
    6 * * * Request timed out.
    7 * * * Request timed out.
    8 * * * Request timed out.
    9 * * * Request timed out.
    10 * * * Request timed out.
    11 * * * Request timed out.
    12 80 ms 81 ms 80 ms b1.www.vip.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]

    Trace complete.

    Ubuntu laptop:

    1 2 ms 5 ms * 192.168.1.254
    2 * * * Request timed out.
    3 * * * Request timed out.
    4 * * * Request timed out.
    5 * * * Request timed out.
    6 * * * Request timed out.
    7 41 42 43 b1.www.vip.mud.yahoo.com [209.191.93.53]


    TCP/IP Analyzer:

    « SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results »
    Tested on: 11.10.2009 19:04
    IP address: 207.6.xxx.xx
    Client OS: Windows XP

    TCP options string: 020405b40103030201010402
    MSS: 1460
    MTU: 1500
    TCP Window: 134872 (NOT multiple of MSS)
    RWIN Scaling: 2 bits (2^2=4)
    Unscaled RWIN : 33718
    Recommended RWINs: 64240, 128480, 256960, 513920, 1027840
    BDP limit (200ms): 5395kbps (674KBytes/s)
    BDP limit (500ms): 2158kbps (270KBytes/s)
    MTU Discovery: ON
    TTL: 107
    Timestamps: OFF
    SACKs: ON
    IP ToS: 00000101 (5)
    Precedence: 000 (routine)
    Delay: 0 (normal delay)
    Throughput: 0 (normal throughput)
    Reliability: 1 (low reliability)
    Cost: 0 (normal cost)
    Check bit: 1 (incorrect)
    DiffServ: No valid DiffServ equivalent (000001)

  7. #7
    XP + akbarri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Caterpillar Inc
    Posts
    938
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by blue4paper View Post
    Tracert:

    TCP/IP Analyzer:

    « SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results »
    Tested on: 11.10.2009 19:04
    IP address: 207.6.xxx.xx
    Client OS: Windows XP

    TCP options string: 020405b40103030201010402
    MSS: 1460
    MTU: 1500
    TCP Window: 134872 (NOT multiple of MSS)
    RWIN Scaling: 2 bits (2^2=4)
    Unscaled RWIN : 33718
    Recommended RWINs: 64240, 128480, 256960, 513920, 1027840
    BDP limit (200ms): 5395kbps (674KBytes/s)
    BDP limit (500ms): 2158kbps (270KBytes/s)
    MTU Discovery: ON
    TTL: 107
    Timestamps: OFF
    SACKs: ON
    IP ToS: 00000101 (5)
    Precedence: 000 (routine)
    Delay: 0 (normal delay)
    Throughput: 0 (normal throughput)
    Reliability: 1 (low reliability)
    Cost: 0 (normal cost)
    Check bit: 1 (incorrect)
    DiffServ: No valid DiffServ equivalent (000001)
    ur TCP/IP setting is NOT GOOD!!
    what is ur advert speed??

    # OS: Windows, Linux # Browser: Blink, Gecko, Presto, Webkit + Squid + Bind

  8. #8
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Check Hijackthis log of XP.
    "Contentment is not the fulfillment of what you want, but is the realisation of how much you already have" - anon

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    Advertised speeds are 10 - 15 Mbps. Our max was around 13 Mbps with ethernet directly connected.

    Here's a hijackthis log

    By the way, in the hijackthis log you'll notice OpenDNS updater, but i am not using opendns servers at the moment. I'm using my default ISP DNS servers until i can fix my internet connectivity.

    Logfile of Trend Micro HijackThis v2.0.2
    Scan saved at 10:20:47 AM, on 11/11/2009
    Platform: Windows XP SP3 (WinNT 5.01.2600)
    MSIE: Internet Explorer v7.00 (7.00.6000.16827)
    Boot mode: Normal

    Running processes:
    C:\WINDOWS\System32\smss.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\winlogon.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\services.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\lsass.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\svchost.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\System32\svchost.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\svchost.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\spoolsv.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\Explorer.EXE
    C:\WINDOWS\SOUNDMAN.EXE
    E:\Program Files\WinPatrol\winpatrol.exe
    E:\Program Files\ClamWin\ClamWin\bin\ClamTray.exe
    C:\Program Files\OpenDNS Updater\OpenDNSUpdater.exe
    C:\Documents and Settings\Nagahama\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Update\GoogleUpdate.exe
    C:\Program Files\Rosewill\Common\RaUI.exe
    C:\Program Files\Common Files\Apple\Mobile Device Support\bin\AppleMobileDeviceService.exe
    C:\Program Files\Bonjour\mDNSResponder.exe
    C:\Program Files\Diskeeper Corporation\Diskeeper\DkService.exe
    E:\Program Files\FreeProxy\FreeProxy\FreeProxy.exe
    E:\Program Files\Hotspot Shield\bin\openvpnas.exe
    E:\Program Files\Hotspot Shield\HssWPR\hsssrv.exe
    C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL.1\MSSQL\Binn\sqlservr.exe
    C:\Program Files\Rosewill\Common\RegistryWriter.exe
    C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\90\Shared\sqlwriter.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\ZuneBusEnum.exe
    E:\Program Files\Pidgin\pidgin.exe
    E:\Program Files\Firefox\firefox.exe
    C:\WINDOWS\system32\ctfmon.exe
    C:\Documents and Settings\Nagahama\Desktop\HijackThis.exe

    R1 - HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main,Default_Page_URL = http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=69157
    R1 - HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main,Default_Search_URL = http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=54896
    R1 - HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main,Search Page = http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=54896
    R0 - HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main,Start Page = http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=69157
    R0 - HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main,Local Page =
    R0 - HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main,Local Page =
    R1 - HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings,ProxyOverride = *.local
    O2 - BHO: HP Print Enhancer - {0347C33E-8762-4905-BF09-768834316C61} - C:\Program Files\HP\Digital Imaging\Smart Web Printing\hpswp_printenhancer.dll
    O2 - BHO: (no name) - {5C255C8A-E604-49b4-9D64-90988571CECB} - (no file)
    O2 - BHO: Groove GFS Browser Helper - {72853161-30C5-4D22-B7F9-0BBC1D38A37E} - E:\Program Files\Office12\GrooveShellExtensions.dll
    O2 - BHO: HP Smart BHO Class - {FFFFFFFF-CF4E-4F2B-BDC2-0E72E116A856} - C:\Program Files\HP\Digital Imaging\Smart Web Printing\hpswp_BHO.dll
    O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [SoundMan] SOUNDMAN.EXE
    O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [WinPatrol] E:\Program Files\WinPatrol\winpatrol.exe
    O4 - HKLM\..\Run: [ClamWin] "E:\Program Files\ClamWin\ClamWin\bin\ClamTray.exe" --logon
    O4 - HKCU\..\Run: [OpenDNS Updater] "C:\Program Files\OpenDNS Updater\OpenDNSUpdater.exe" /autostart
    O4 - HKCU\..\Run: [Google Update] "C:\Documents and Settings\Nagahama\Local Settings\Application Data\Google\Update\GoogleUpdate.exe" /c
    O4 - Global Startup: Rosewill Wireless Utility.lnk = C:\Program Files\Rosewill\Common\RaUI.exe
    O8 - Extra context menu item: &Download by Orbit - res://E:\Program Files\Orbitdownloader\orbitmxt.dll/201
    O8 - Extra context menu item: &Grab video by Orbit - res://E:\Program Files\Orbitdownloader\orbitmxt.dll/204
    O8 - Extra context menu item: Do&wnload selected by Orbit - res://E:\Program Files\Orbitdownloader\orbitmxt.dll/203
    O8 - Extra context menu item: Down&load all by Orbit - res://E:\Program Files\Orbitdownloader\orbitmxt.dll/202
    O8 - Extra context menu item: E&xport to Microsoft Excel - res://E:\PROGRA~1\Office12\EXCEL.EXE/3000
    O9 - Extra button: Send to OneNote - {2670000A-7350-4f3c-8081-5663EE0C6C49} - E:\PROGRA~1\Office12\ONBttnIE.dll
    O9 - Extra 'Tools' menuitem: S&end to OneNote - {2670000A-7350-4f3c-8081-5663EE0C6C49} - E:\PROGRA~1\Office12\ONBttnIE.dll
    O9 - Extra button: Research - {92780B25-18CC-41C8-B9BE-3C9C571A8263} - E:\PROGRA~1\Office12\REFIEBAR.DLL
    O9 - Extra button: HP Smart Select - {DDE87865-83C5-48c4-8357-2F5B1AA84522} - C:\Program Files\HP\Digital Imaging\Smart Web Printing\hpswp_BHO.dll
    O9 - Extra button: (no name) - {e2e2dd38-d088-4134-82b7-f2ba38496583} - C:\WINDOWS\Network Diagnostic\xpnetdiag.exe
    O9 - Extra 'Tools' menuitem: @xpsp3res.dll,-20001 - {e2e2dd38-d088-4134-82b7-f2ba38496583} - C:\WINDOWS\Network Diagnostic\xpnetdiag.exe
    O9 - Extra button: Messenger - {FB5F1910-F110-11d2-BB9E-00C04F795683} - C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe (file missing)
    O9 - Extra 'Tools' menuitem: Windows Messenger - {FB5F1910-F110-11d2-BB9E-00C04F795683} - C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe (file missing)
    O10 - Unknown file in Winsock LSP: c:\windows\system32\nwprovau.dll
    O16 - DPF: {0E5F0222-96B9-11D3-8997-00104BD12D94} (PCPitstop Utility) - http://www.pcpitstop.com/betapit/PCPitStop.CAB
    O16 - DPF: {6E32070A-766D-4EE6-879C-DC1FA91D2FC3} (MUWebControl Class) - http://www.update.microsoft.com/micr...?1194218864002
    O16 - DPF: {D27CDB6E-AE6D-11CF-96B8-444553540000} (Shockwave Flash Object) - http://fpdownload2.macromedia.com/ge...sh/swflash.cab
    O17 - HKLM\System\CCS\Services\Tcpip\..\{2A3E88C2-3F75-449C-BEB9-1BFB2463414F}: NameServer = 75.154.133.68,75.154.133.100
    O18 - Protocol: grooveLocalGWS - {88FED34C-F0CA-4636-A375-3CB6248B04CD} - E:\Program Files\Office12\GrooveSystemServices.dll
    O18 - Protocol: skype4com - {FFC8B962-9B40-4DFF-9458-1830C7DD7F5D} - C:\PROGRA~1\COMMON~1\Skype\SKYPE4~1.DLL
    O23 - Service: Apple Mobile Device - Apple Inc. - C:\Program Files\Common Files\Apple\Mobile Device Support\bin\AppleMobileDeviceService.exe
    O23 - Service: Bonjour Service - Apple Inc. - C:\Program Files\Bonjour\mDNSResponder.exe
    O23 - Service: Diskeeper - Diskeeper Corporation - C:\Program Files\Diskeeper Corporation\Diskeeper\DkService.exe
    O23 - Service: Free Proxy Service (FreeProxy) - Unknown owner - E:\Program Files\FreeProxy\FreeProxy\FreeProxy.exe
    O23 - Service: Hotspot Shield Service (HotspotShieldService) - Unknown owner - E:\Program Files\Hotspot Shield\bin\openvpnas.exe
    O23 - Service: Hotspot Shield Routing Service (HssSrv) - AnchorFree Inc. - E:\Program Files\Hotspot Shield\HssWPR\hsssrv.exe
    O23 - Service: Hotspot Shield Tray Service (HssTrayService) - Unknown owner - E:\Program Files\Hotspot Shield\bin\HssTrayService.EXE
    O23 - Service: iPod Service - Apple Inc. - C:\Program Files\iPod\bin\iPodService.exe
    O23 - Service: Java Quick Starter (JavaQuickStarterService) - Sun Microsystems, Inc. - E:\Program Files\Java\bin\jqs.exe
    O23 - Service: nProtect GameGuard Service (npggsvc) - Unknown owner - C:\WINDOWS\system32\GameMon.des.exe (file missing)
    O23 - Service: NVIDIA Display Driver Service (NVSvc) - NVIDIA Corporation - C:\WINDOWS\system32\nvsvc32.exe
    O23 - Service: Ralink Registry Writer (RalinkRegistryWriter) - Ralink Technology, Corp. - C:\Program Files\Rosewill\Common\RegistryWriter.exe
    O23 - Service: Remote Packet Capture Protocol v.0 (experimental) (rpcapd) - CACE Technologies, Inc. - C:\Program Files\WinPcap\rpcapd.exe

    --
    End of file - 7335 bytes

  10. #10
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    R1 - HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Internet Settings,ProxyOverride = *.local

    O23 - Service: Free Proxy Service (FreeProxy) - Unknown owner - E:\Program Files\FreeProxy\FreeProxy\FreeProxy.exe
    Uninstall Free Proxy and remove this proxy override setting.

    Uninstall OpenDNS and remove its updater. Use your ISP's DNS servers. You can test their performance using dnsbench of www.grc.com

    http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm

    Use Hijackthis to fix those entries with missing files.
    "Contentment is not the fulfillment of what you want, but is the realisation of how much you already have" - anon

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    Alright, I removed the entries and here are the DNS benchmark results:


  12. #12
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    What conclusion and recommendations did DNSbench give?

    Seems using the first 2 fastest IP addresses of the result as your DNS servers is the best alternative.

    What speed did you pay your ISP to give you? I think you need to use the TCP Optimizer to tweak.
    "Contentment is not the fulfillment of what you want, but is the realisation of how much you already have" - anon

  13. #13
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    Well the advertised speeds we chose were 10 to 15 Mbps, and we get about 13 Mbps with an ethernet cable.

    Here is the conclusions:

    ώ = Check ύ = X
    DNS Benchmark Conclusions & Recommendations

    What the results you have just obtained mean to YOU

    The results summary, conclusions, and recommendations from your most recent run of this DNS benchmark are provided below. Please carefully consider the implications of making any changes to your system's current configuration before doing so.


    ώ System has multiple redundant nameservers configured.
    This system is currently configured to use 2 separate nameservers for DNS name resolution. This is in keeping with recommended best practice (of having at least two different nameservers) so that the temporary failure of any single nameserver will not prevent all DNS name resolution.


    ώ All system nameservers are alive & replying to queries.
    All of this system's 2 nameservers are working and replying to queries. This is terrific because if the system's primary nameserver were to become overloaded or unavailable, even briefly, one or more backup nameservers are standing by ready to supply DNS lookup services.


    ώ System's nameservers are probably optimally ordered.
    Windows uses DNS servers in the order they are listed under the network adapter's properties, or when obtained automatically from an ISP, in the order provided by the ISP. Windows will fall back to using the second, third, and other nameservers only when the first listed nameserver fails to respond. So if the first nameserver happened to be very slow, but working, everything would be slowed down. Consequently, the order of nameserver listing should match their order of decreasing performance . . . which is probably how this system is currently configured:

    Usage Order Nameserver IP Speed Rank
    ----------- --------------- ----------
    1 75.154.133. 68 1 unreliable
    2 75.154.133.100 2 unreliable

    Why only "probably" ?
    Only "probably" because there wasn't enough of a statistically significant difference between their timings to be able to make any claims with at least 95% confidence. Here are the details:
    When this benchmark is allowed to finish, it will have collected approximately one hundred and fifty (150) DNS performance samples from each nameserver being tested. Although this is sufficient to generate a good average performance estimate, if the collection of sampled values are too widely spread apart (in other words, not a lot of agreement among samples), it is impossible to know with "statistical certainty" (to be 95% sure) how individual nameservers compare to each other.
    Therefore, even if the ranking shown above appears to be out of order, the differences are not statistically significant, and you should not be concerned. If you were to re-run the benchmark you might get a different outcome. This benchmark conclusion page will inform you when a problem exists that is statistically significant, and will then advise you that your DNS nameserver settings should be changed. But that is not the case with the benchmark results that were just obtained.


    ώ System nameservers are faster than ALL public alternatives.
    All of the DNS resolvers your system is using are responding faster than any of the 100% reliable publicly available alternative DNS nameservers this benchmark utility just tested. Therefore, there would be no performance benefit from replacing any of this system's current nameservers with any of those publicly available alternatives. However, this best performance appraisal assumes that this system's nameservers are 100% reliable. See the next item below for an appraisal of your nameservers' reliability.

    Note: If there appeared to be one or more faster public alternative nameservers, there was enough uncertainty created by the spread of benchmark timing results that it was not possible to be at least 95% confident that any of those faster-seeming nameservers really were reliably faster than the nameservers this system is currently using. So it made no sense to alarm you about the need to change things when there was insufficient evidence.


    ύ One or more system nameservers is NOT 100% reliable!
    DNS reliability is extremely important, since lookup requests that are dropped and ignored by nameservers cause significant delays in Internet access while the querying system waits for a reply. The system is then finally forced to reissue the query to the same or to backup nameservers. While your system is patiently waiting for a reply, you are impatiently waiting to get on with your Internet access.

    During this benchmark test, the nameservers being tested did not reply to some of the DNS queries they were sent.

    So the question now is: Did the benchmark discover alternative nameservers having superior performance and reliability to which you could switch in order to obtain more performance and reliability?

    Important Note:

    Incorrect warnings of low reliability nameservers can arise if (1) DNS benchmarking is being performed while the local network is busy performing other work such as file downloading, or (2) the benchmark is running over a wireless (WiFi) link with low signal strength or high interference. Please try to minimize any other local network activity while the benchmark is running, and use a wired (not wireless) LAN connection if possible.

    Recommended Actions:

    Before you make any changes, you should probably run the benchmark a few more times at differing times of day to make sure that the troubling reliability is an ongoing problem and not just a brief occurrence.

    You may also wish to consult the "Tabular Data" page which summarizes all benchmark results in numeric tables. The numbers make it easier to see exactly how unreliable your system's nameservers are compared with the available alternatives. (And also how the alternatives' performance compares.)


    ώ All of this system nameservers return errors.
    This is a GOOD thing! Some DNS providers, such as OpenDNS and even the Earthlink, Roadrunner and Comcast ISPs, redirect incorrectly entered URLs to their own advertising-laden marketing-driven interception page instead of simply returning an error to the web browser. But this system's nameservers are returning errors when asked to lookup non-existent domain names.


    ώ System nameservers are replying to all query types.
    During the development of this DNS Benchmark we discovered that the routers used by some pre-release testers were not returning results for the benchmark's Uncached and/or Dotcom testing queries. Even though these queries are admittedly unusual, they are completely valid. So the only conclusion was that those few routers were inherently defective. The good news here is that your nameservers are replying to these unusual but valid queries.

  14. #14
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Try setting DNS servers to the first 2 IP addresses of the graphically result, and then test again - 72.45.111.250 and 72.45.111.251

    Try the following with TCP Optimizer:

    General Settings tab:
    Custom settings - check
    Modify All Network Adapters - check
    network adapter selection - your NIC
    MTU - 1500
    TTL - 64
    Windows Scaling - checked
    TCP Receive Window - 513920
    MTU Discovery - Yes
    Black Hole Detect - No
    Selective Acks - Yes
    Max Duplicate ACKs - 2
    TCP 1323 Options:
    Timestamps - uncheck

    Advanced Settings tab:
    Max Connections per Server - 10
    Max Connections per 1.0 Server - 10
    LocalPriority - 5
    Host Priority - 6
    DNSPriority - 7
    NetbtPriority - 8
    Lan Browsing speedup - optimized
    QoS: NonBestEffortLimit - 0
    ToS: DisableUserTOSSetting - 0
    ToS: DefaultTOSValue - 80
    MaxNegativeCacheTtl - 0
    NetFailureCacheTime - 0
    NegativeSOACache Time - 0
    LAN Request Buffer Size - 32768
    "Contentment is not the fulfillment of what you want, but is the realisation of how much you already have" - anon

  15. #15
    XP + akbarri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Caterpillar Inc
    Posts
    938
    Blog Entries
    3
    thx trogers for DNSbench

    # OS: Windows, Linux # Browser: Blink, Gecko, Presto, Webkit + Squid + Bind

  16. #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    Alright, I made the changes in TCPoptimizer and changed my DNS serves to the ones you suggested. None the less, my browsing is still relatively slow: resolving hostname, loading etc...

    Here is the second dnsbenchmark:

    DNS Benchmark Conclusions & Recommendations

    What the results you have just obtained mean to YOU

    The results summary, conclusions, and recommendations from your most recent run of this DNS benchmark are provided below. Please carefully consider the implications of making any changes to your system's current configuration before doing so.


    ώ System has multiple redundant nameservers configured.
    This system is currently configured to use 2 separate nameservers for DNS name resolution. This is in keeping with recommended best practice (of having at least two different nameservers) so that the temporary failure of any single nameserver will not prevent all DNS name resolution.


    ώ All system nameservers are alive & replying to queries.
    All of this system's 2 nameservers are working and replying to queries. This is terrific because if the system's primary nameserver were to become overloaded or unavailable, even briefly, one or more backup nameservers are standing by ready to supply DNS lookup services.


    ώ System's nameservers are probably optimally ordered.
    Windows uses DNS servers in the order they are listed under the network adapter's properties, or when obtained automatically from an ISP, in the order provided by the ISP. Windows will fall back to using the second, third, and other nameservers only when the first listed nameserver fails to respond. So if the first nameserver happened to be very slow, but working, everything would be slowed down. Consequently, the order of nameserver listing should match their order of decreasing performance . . . which is probably how this system is currently configured:

    Usage Order Nameserver IP Speed Rank
    ----------- --------------- ----------
    1 72. 45.111.250 1
    2 72. 45.111.251 2

    Why only "probably" ?
    Only "probably" because there wasn't enough of a statistically significant difference between their timings to be able to make any claims with at least 95% confidence. Here are the details:
    When this benchmark is allowed to finish, it will have collected approximately one hundred and fifty (150) DNS performance samples from each nameserver being tested. Although this is sufficient to generate a good average performance estimate, if the collection of sampled values are too widely spread apart (in other words, not a lot of agreement among samples), it is impossible to know with "statistical certainty" (to be 95% sure) how individual nameservers compare to each other.
    Therefore, even if the ranking shown above appears to be out of order, the differences are not statistically significant, and you should not be concerned. If you were to re-run the benchmark you might get a different outcome. This benchmark conclusion page will inform you when a problem exists that is statistically significant, and will then advise you that your DNS nameserver settings should be changed. But that is not the case with the benchmark results that were just obtained.


    ώ System nameservers are faster than ALL public alternatives.
    All of the DNS resolvers your system is using are responding faster than any of the 100% reliable publicly available alternative DNS nameservers this benchmark utility just tested. Therefore, there would be no performance benefit from replacing any of this system's current nameservers with any of those publicly available alternatives. However, this best performance appraisal assumes that this system's nameservers are 100% reliable. See the next item below for an appraisal of your nameservers' reliability.

    Note: If there appeared to be one or more faster public alternative nameservers, there was enough uncertainty created by the spread of benchmark timing results that it was not possible to be at least 95% confident that any of those faster-seeming nameservers really were reliably faster than the nameservers this system is currently using. So it made no sense to alarm you about the need to change things when there was insufficient evidence.


    ώ This system's nameservers are 100% reliable.
    DNS reliability is extremely important, since lookup requests that are dropped and ignored by nameservers cause significant delays in Internet access while the querying system waits for a reply. The system is then finally forced to reissue the query to the same or to backup nameservers. While your system is patiently waiting for a reply, you are impatiently waiting to get on with your Internet access.

    During this benchmark test, all of the system's nameservers tested returned a reply for every request sent. It doesn't get any better than that. Very nice.


    ώ All of this system nameservers return errors.
    This is a GOOD thing! Some DNS providers, such as OpenDNS and even the Earthlink, Roadrunner and Comcast ISPs, redirect incorrectly entered URLs to their own advertising-laden marketing-driven interception page instead of simply returning an error to the web browser. But this system's nameservers are returning errors when asked to lookup non-existent domain names.


    ώ System nameservers are replying to all query types.
    During the development of this DNS Benchmark we discovered that the routers used by some pre-release testers were not returning results for the benchmark's Uncached and/or Dotcom testing queries. Even though these queries are admittedly unusual, they are completely valid. So the only conclusion was that those few routers were inherently defective. The good news here is that your nameservers are replying to these unusual but valid queries.
    Also i went out on a limb and clicked GRC.com's dns spoofability link.

    Which showed the following:

    DNS Nameserver Spoofability Test
    Should you trust the Domain Name Servers you are using?


    (If this page doesn't work for you, please see our DNS FAQ page.)
    What's going on?
    The display of this page initiates a comprehensive search for all Internet DNS nameservers that respond to your system's requests for domain name lookups. As this process can take up to several minutes, some patience will be required. Once no additional nameservers are being found, the search terminates and a comprehensive security and spoofability analysis of the data obtained from the DNS nameserver(s) currently being used by your PC and web browser will be displayed.
    Searching for all DNS nameservers used by your system:
    Query Servers Queries
    Round Receiving Nameserver Queries...(per round results) Found Received
    ----- -------------------------------------------------- ------- --------
    1 ••••••••• 2 400
    2 ••••••••• 0 400
    3 ••••••••• 0 400
    4 ••••••••• 0 0
    5 ••••••••• 0 0
    ------- --------
    Totals for all rounds: 2 1,200
    Please see the guide at the bottom of this page
    for help interpreting the following analysis results:
    Analysis of 600 queries from nameserver at [ 72.45.111.250 ]
    Anti-Spoofing Safety: Very Bad
    Server Name: XPLR-TS-10-VAN-72-45-111-250.barrettxplore.com


    Query Source Port Analysis (worst case)
    Max Entropy: 0 Very Bad Dir Bias: 0% Excellent
    Lost Entropy: 9.23 Very Bad Stuck Bits: 16 Very Bad

    Query Transaction ID Analysis (worst case)
    Max Entropy: 16 Excellent Dir Bias: 4.51% Excellent
    Lost Entropy: 0 Excellent Stuck Bits: 0 Excellent
    DNS Nameserver Access Details
    External Ping: replied (It might be better for the server to be less visible.)
    External Query: replied (It would be better for it to ignore external queries.)
    DNSSEC Security: supported (This server supports improved security standards.)
    Alphabetic Case: all lower (An improvement could be created by mixing case.)
    Extra Anti-Spoofing: not present (No additional anti-spoofing technology.)


    Analysis of 600 queries from nameserver at [ 72.45.111.251 ]
    Anti-Spoofing Safety: Very Bad
    Server Name: XPLR-TS-10-VAN-72-45-111-251.barrettxplore.com


    Query Source Port Analysis (worst case)
    Max Entropy: 0 Very Bad Dir Bias: 0% Excellent
    Lost Entropy: 9.23 Very Bad Stuck Bits: 16 Very Bad

    Query Transaction ID Analysis (worst case)
    Max Entropy: 15.99 Excellent Dir Bias: 3.51% Excellent
    Lost Entropy: 0 Excellent Stuck Bits: 0 Excellent
    DNS Nameserver Access Details
    External Ping: replied (It might be better for the server to be less visible.)
    External Query: replied (It would be better for it to ignore external queries.)
    DNSSEC Security: supported (This server supports improved security standards.)
    Alphabetic Case: all lower (An improvement could be created by mixing case.)
    Extra Anti-Spoofing: not present (No additional anti-spoofing technology.)


    DNS Spoofability: If you are not familiar with the purpose and intention of this nameserver spoofability analysis, please refer to the introductory page of this site's DNS section. The detailed test results above and notes below assume a familiarity with the problem and terminology of “DNS spoofability.”
    And . . . would you like improved Internet performance?
    DNS Benchmarking: In addition to determining the spoofability of your DNS nameservers, GRC's free “Domain Name Speed” utility can test, compare and rank the name resolution performance of any DNS nameservers accessible to you. If the DNS nameservers provided by your ISP are overloaded, slow, or poorly connected (as too many are) you might find that your Internet experience can be dramatically improved by switching to faster, publicly available DNS nameservers. (We'll show you how.) Check it out!

  17. #17
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Quote Originally Posted by blue4paper View Post
    Alright, I made the changes in TCPoptimizer and changed my DNS serves to the ones you suggested. None the less, my browsing is still relatively slow: resolving hostname, loading etc...

    Here is the second dnsbenchmark:



    Also i went out on a limb and clicked GRC.com's dns spoofability link.

    Which showed the following:
    If you have friends across town using the same ISP, check with them to see if they are using a different set of DNS servers. Better still, try to find the set that your ISP is giving to business lines.

    My ISP has two different sets. When one set is overloaded, I switch to the other.
    "Contentment is not the fulfillment of what you want, but is the realisation of how much you already have" - anon

  18. #18
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    My DNS servers fair as badly as yours in the dns spoofability test...lol
    "Contentment is not the fulfillment of what you want, but is the realisation of how much you already have" - anon

  19. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    10
    Well, if I'm using OpenDNS servers or the DNS servers you suggested to me a few post before, then my ISP wouldn't really have any involvement in my browsing speed, right?

    So, i guess its pretty hard to determine what the problem is then.

    If you've any more suggestion, last tips or comments you'd like to make, otherwise thanks for the help.

Similar Threads

  1. Troubleshooting a very slow Comcast internet connection
    By onyxx in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-05-12, 01:38 AM
  2. Internet speed slow thru router fast thru modem AGAIN
    By Stew in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-18-10, 04:31 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-18-08, 10:46 PM
  4. slow ADSL connection when I route through router
    By Risca in forum General Broadband Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-02-08, 12:28 AM
  5. connection slagging / outlook slow?
    By Virtuoso in forum Broadband Tweaks Help
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-27-08, 05:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •