35 pts.
 20% packet loss affects performance?
Hi. I've been noticed that I have some packet loss when I do ping from our 3Com router 5642 to the default gateway of our provider. <codinet03>ping 10.162.66.185 PING 10.162.66.185: 56 data bytes, press CTRL_C to break Reply from 10.162.66.185: bytes=56 Sequence=1 ttl=255 time=3 ms Reply from 10.162.66.185: bytes=56 Sequence=2 ttl=255 time=1 ms Request time out Reply from 10.162.66.185: bytes=56 Sequence=4 ttl=255 time=2 ms Reply from 10.162.66.185: bytes=56 Sequence=5 ttl=255 time=1 ms --- 10.162.66.185 ping statistics --- 5 packet(s) transmitted 4 packet(s) received 20.00% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 1/1/3 ms We did the last mile between our provider and us and once I called them because I felt network slow. They told me that could be the packet loss (20%) that make the Internet slow and I should verify this. Is really a 20% of packet loss that ocurrs sometimes, a major problem for our Internet conection?? Thanks in advanced

Software/Hardware used:
ASKED: February 5, 2008  2:58 PM
UPDATED: December 29, 2009  11:10 PM

Answer Wiki:
Absolutely.... 1% packet loss can create major issues on a connection due to the TCP backoff algorithm. This means that packet retransmits and window updates have to happen. Both of these reduce network throughput. Run pathping on a Windows XP or above box to see where the packet loss is happening along the path. Then talk to the responsible parties between those two points.
Last Wiki Answer Submitted:  May 21, 2008  8:36 pm  by  Labnuke99   32,645 pts.
All Answer Wiki Contributors:  Labnuke99   32,645 pts.
To see all answers submitted to the Answer Wiki: View Answer History.


Discuss This Question:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _


 

I’ll agree with Labnuke99, you situation is quite serious. Recently, due to a LAN switch failure some PCs got 0% pings lost with standard packets (bytes=56) and ~20% with 1024 b packets (ping -t -l 1024 some.host.name) and this led to a major user “under-satisfaction”…

BR,

Petko

 3,120 pts.

 

Sorry for the late, late post. Yes, we could solve the problem, due to hardware error. Now the problem is solved. Thanks

 35 pts.