The Reverend Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 http://nitro.ucsc.edu/ Cholla turned me on to this place last night. I tried it at 8:17AM EST USA and got exactly 100Mbps (not a misprint) 100Mbps (so, I am assuming that the new Server is online for the high-end speed testing because that is (almost) her maximum speed.coming straight out of Houston or Virginia if you ae extreme East Coast. Cheers and TY Cholla! THe Reverend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devolt Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 I have a dw6000. Here is what it gave me: running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.35Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 992.96kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet BTW, I'm brand new and looking foward to learning all I can here. Reverend, you seem like a real cool guy so far... I have had my dw6000 setup for a couple months with fairly good results. I was just reading about how apparently IE is significantly faster on Dway then Firefox, which kind of bummed me out...there's no going back to IE for me, lol. Anyways, can someone tell me how to check my signal strength though firefox? Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Reverend Posted January 17, 2005 Author CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 In your browser you can't type in 192.168.0.1 and get the command screen with a "green" light.....clicl on the "light" and the next screen tells you your SS and other things you should WRITE DOWN! If not, you should return to IE because you are screwing yourself out of over 400Fbps! DirecWay DW6000s are MADE for IE only ..not the lightweights my friend. You are actually running LESS security due to DirecWay! So give it careful consideration please? Thanks! The Reverend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devolt Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 Arg, I wasn't hoping you wouldn't come back and say something like that, lol. I became a firefox junkie whilst on dialup... How can you say it's actually LESS secure? Btw, thanks for the quick reply and my SS is 75 which seems not bad compared to what I've read in the dslreport forums... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Reverend Posted January 17, 2005 Author CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 It is LESS secure because the DWay connection will only take advantage of the IE security. It ignores anything else. And, your speeds fall through the floor as well. Sorry, but those are the stats and the "straight skinny" from the men who created them. FireFox is indeed nice, just not if you are using DWay is all. You NEED the bulk of a full browser. Firefox "tears up" XP Systems so that they no longer work for getting into https sites and such things ...or at least that is what my data is starting to point to, and I have over 2,000 trouble calls exactly like yours! (And climbing....). Cheers! The Reverend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devolt Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 Hmmm...well, I just downloaded the TCP Optimizer that you mentioned in the other thread, so we'll see how that goes. Does Zone Alarm effect Dway at all? I have had ZA running on my PC for a while now... Also, are you saying that https sites will load faster with IE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Reverend Posted January 17, 2005 Author CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 No. I am saying that the chances of them opening are better than with FireFox. Seems that Firefox does something to screw up https in your Registry. XP sometimes can repair itself. PPL don't like Zone Alarm. I've used it flawlessly with a static IP for three years with no problems. Never had to drop the wall once in order to get into anythihng. If you DO, you won't last 40 seconds and you sure don't wanna go to an https website with no firewall .....the hackers will cream you. The TCP OPtimimizer will just give you "top" speed, it has nothing to do with helping your IE browser accessing https sites. Good luck THe Reverend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devolt Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 Yes, I understood that about the TCP Optimizer, I was just saying "We'll see' in a roundabout way... Hey can someone tell me, or direct me to the link that explains how to setup your LAN in IE and use the Dway cache (or something like that...)? I was reading about it earlier today, but can't find the site now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mastergunz Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 This is my results..pardon my ignorance but not sure what this tells me... running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.21Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 601.67kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet MasterGunz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xmechanic Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 This is after I ran the 'Reverend recommended' TCP Optimizer settings and rebooted both the machine and then the modem. TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.1e click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 409.70Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 314.20kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet I'm going to run a direct connection from the DW-6000 to my main machine and see if that bottom message changes. Be back in a while. BTW, also running Firefox here, so I will retest first with Firefox and then with IE6 (yuck!) and see if there is a noticeable difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xmechanic Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 OK , back to a direct connection between the DW-6000 and my main box. First test with Firefox. Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.43Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 339.24kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet and now for IE 6 Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 561.33Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 364.94kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet Interesting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlh24 Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 These are my results. I do not understand them but maybe it will help with this thread. TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.1e click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.40Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 989.28kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet click START to re-test Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martylemoo Posted January 17, 2005 CID Share Posted January 17, 2005 My results, they seem quite abnormal but then that is just my connection...ABNORMAL Any idea why the first test is so much lower than the second? TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.1e click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 36.66Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 144.95kb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MICROWAVE Posted January 18, 2005 CID Share Posted January 18, 2005 Yeah this site has been around for some time and is actually an upgrade from a previous version. Its my understanding that its primary purpose is as a "Network Diagnostic Tester" and it does have links to other useful sites. The browser testing site was designed by Fred Langa , from the Langa newsletter, he puts out a free letter every Sunday and a upgraded letter which you must pay for. He does have one of the better stress tester for browsers around IMO. The only "problem" I have with the NDT is that the speed test is not always accurate of course thats not its sole purpose, for sure there is more info than anyone could ever use in a lifetime if you are just a P.C. user. But it still is a really cool site and worth a visit and I would encourage everyone to subscribe to the Langa letter (free) as there are always at least 1or2 tips that can help most ppl....... have fun... Another good site for freebies and a place to test your firewall is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Reverend Posted January 18, 2005 Author CID Share Posted January 18, 2005 Thanks everyone.....what you have been doing is "pinging" the new Server. As you can see we are getting an average of 100Mbps ...which is exactly what I wanted to see with the new 'baby' purchased for testmy.net. She will be coming online in several hours. CA3LE is killing himself getting her all set up....and I apologise for laxing here as I have been a ev1.net getting things done. TY Again! "The Rev" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoShow Posted January 18, 2005 CID Share Posted January 18, 2005 Here is what I got: TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.1e click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 529.99Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 784.27kb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Reverend Posted January 18, 2005 Author CID Share Posted January 18, 2005 Please keep testing from time to time if you will because it will HELP you maintain a good connection as well. Cheers! The Reverend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phreek000 Posted February 1, 2005 CID Share Posted February 1, 2005 here it is click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.31Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 990.42kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet click START to re-test Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.21Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 995.07kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SidV Posted February 9, 2005 CID Share Posted February 9, 2005 TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.1e click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.24Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 124.27kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet retest: Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.25Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 125.62kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet Sid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 9, 2005 CID Share Posted February 9, 2005 yea that uploadtest is abit off VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlester Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 Any problems seen with this test?? TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.1e click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.25Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 992.13kb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet WEB100 Enabled Statistics: Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.37Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 942.73kb/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 ------ 100 Mbps FastEthernet link found. Link set to Full Duplex mode No network congestion discovered. Good network cable(s) found Normal duplex operation found. Web100 reports the Round trip time = 80.36 msec; the Packet size = 1420 Bytes; and There were 6 packets retransmitted, 37 duplicate acks received, and 0 SACK blocks received The connection stalled 1 times due to packet loss The connection was idle 0.28 seconds (2.80%) of the time This connection is receiver limited 71.37% of the time. Increasing the current receive buffer (15.0 KB) will improve performance*******************???**************************** This connection is network limited 28.55% of the time. Contact your local network administrator to report a network problem Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to: RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: OFF RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF RFC 1323 Window Scaling: OFF Information: Network Middlebox is modifying MSS variable Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address Server says [67.45.7.172](new NAT IP ADDRESS) but Client says [192.168.0.2](IP Address? Both new and old are 192.168.0.1) Any problems with the above?? Thanks John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 The connection stalled 1 times due to packet loss thats not a goood thing Increasing the current receive buffer (15.0 KB) will improve performance*******************???**************************** i think the test read the settings at the NOC, and not from your pc VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
816_1443013898 Posted February 13, 2005 CID Share Posted February 13, 2005 :::.. Download Stats ..::: Connection is:: 1960 Kbps about 2 Mbps (tested with 579 KB) Download Speed is:: 239 KB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Test Time:: Sun Feb 13 08:25:38 EST 2005 Bottom Line:: 35X faster than 56K 1MB download in 4.28 sec Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/id-NIEFAH4G8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.