who do I report this to?

韓家標 Bill Hacker askbill at conducive.net
Fri Nov 23 09:26:53 PST 2007


Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 韓家標 Bill Hacker wrote:
>> Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:

*snip*
> 
> My roommates XP machine seems to have none of these issues and it is

ACK - but that is yet-another set of variables of limited utility to an re(4) 
coder. We don't know what MB, BIOS, 'glue' chipset, NIC ... yada yada.. Vista is 
using - nor would it be lot of help as regards *BSD if we DID know.

*snip*

> 
> Personally I think the unpredictable parts are part of the issue since
> as you said you have pretty much the same setup and no issue... thus

Sure they are.  But they have to be either quantized (hard) or removed (easy).

> the only way to do a local test I can think of is write a network
> simulator and throw in different loss characteristics

No need to write it.

tcpdump has lots of 'steering', dummynet has what you need, and wireshark may be 
of use. More stuff yet is in ports.

But you still need two boxes, and at least two NICS - preferably 3 or more so 
that you can do re to re and re to 'non-re'.

>> You will need at least one other 'local' box. It need not be fancy,
>> but it has to be under your observation and control.
> 
> If the XP machine above will do (keep in mind I can make minor
> alterations to it but I will be skinned alive if I do anything like
> install an OS)

It *might* do if you can protect your friend's Vista from interference by 
booting it from an outboard HDD or USB stick - even a 'LiveCD' that is a bit 
better suited to providing analytical tools.

*snip*

> That is what the original post was asking but Pyun (and most other
> private replies I have gotten) point to re(4)

As they should.

Remember - I didnt say that re(4) might not have need of fixing - I just said 
you were not the one best equipped to contribute good test data.

*snip*

>> What you are calling a 'phantom' is the product of a combination of
>> circumstances - too many of which are literally 'outside the house'.
> 
> this very well be true but the lack of problems on vista/xp says other
> wise I think.
> 

Perhaps.  But, as said - it is mostly just a different set of confusables.

*snip*

> 
> The only thing I have for this is the XP machine and Belkin router.
>

Lack of specialized resources is no sin.

But best to face that and concentrate your energy on issues that you can more 
easily test accurately - not with what you wish you had - but with what you DO have.

Others will have access to better re(4) test environments - or the resources to 
implement such.

Meanwhile, I suspect that if you force your re to downshift to 10-base speed 
when using the uplink, you will see real-world throughput actually go up, not down.

Bill



More information about the freebsd-current mailing list