?? - Networking

This is a discussion on ?? - Networking ; what can be cause of this? loss of packets in cable? tnx Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: ??

  1. ??

    what can be cause of this? loss of packets in cable? tnx

    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Request timed out.
    Request timed out.
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Request timed out.
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128




  2. Re: ??

    "samba" writes:

    > what can be cause of this? loss of packets in cable? tnx


    >
    > Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    > Request timed out.
    > Request timed out.
    > Request timed out.
    > Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128


    If you are using IP over Carrier Pigeons, then perhaps it's hunters
    with guns.


    Seriously, why don't you tell more about your problem?
    Is this a ping command you are executing? What are the command line options?
    Please describe the hardware.
    Are the source and destination on the same LAN?
    Are there routers? Firewalls? Modems?









  3. Re: ??

    On Wed, 01 Oct 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    article <87prmk4m09.fsf@com.invalid>, Maxwell Lol wrote:

    >"samba" writes:
    >
    >> what can be cause of this? loss of packets in cable? tnx
    >>
    >> Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
    >> Request timed out.
    >> Request timed out.
    >> Request timed out.
    >> Reply from 192.168.41.37: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128


    You might want to read http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

    >If you are using IP over Carrier Pigeons, then perhaps it's hunters
    >with guns.


    You haven't updated to RFC2549?

    2549 IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service. D. Waitzman.
    April 1 1999. (Format: TXT=9519 bytes) (Updates RFC1149)
    (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

    That's been available for quite some time - I think it may have been
    added to the 2.2.7 kernel, and I don't think it has been replaced or
    superseded in the current kernels. BICBW (For those who don't pay
    attention to networking standards, there is an earlier version of
    this protocol that predates Linux:

    1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian carriers.
    D. Waitzman. April 1 1990. (Format: TXT=3329 bytes) (Updated by
    RFC2549) (Status: EXPERIMENTAL)

    but as you can see, it was experimental, and I don't think it was made
    available in very many operating systems. I also have not heard of the
    RFC4824 networking protocol being added to the 2.6 kernel.)

    >Seriously, why don't you tell more about your problem?
    >Is this a ping command you are executing? What are the command line
    >options?


    From the TTL, it's some version of windoze - NT, XP, W2k, or maybe
    vista - I'm not sure where Linux might be involved.

    Old guy

  4. Re: ??

    ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:

    [snip]

    > That's been available for quite some time - I think it may have been
    > added to the 2.2.7 kernel, and I don't think it has been replaced or
    > superseded in the current kernels. BICBW (For those who don't pay
    > attention to networking standards, there is an earlier version of
    > this protocol that predates Linux:
    >
    > 1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian carriers.
    > D. Waitzman. April 1 1990. (Format: TXT=3329 bytes) (Updated by
    > RFC2549) (Status: EXPERIMENTAL)
    >
    > but as you can see, it was experimental, and I don't think it was made
    > available in very many operating systems. I also have not heard of the
    > RFC4824 networking protocol being added to the 2.6 kernel.)


    Here are the some of the details about a Linux implementation of
    RFC1149.

    http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/
    http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-257064.html

    Scott
    --
    Scott Hemphill hemphill@alumni.caltech.edu
    "This isn't flying. This is falling, with style." -- Buzz Lightyear

  5. Re: ??

    Scott Hemphill writes:

    > Here are the some of the details about a Linux implementation of
    > RFC1149.
    >
    > http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/


    Impressive and vastly amusing.
    From the ping log:

    --- 10.0.3.1 ping statistics ---
    9 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 55% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max = 3211900.8/5222806.6/6388671.9 ms
    vegard@gyversalen:~$ exit


  6. Re: ??

    On Fri, 03 Oct 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    article , Scott Hemphill wrote:

    >ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:


    >> (For those who don't pay attention to networking standards, there
    >> is an earlier version of this protocol that predates Linux:
    >>
    >> 1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian carriers.
    >> D. Waitzman. April 1 1990. (Format: TXT=3329 bytes) (Updated by
    >> RFC2549) (Status: EXPERIMENTAL)
    >>
    >> but as you can see, it was experimental, and I don't think it was made
    >> available in very many operating systems.


    >Here are the some of the details about a Linux implementation of
    >RFC1149.
    >
    >http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/


    [compton ~]$ tar -ztvf pigeonware-0.15.tar.gz
    drwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 0 2002-08-12 04:54 pigeonware-0.15/
    -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 435 2002-08-12 04:51 pigeonware-0.15/install.sh
    -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 3454 2002-08-12 04:49 pigeonware-0.15/pigeond.c
    -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 701 2001-04-29 15:49 pigeonware-0.15/formatocr
    -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 74 2001-04-29 15:49 pigeonware-0.15/setup.sh
    -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 1764 2002-08-12 04:53 pigeonware-0.15/README
    -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 342 2002-08-12 04:05 pigeonware-0.15/test
    -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 105 2002-08-12 04:14 pigeonware-0.15/Makefile
    -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 38 2002-08-12 04:39 pigeonware-0.15/sendout.sh
    -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 45 2002-08-12 04:44 pigeonware-0.15/approvepp
    -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 190 2002-08-12 04:44 pigeonware-0.15/readpp
    [compton ~]$

    Geez, no man page ;-)

    Old guy

  7. Re: ??

    ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:

    >>http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/

    >
    > [compton ~]$ tar -ztvf pigeonware-0.15.tar.gz
    > drwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 0 2002-08-12 04:54 pigeonware-0.15/
    > -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 435 2002-08-12 04:51 pigeonware-0.15/install.sh
    > -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 3454 2002-08-12 04:49 pigeonware-0.15/pigeond.c
    > -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 701 2001-04-29 15:49 pigeonware-0.15/formatocr
    > -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 74 2001-04-29 15:49 pigeonware-0.15/setup.sh
    > -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 1764 2002-08-12 04:53 pigeonware-0.15/README
    > -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 342 2002-08-12 04:05 pigeonware-0.15/test
    > -rw-r--r-- vegard/vegard 105 2002-08-12 04:14 pigeonware-0.15/Makefile
    > -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 38 2002-08-12 04:39 pigeonware-0.15/sendout.sh
    > -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 45 2002-08-12 04:44 pigeonware-0.15/approvepp
    > -rwxr-xr-x vegard/vegard 190 2002-08-12 04:44 pigeonware-0.15/readpp
    > [compton ~]$
    >
    > Geez, no man page ;-)


    I guess you have to go elsewhere to read about pigeon maintenance.


  8. Re: ??

    On Sat, 04 Oct 2008, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux.networking, in
    article <87myhkcaxn.fsf@com.invalid>, Maxwell Lol wrote:

    >ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld (Moe Trin) writes:


    >> Geez, no man page ;-)

    >
    >I guess you have to go elsewhere to read about pigeon maintenance.


    Yabbut I don't think I can convince INS to issue an H-1B to Andy Capp
    (even if he's still around). All of the locals here are operating
    falcons or hawks of some kind, and I don't think they'd be interested
    in the maintenance aspect of pigeons. Feed-stock or training aids
    maybe, but racing? Nah

    Old guy

+ Reply to Thread