therockscott

Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 5853 Kbps about 5.9 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 715 kB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Fri Apr 8 08:02:30 EDT 2005 Bottom Line:: 105X faster than 56K 1MB download in 1.43 sec Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 64.55 % faster than the average for host (rr.com) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-TZ4BIXQPW

Does anyone know the correct way to setup NetfileServer? I'm not a dummy but I must be missing a step or something. I have an http server and an ftp server running separately. But this one incorporates both in the same program. Thanks in advance for the help.

:::.. Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 5177 Kbps about 5.2 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 632 kB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Sat Apr 2 09:00:23 EST 2005 Bottom Line:: 92X faster than 56K 1MB download in 1.62 sec Diagnosis: Awesome! 20% + : 45.42 % faster than the average for host (rr.com) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-WGXQSUK26 My cap is set at 5000/300. This is the best that I've ever gotten

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] © Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:Documents and Settingsscott>ping -n 100 24.95.224.65 Pinging 24.95.224.65 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Request timed out. Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=134ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=245ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=255ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=267ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=284ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=303ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=257ms TTL=251 Reply from 24.95.224.65: bytes=32 time=269ms TTL=251 Ping statistics for 24.95.224.65: Packets: Sent = 100, Received = 99, Lost = 1 (1% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 7ms, Maximum = 303ms, Average = 29ms C:Documents and Settingsscott>

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] © Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:Documents and Settingsscott>pathping testmy.net Tracing route to testmy.net [67.19.36.6] over a maximum of 30 hops: 0 coco [192.168.2.3] 1 192.168.2.1 2 10.110.112.1 3 pos2-0.orldflstcd-ubr1.cfl.rr.com [24.95.226.74] 4 24.95.224.97 5 srp2-0.orldflwrpk-rtr1.cfl.rr.com [24.95.224.65] 6 24.95.224.165 7 p1-0.hsa2.orl1.bbnplanet.net [63.209.120.29] 8 ge-6-0-1.mp1.Orlando1.Level3.net [64.159.0.37] 9 as-1-0.bbr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [209.247.9.102] 10 ge-1-2-56.car3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.68.122.166] 11 4.78.220.10 12 dist-vlan31.dsr3-2.dllstx3.theplanet.com [70.85.127.30] 13 dist-vlan41.dsr2-1.dllstx4.theplanet.com [70.85.127.83] 14 gig1-0-1.tp-car9-1.dllstx4.theplanet.com [67.18.116.69] 15 6.67-19-36.reverse.theplanet.com [67.19.36.6] Computing statistics for 375 seconds... Source to Here This Node/Link Hop RTT Lost/Sent = Pct Lost/Sent = Pct Address 0 coco [192.168.2.3] 0/ 100 = 0% | 1 0ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 192.168.2.1 0/ 100 = 0% | 2 10ms 1/ 100 = 1% 1/ 100 = 1% 10.110.112.1 0/ 100 = 0% | 3 11ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% pos2-0.orldflstcd-ubr1.cfl.rr.com [24.95.226.74] 0/ 100 = 0% | 4 9ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 24.95.224.97 0/ 100 = 0% | 5 10ms 2/ 100 = 2% 2/ 100 = 2% srp2-0.orldflwrpk-rtr1.cfl.rr.com [24.95.224.65] 0/ 100 = 0% | 6 13ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% 24.95.224.165 0/ 100 = 0% | 7 13ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% p1-0.hsa2.orl1.bbnplanet.net [63.2 09.120.29] 0/ 100 = 0% | 8 17ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% ge-6-0-1.mp1.Orlando1.Level3.net [ 64.159.0.37] 0/ 100 = 0% | 9 42ms 2/ 100 = 2% 2/ 100 = 2% as-1-0.bbr1.Dallas1.Level3.net [20 9.247.9.102] 0/ 100 = 0% | 10 43ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% ge-1-2-56.car3.Dallas1.Level3.net [4.68.122.166] 0/ 100 = 0% | 11 --- 100/ 100 =100% 100/ 100 =100% 4.78.220.10 0/ 100 = 0% | 12 --- 100/ 100 =100% 100/ 100 =100% dist-vlan31.dsr3-2.dllstx3.theplan et.com [70.85.127.30] 0/ 100 = 0% | 13 --- 100/ 100 =100% 100/ 100 =100% dist-vlan41.dsr2-1.dllstx4.theplan et.com [70.85.127.83] 0/ 100 = 0% | 14 51ms 0/ 100 = 0% 0/ 100 = 0% gig1-0-1.tp-car9-1.dllstx4.theplan et.com [67.18.116.69] 1/ 100 = 1% | 15 42ms 1/ 100 = 1% 0/ 100 = 0% 6.67-19-36.reverse.theplanet.com [ 67.19.36.6] Trace complete.

My d/l speed absolutely sucks. Last week i was getting 4.9mbps consistently, with a cap limit of 5mbps. Now I'm barely hitting 3.5, even at different parts of the day. I even formatted my entire drive and installed XP Pro clean. Same thing. My upload is operating normally. My cap is 5000/300 from RR. I'm hoping that some tweaks will help. i was trying VanBuren's cable 5000/384 but i wiped everything clean and I've installed SP2 with all of the updates. thanks in advance. :::.. Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 2681 Kbps about 2.7 Mbps (tested with 2992 kB) Download Speed is:: 327 kB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Mon Mar 14 21:48:18 EST 2005 Bottom Line:: 48X faster than 56K 1MB download in 3.13 sec Diagnosis: May need help : running at only 79.53 % of your hosts average (rr.com) Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-NXSFIM893 TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3a click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

How do you get it to test with the new load bar?

what are you cap limits on your system?

:shock:Sorry about that, I was at work.

SO THERE WILL BE ABSOLUTELY NO WAY OFF SETTING IT UP IN FULL DUPLEX MODE FROM INCOMING TRAFFIC? IF SO, THEN THAT KINDA SUCKS. WHEN I'M ON MY LAN, TRANSFERRING TO COMPUTERS, IT ROCKS. SO MAYBE I CAN CALL THE CABLE COMPANY AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT I CAN DO? ANY SUGGESTIONS ARE WELCOME. AND THANKS AGAIN VAN BUREN. I'M USING YOUR LATEST CCS SETTINGS. PROBABLY WOULD GO ALOT FASTER IN FULL MODE THOUGH.

more info: WEB100 Kernel Variables: Client: localhost/127.0.0.1 AckPktsIn: 1552 AckPktsOut: 0 BytesRetrans: 40880 CongAvoid: 1028 CongestionOverCount: 0 CongestionSignals: 3 CountRTT: 1225 CurCwnd: 42340 CurMSS: 1460 CurRTO: 290 CurRwinRcvd: 687104 CurRwinSent: 5840 CurSsthresh: 30660 DSACKDups: 0 DataBytesIn: 0 DataBytesOut: 4152240 DataPktsIn: 0 DataPktsOut: 2844 DupAcksIn: 303 ECNEnabled: 0 FastRetran: 3 MaxCwnd: 166440 MaxMSS: 1460 MaxRTO: 420 MaxRTT: 260 MaxRwinRcvd: 687104 MaxRwinSent: 5840 MaxSsthresh: 83220 MinMSS: 1460 MinRTO: 280 MinRTT: 80 MinRwinRcvd: 42944 MinRwinSent: 5840 NagleEnabled: 1 OtherReductions: 1 PktsIn: 1552 PktsOut: 2844 PktsRetrans: 28 X_Rcvbuf: 103424 RcvWinScale: 7 SACKEnabled: 3 SACKsRcvd: 347 SendStall: 0 SlowStart: 174 SampleRTT: 90 SmoothedRTT: 90 X_Sndbuf: 103424 SndWinScale: 4 SndLimTimeRwin: 0 SndLimTimeCwnd: 10095596 SndLimTimeSender: 2591 SndLimTransRwin: 0 SndLimTransCwnd: 1 SndLimTransSender: 1 SndLimBytesRwin: 0 SndLimBytesCwnd: 4152240 SndLimBytesSender: 0 SubsequentTimeouts: 0 SumRTT: 143500 Timeouts: 0 TimestampsEnabled: 0 WinScaleRcvd: 4 WinScaleSent: 7 DupAcksOut: 0 StartTimeUsec: 349071 Duration: 10101485 c2sData: 2 c2sAck: 2 s2cData: 9 s2cAck: 3 half_duplex: 1 link: 0 congestion: 1 bad_cable: 0 mismatch: 0 spd: 0.00 bw: 2.93 loss: 0.001054852 avgrtt: 117.14 waitsec: 0.00 timesec: 10.00 order: 0.1952 rwintime: 0.0000 sendtime: 0.0003 cwndtime: 0.9997 rwin: 5.2422 swin: 64.0000 cwin: 1.2698 rttsec: 0.117143 Sndbuf: 8388608 aspd: 9.71805 Checking for mismatch on uplink (speed > 50 [0>50], (xmitspeed < 5) [0.41<5] (rwintime > .9) [0>.9], (loss < .01) [0.00<.01] Checking for excessive errors condition (loss/sec > .15) [1.05>.15], (cwndtime > .6) [0.99>.6], (loss < .01) [0.00<.01], (MaxSsthresh > 0) [83220>0] Checking for 10 Mbps link (speed < 9.5) [0<9.5], (speed > 3.0) [0>3.0] (xmitspeed < 9.5) [0.41<9.5] (loss < .01) [0.00<.01], (mylink > 0) [3.0>0] Checking for Wireless link (sendtime = 0) [3.0E=0], (speed < 5) [0<5] (Estimate > 50 [2.93>50], (Rwintime > 90) [0>.90] (RwinTrans/CwndTrans = 1) [0/1=1], (mylink > 0) [3.0>0] Checking for DSL/Cable Modem link (speed < 2) [0<2], (SndLimTransSender = 0) [1=0] (SendTime = 0) [3.0E-4=0], (mylink > 0) [3.0>0] Checking for half-duplex condition (rwintime > .95) [0>.95], (RwinTrans/sec > 30) [0>30], (SenderTrans/sec > 30) [0.1>30], OR (mylink <= 10) [3.0<=10] Checking for congestion (cwndtime > .02) [0.99>.02], (mismatch = 0) [0=0] (MaxSsthresh > 0) [83220>0] estimate = 2.93 based on packet size = 11Kbits, RTT = 117.14msec, and loss = 0.001054852 The theoretical network limit is 2.93 Mbps The NDT server has a 8192.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 546.34 Mbps Your PC/Workstation has a 671.0 KByte buffer which limits the throughput to 44.75 Mbps The network based flow control limits the throughput to 10.83 Mbps Client Data reports link is 'T1', Client Acks report link is 'T1' Server Data reports link is '10 Gig', Server Acks report link is 'Ethernet' stats: WEB100 Enabled Statistics: Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 412.21Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 3.28Mb/s ------ Client System Details ------ OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1 Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.5.0_01 ------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------ Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found. Link set to Half Duplex mode Information: throughput is limited by other network traffic. Good network cable(s) found Normal duplex operation found. Web100 reports the Round trip time = 117.14 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and There were 28 packets retransmitted, 303 duplicate acks received, and 347 SACK blocks received The connection was idle 0 seconds (0%) of the time This connection is network limited 99.97% of the time. Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to: RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF RFC 1323 Window Scaling: ON Packet size is preserved End-to-End Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address Server says [65.33.114.140] but Client says [192.168.2.3] TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3d click START to begin Another client is currently being served, your test will begin within 90 seconds Another client is currently being served, your test will begin within 45 seconds Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 412.21Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 3.28Mb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Information: Other network traffic is congesting the link

here's the info : TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3d click START to begin Another client is currently being served, your test will begin within 90 seconds Another client is currently being served, your test will begin within 45 seconds Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 412.21Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 3.28Mb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Information: Other network traffic is congesting the link

docsdiag is a diagnostic tool that reads information from the modem and it says that i'm still running in half-duplex even when i've changed it to full and did a reboot. I didn't notice very much change but I'm not sure if the network adapter is capable of being changed to full duplex since it's on an older computer and integrated into the motherboard.

This is my first post on this site. I absolutely have become addicted to this site. I'm using an old computer as an FTP server. It's a Compaq PIII 700mhz with the adapter being integrated into the motherboard. It's worked fine but I've been reading about the half and full duplex modes. Mine was in auto-detect. I ran docsdiag and it said that I was at half-duplex. I went to properties and changed it to full, rebooted and ran docsdiag again and it still said half-duplex. My adapter is an Intel Pro/100 VM. I went on Intel's website to see if this adapter only supported half-duplex but didn't get any info. So do I need to get another adapter to make my tweaks faster? I'm also behind a Belkin router and I'm using RR with 5000/384. Thanks in advance.