Results 1 to 7 of 7
Hello, I recently moved from Opensuse to Xubuntu. And ever since I have done this I am having issues with my network. These issues started during installing. During my first ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 06-03-2012 #1
Awkward high packet loss
I recently moved from Opensuse to Xubuntu.
And ever since I have done this I am having issues with my network.
These issues started during installing.
During my first install attempt I enabled the feature to download updates during install.
I started the installer and just waited for a little while, got up, had some coffee, read the newspaper, went to the loo and got back to check on my install.
When the screen said, 123Hours remaining I aborted the install.
Rebooted, made sure the "download updates" checkbox was not checked. And pressed install.
Got up, got coffee, got back install done.
I rebooted into my new envoirment, wanted to install my required tools. You know gedit, cmake, chromium, sylpheed etc etc using Ubuntu Software Center.
The USC hanged. Everything was slow. And the download time told me 6days. I aborted rebooted and started analysing my network.
First I pinged 3 locations:
nu.nl (National Website), google.com (American Website), nippon.jp (Asian Pacific Website).
The current results when I do this are the following.
robin% ping -c 10 nu.nl ; ping -c 10 google.com ; ping -c 10 nippon.jp PING nu.nl (22.214.171.124) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_req=2 ttl=249 time=6.76 ms 64 bytes from 188.8.131.52: icmp_req=3 ttl=249 time=887 ms 64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_req=6 ttl=249 time=234 ms 64 bytes from 220.127.116.11: icmp_req=7 ttl=249 time=7.46 ms 64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_req=8 ttl=249 time=270 ms --- nu.nl ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 5 received, 50% packet loss, time 31595ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.764/281.221/887.807/322.666 ms PING google.com (22.214.171.124) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from wi-in-f101.1e100.net (126.96.36.199): icmp_req=1 ttl=49 time=10.5 ms 64 bytes from wi-in-f101.1e100.net (188.8.131.52): icmp_req=3 ttl=49 time=10.5 ms 64 bytes from wi-in-f101.1e100.net (184.108.40.206): icmp_req=4 ttl=49 time=10.6 ms 64 bytes from wi-in-f101.1e100.net (220.127.116.11): icmp_req=7 ttl=49 time=10.2 ms 64 bytes from wi-in-f101.1e100.net (18.104.22.168): icmp_req=9 ttl=49 time=791 ms 64 bytes from wi-in-f101.1e100.net (22.214.171.124): icmp_req=10 ttl=49 time=10.5 ms --- google.com ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 6 received, 40% packet loss, time 9036ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 10.253/140.723/791.821/291.179 ms PING nippon.jp (126.96.36.199) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 188.8.131.52: icmp_req=3 ttl=104 time=253 ms 64 bytes from 184.108.40.206: icmp_req=4 ttl=104 time=251 ms 64 bytes from 220.127.116.11: icmp_req=5 ttl=104 time=295 ms 64 bytes from 18.104.22.168: icmp_req=6 ttl=104 time=785 ms 64 bytes from 22.214.171.124: icmp_req=8 ttl=101 time=467 ms 64 bytes from 126.96.36.199: icmp_req=10 ttl=104 time=260 ms --- nippon.jp ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 6 received, 40% packet loss, time 34607ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 251.950/385.740/785.804/194.092 ms
The latency can't really be the issue of the slowness since I think 10ms to reach google is alright.
So, I had a look at my MTU, restared my router, retried, used another system.
None of those are the issue. The MTU of my system is 1500. The other systems don't have any slowness.
Next part to test, I got to University and checked my internet there. It worked _PERFECTLY_.
We got another router at University, a Linksys something, we made a little 5 person network.
That is starting to get me confused. I checked iptables for some odd rule. But, iptables was empty.
I tracedrouted google.com
Got the following:
traceroute to google.com (188.8.131.52), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 * * * 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 184.108.40.206 (220.127.116.11) 2668.287 ms 2669.405 ms 2671.414 ms
As I am using WIFI it might be some very strong electrical field somewhere in the air, yet the other laptops magicly don't have issues with connecting to Wireless.
Does anyone have an idea?
Some system info to boot:
robin% lsmod ; uname -a ; lspci ; uptime ; iwconfig ; ifconfig Module Size Used by iptable_filter 12810 0 ip_tables 27473 1 iptable_filter x_tables 29846 2 iptable_filter,ip_tables pci_stub 12622 1 vboxpci 23200 0 vboxnetadp 13382 0 vboxnetflt 23441 0 vboxdrv 287082 3 vboxpci,vboxnetadp,vboxnetflt rfcomm 47604 4 bnep 18281 2 bluetooth 180104 10 rfcomm,bnep parport_pc 32866 0 ppdev 17113 0 vesafb 13844 1 snd_hda_codec_realtek 223867 1 joydev 17693 0 hid_logitech_dj 18593 0 nvidia 12319264 32 uvcvideo 72627 0 videodev 98259 1 uvcvideo v4l2_compat_ioctl32 17128 1 videodev snd_hda_intel 33773 4 snd_hda_codec 127706 2 snd_hda_codec_realtek,snd_hda_intel snd_hwdep 13668 1 snd_hda_codec snd_pcm 97188 2 snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec snd_seq_midi 13324 0 snd_rawmidi 30748 1 snd_seq_midi arc4 12529 2 snd_seq_midi_event 14899 1 snd_seq_midi snd_seq 61896 2 snd_seq_midi,snd_seq_midi_event ath9k 132390 0 mac80211 506816 1 ath9k ath9k_common 14053 1 ath9k ath9k_hw 411112 2 ath9k,ath9k_common ath 24067 3 ath9k,ath9k_common,ath9k_hw psmouse 87603 0 cfg80211 205544 3 ath9k,mac80211,ath serio_raw 13211 0 shpchp 37277 0 snd_timer 29990 2 snd_pcm,snd_seq snd_seq_device 14540 3 snd_seq_midi,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq video 19596 0 snd 78855 17 snd_hda_codec_realtek,snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_hwdep,snd_pcm,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq,snd_timer,snd_seq_device wmi 19256 0 soundcore 15091 1 snd snd_page_alloc 18529 2 snd_hda_intel,snd_pcm i2c_nforce2 13058 0 asus_laptop 24493 0 sparse_keymap 13890 1 asus_laptop input_polldev 13896 1 asus_laptop mac_hid 13253 0 lp 17799 0 parport 46562 3 parport_pc,ppdev,lp usbhid 47199 1 hid_logitech_dj hid 99559 2 hid_logitech_dj,usbhid r8169 62099 0 Linux Stolas 3.2.0-23-generic #36-Ubuntu SMP Tue Apr 10 20:39:51 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux 00:00.0 Host bridge: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 Host Bridge (rev b1) 00:00.1 RAM memory: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 Memory Controller (rev b1) 00:03.0 ISA bridge: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 LPC Bridge (rev b3) 00:03.1 RAM memory: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 Memory Controller (rev b1) 00:03.2 SMBus: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 SMBus (rev b1) 00:03.3 RAM memory: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 Memory Controller (rev b1) 00:03.5 Co-processor: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 Co-processor (rev b1) 00:04.0 USB controller: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 OHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev b1) 00:04.1 USB controller: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 EHCI USB 2.0 Controller (rev b1) 00:08.0 Audio device: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 High Definition Audio (rev b1) 00:09.0 PCI bridge: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 PCI Bridge (rev b1) 00:0b.0 SATA controller: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 AHCI Controller (rev b1) 00:10.0 PCI bridge: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 PCI Express Bridge (rev b1) 00:15.0 PCI bridge: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 PCI Express Bridge (rev b1) 00:16.0 PCI bridge: NVIDIA Corporation MCP79 PCI Express Bridge (rev b1) 02:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation C79 [GeForce G102M] (rev b1) 03:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller (rev 01) 04:00.0 Network controller: Atheros Communications Inc. AR9285 Wireless Network Adapter (PCI-Express) (rev 01) 12:50:22 up 4:06, 0 users, load average: 0.77, 0.97, 0.97 lo no wireless extensions. wlan0 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"flare" Mode:Managed Frequency:2.437 GHz Access Point: 00:25:9C:D5:35:1C Bit Rate=65 Mb/s Tx-Power=15 dBm Retry long limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off Power Management:off Link Quality=61/70 Signal level=-49 dBm Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0 Tx excessive retries:9790 Invalid misc:1361 Missed beacon:0 eth0 no wireless extensions. eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr e0:cb:4e:24:b9:bf UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:41 Base address:0xe000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:2136 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:2136 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:174828 (174.8 KB) TX bytes:174828 (174.8 KB) wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:25:d3:de:4c:9e inet addr:192.168.1.101 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::225:d3ff:fede:4c9e/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:163484 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:114542 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:238187571 (238.1 MB) TX bytes:10831786 (10.8 MB)
- 06-03-2012 #2
I have experienced this in two situations
1. IPV6 enabled with hardware that really didn't like it
2. Accidentally assigning two computers the same IP address
- 06-03-2012 #3
As the issue seems to be related to wlan, but also your laptop seems to be working, maybe the issue is a overused wlan channel.
List of WLAN channels - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You can get a list of actively used channels/frequencies with
iwlist( - Linux man page
and set a different channel with
iwconfig( - Linux man page
However, this probably needs to happen on the AP.
Other than that: Yes, I also already experienced that hardware A just doesnt want to work with hardware B, although not in recent times anymore.You must always face the curtain with a bow.
- 06-04-2012 #4IPV6 enabled with hardware that really didn't like it
But I'll give it a go anyway. =)
It's a non-modified Laptop. So I don't think the hardware clash.
The Channels sound the most reasonable. I had a look at the roaming networks and I didn't see a different one. And I doubt the people around here know how to set a Channel. As I see a lot of router names when I scan =P.
But I'll give it a check. Thanks for the recommendations..
- 06-05-2012 #5
- 06-05-2012 #6
Does this happen when you do anything or is it only when using Chromium?
- 06-09-2012 #7