Re: ping

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 4:21 AM Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 09:05:03PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > > On Sun 13 Nov 2022 at 14:50:58 (+), Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 06:04:51AM -0800, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > > > > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/pi

Re: ping

On Sun, 13 Nov 2022, Greg Wooledge wrote: unicorn:~$ command -v ls ls But sure, the OP could provide the output of "command -v ping" in addition to "type ping". It couldn't hurt. command -V ping

Re: ping

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 10:24:13PM -0500, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 3:54 PM Klaus Singvogel > wrote: > > > > pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > > > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > > > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > > > 64 bytes from 192

Re: ping

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 3:54 PM Klaus Singvogel wrote: > > pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms > > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icm

Re: ping

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 09:05:03PM -0600, David Wright wrote: > On Sun 13 Nov 2022 at 14:50:58 (+), Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 06:04:51AM -0800, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > > > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > > > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56

Re: ping

On Sun 13 Nov 2022 at 14:50:58 (+), Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 06:04:51AM -0800, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64

Re: ping

pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.114 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=

Re: ping

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 06:04:51AM -0800, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.114

Re: ping

On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 06:13:38 -0800 pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.114 ms > 6

Re: ping

On 11/13/22 06:13, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.114 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12

Re: ping

On 11/13/22 06:50, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 06:04:51AM -0800, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms 64 bytes from 19

Re: ping

On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 06:04:51AM -0800, pe...@easthope.ca wrote: > root@joule:/home/root# /bin/ping -c 3 192.168.0.12 > PING 192.168.0.12 (192.168.0.12) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.079 ms > 64 bytes from 192.168.0.12: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.114

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

rudu writes: > > To configure the printer, I first have to be able to ping it on the > local network, which every over computer can do. So all other peers on the LAN can get to the printer. > And they can print all right, so this desktop must have some network > misconfiguration of some sort, I

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On 4/9/21, rudu wrote: > > To configure the printer, I first have to be able to ping it on the > local network, which every over computer can do. > And they can print all right, so this desktop must have some network > misconfiguration of some sort, I guess ... > It seems like trapped into a tunne

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On 09.04.2021 21:37, deloptes wrote: Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: I don't see any reason why your computer could not ping the printer, since you can ping gateway IP and access the Internet from it. I suspect printer's IP address has changed somehow, or it is in powered off state (some printers

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On Vi, 09 apr 21, 11:41:56, rudu wrote: > > I paste here a few commands I passed when remotely connected to the > problematic machine (sorry for the french locale). You can always prepend 'LANG=C.UTF-8' to get the output in English. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebian

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On 2021-04-09 10:41, rudu wrote: Hi, First, I tried to understand why a single machine among others couldn't print on the local printer. So I tried to ping the printer and it failed. The machine could nevertheless surf the web with no problem ... I paste here a few commands I passed when remote

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: > I don't see any reason why your computer could not ping the printer, > since you can ping gateway IP and access the Internet from it. > I suspect printer's IP address has changed somehow, or it is in powered > off state (some printers can power off themselves, if th

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On 09.04.2021 19:09, rudu wrote: Le 09/04/2021 à 12:08, Alexander V. Makartsev a écrit : On 09.04.2021 14:41, rudu wrote: Hi, First, I tried to understand why a single machine among others couldn't print on the local printer. So I tried to ping the printer and it failed. The machine could ne

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

Le 09/04/2021 à 12:08, Alexander V. Makartsev a écrit : On 09.04.2021 14:41, rudu wrote: Hi, First, I tried to understand why a single machine among others couldn't print on the local printer. So I tried to ping the printer and it failed. The machine could nevertheless surf the web with no pr

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 11:41:56AM +0200, rudu wrote: > Hi, > > First, I tried to understand why a single machine among others couldn't > print on the local printer. > So I tried to ping the printer and it failed. > The machine could nevertheless surf the web with no problem ... > > I paste here

Re: ping gateway ok, ping any other local network address fails

On 09.04.2021 14:41, rudu wrote: Hi, First, I tried to understand why a single machine among others couldn't print on the local printer. So I tried to ping the printer and it failed. The machine could nevertheless surf the web with no problem ... I paste here a few commands I passed when remo

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Vi, 31 mai 19, 08:51:20, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:47:26AM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > > https://wiki.debian.org/MergedUsr > > > > The wiki says this page does not exist yet. > > It's actually . Right, thanks (again) Greg for co

Re: Gmail problems (was Re: Ping as normal user)

On Fri 31 May 2019 at 14:33:42 +0100, mick crane wrote: > On 2019-05-31 14:01, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > I guess I have to learn more about google > > mail, maybe either disabling their spam filter, or deciding to switch to > > an > > email provider (ideally free or cheap) who doesn't filter e

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hello, On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 08:48:36AM -0500, Jason wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:46:50PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > > How did you install this system? […] > > One other person in this thread said they used (a script which > > ultimately uses) debootstrap. > > This system was installed

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:46:50PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 04:18:51PM -0500, Jason wrote: > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 08:12:32AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > While I didn't mention it in this thread, ping had indeed somehow lost > > > its capabilitie

Re: Gmail problems (was Re: Ping as normal user)

On 2019-05-31 14:01, rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: I guess I have to learn more about google mail, maybe either disabling their spam filter, or deciding to switch to an email provider (ideally free or cheap) who doesn't filter email for me. (I guess when others mark something as spam, at least som

Gmail problems (was Re: Ping as normal user)

On Friday, May 31, 2019 07:26:54 AM Pascal Hambourg wrote: > Le 31/05/2019 à 13:16, rhkra...@gmail.com a écrit : > > I wanted to learn at least a little more about that, starting by looking > > back at the original post that mentioned that. I looked back about 10 > > posts but couldn't find it --

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:47:26AM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > https://wiki.debian.org/MergedUsr > > The wiki says this page does not exist yet. It's actually .

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi, i wrote: > > Currently the Default User depends on assumptions about local package > > management which are not obviously related to security. > > That's a future pitfall which just needs its unintentional cover removed. Reco wrote: > The way I see it, the "problematic" package got that Impor

Re: Ping as normal user

Le 31/05/2019 à 13:16, rhkra...@gmail.com a écrit : On Thursday, May 30, 2019 10:55:57 PM Stefan Monnier wrote: $ getcap /bin/ping /bin/ping = cap_net_raw+ep I wanted to learn at least a little more about that, starting by looking back at the original post that mentioned that. I looked back a

Re: Ping as normal user

On Thursday, May 30, 2019 10:55:57 PM Stefan Monnier wrote: > > $ getcap /bin/ping > > /bin/ping = cap_net_raw+ep I wanted to learn at least a little more about that, starting by looking back at the original post that mentioned that. I looked back about 10 posts but couldn't find it -- can you

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 12:09:19PM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > Not every filesystem supported by Debian > > implements extended attributes needed for capabilities. > > Off the top of my head it's NFS and JFFS2. > > It is about the filesystem which holds the /bin directory. I would deem it > e

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi, i wrote: > > "d/control: Drop Priority of libcap2" > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libcap2/commit/5386335db24bfff5cc85bda69dbcda6ab2d7d20d Reco wrote: > Ah, that's what is was. That change made into the stable, I've just checked. Not according to the package tracker: oldstable has 1:2.2

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Le 31/05/2019 à 08:38, Andrei POPESCU a écrit : On Mi, 29 mai 19, 23:29:21, Gene Heskett wrote: the default $PATH the installer sets up for $users, apparently does not include any of the sbin's, only /usr/bin and /bin. I've been fixing that for several generations of debian installs. It won't

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi. On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 09:08:55AM +0200, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > The other way would be if the archive priority was changed between > > different installs. > > This has happened in april 2016 (maybe related to bug 780721 ?) > > "d/control: Increase Priori

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > The other way would be if the archive priority was changed between > different installs. This has happened in april 2016 (maybe related to bug 780721 ?) "d/control: Increase Priority of libcap2{,-bin} to important" https://salsa.debian.org/debian/libcap2/commit/a

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Jo, 30 mai 19, 18:43:05, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:08:22AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > I asked on IRC, and got this answer: > > > > The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's > > mostly a field that has no meaning these days.

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Mi, 29 mai 19, 23:29:21, Gene Heskett wrote: > > the default $PATH the installer sets up for $users, apparently does not > include any of the sbin's, only /usr/bin and /bin. I've been fixing that > for several generations of debian installs. Probably shouldn't as there > may be some good re

Re: Ping as normal user

> $ getcap /bin/ping > /bin/ping = cap_net_raw+ep BTW, if these caps are missing you can recover them with: dpkg-reconfigure iputils-ping -- Stefan

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hello, On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:08:38AM +0300, Reco wrote: > Easy. You run debootstrap, set some --include options (which pull > libcap2-bin by dependency), and then you tar the whole resulting > filesystem. > tar never understood file capabilities, so they are lost in the process. Sure, tar is

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi, i pointed to: > > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html#version-4- 0-1 > > [...] Packages may now depend on packages with a lower priority. [...] Curt wrote: > So it seems the reason invoked above is no longer valid due to a change in > policy. It can be legally c

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On 2019-05-30, Thomas Schmitt wrote: > > So the explanation in > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721#10 > > iputils-ping, as priority "important", cannot declare a dependency on > libcap2-bin, which is priority "optional". > > is wrong and in direct contradiction to The Po

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi. On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:08:22AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > I asked on IRC, and got this answer: > > The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's > mostly a field that has no meaning these days. > > I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that. Are

Re: Ping as normal user

Greg Wooledge wrote: > I asked on IRC, and got this answer: > The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's > mostly a field that has no meaning these days. > I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that. Are different mirrors giving > out different Packages files w

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi, Curt wrote: > >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721 > >> (libcap2-bin is recommended but is not a dependancy of iputils-ping, > >> because "iputils-ping, as priority 'important', cannot declare a > >> dependency on libcap2-bin, which is priority 'optional'"). > Why is my

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

I asked on IRC, and got this answer: The archive (Packages) and individual .debs can disagree on Priority. It's mostly a field that has no meaning these days. I'm not 100% sure how to interpret that. Are different mirrors giving out different Packages files with different Priority settings?

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi. On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 10:26:29AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:19:49PM +0300, Reco wrote: > > "dpkg -s" gets package state from /var/lib/dpkg/status. > > "apt-cache" also uses /var/lib/apt/lists/*. > > > > Basically your result tells that libcap2-bin is "o

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:19:49PM +0300, Reco wrote: > "dpkg -s" gets package state from /var/lib/dpkg/status. > "apt-cache" also uses /var/lib/apt/lists/*. > > Basically your result tells that libcap2-bin is "optional" from the > repository POV, but your local package database thinks it's "impor

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi. On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:10:55AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:00:19PM -, Curt wrote: > > On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster. > > > > Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling m

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:00:19PM -, Curt wrote: >> On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge wrote: >> > But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster. >> >> Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional? >> Or am I once a

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:00:19PM -, Curt wrote: > On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > But libcap2-bin is priority important in both stretch and buster. > > Why is my Stretch apt-cache command telling me it's priority optional? > Or am I once again missing some essential thing? Uh... a

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On 2019-05-30, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:11:44AM -, Curt wrote: >> There is a bug related to this imbroglio: >> >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721 >> (libcap2-bin is recommended but is not a dependancy of iputils-ping, >> because "iputils-ping,

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:11:44AM -, Curt wrote: > There is a bug related to this imbroglio: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=780721 > (libcap2-bin is recommended but is not a dependancy of iputils-ping, > because "iputils-ping, as priority 'important', cannot declare a >

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On 2019-05-29, Andy Smith wrote: > > How did you install this system? Because /bin/ping is supposed to > come with file capabilities such that the user can allow it to do > what it needs to do (this is part of what 'dpkg-reconfigure > iputils-ping' restores). So it would be interesting to know how

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi. On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 02:44:58AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > So my question is, are installs done by debootstrap somehow losing > the file capabilities? I ask because in this thread, one of the > other people reporting a /bin/ping without the correct capabilities > did their install t

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Wednesday 29 May 2019 07:46:50 pm Andy Smith wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 04:18:51PM -0500, Jason wrote: > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 08:12:32AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > > While I didn't mention it in this thread, ping had indeed somehow > > > lost its capabilities on m

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi Cindy, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 09:48:44PM -0400, Cindy Sue Causey wrote: > So, yeah, at least for Debootstrap. "iputils-ping" is in there at the > absolute very first start where the Developers have picked the very > first packages that get the party started before the User then picks > everyth

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On 5/29/19, Andy Smith wrote: > Hi Jason, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 04:18:51PM -0500, Jason wrote: >> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 08:12:32AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: >> > While I didn't mention it in this thread, ping had indeed somehow lost >> > its capabilities on my system. 'dpkg-reconfigure

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

Hi Jason, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 04:18:51PM -0500, Jason wrote: > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 08:12:32AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > While I didn't mention it in this thread, ping had indeed somehow lost > > its capabilities on my system. 'dpkg-reconfigure iputils-ping' fixed it. > > That work

Re: Ping as normal user (Was: Why /usr/sbin is not in my root $PATH ?)

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 08:12:32AM +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > While I didn't mention it in this thread, ping had indeed somehow lost > its capabilities on my system. 'dpkg-reconfigure iputils-ping' fixed it. That worked for me (I'm not the OP) with Stretch on an ARM board. Before running

Re: ping: slow with low latency?

Hello, green a écrit : > > $ time ping -c1 vps-fqdn > PING vps-fqdn (64.n.n.n) 56(84) bytes of data. > 64 bytes from 64.n.n.n: icmp_req=1 ttl=43 time=60.1 ms > > --- vps-fqdn ping statistics --- > 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 60.156/60.156/

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Adam Hardy wrote: > What I need is a ping test or something that I can put in smokeping > to alert me when I forget, e.g. this morning there was a power outage > that took out the modem. I think there are others here making suggestions for that. > What do you mean by 'clamped'? "Locked to". At

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Chris Davies on 20/10/10 11:45, wrote: Adam Hardy wrote: Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) target prot opt source destination TCPMSS tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp flags:SYN,RST/SYN TCPMSS set 1460 So you're clamping TCPMSS at 1460? What if the MSS nee

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Adam Hardy wrote: > Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT) > target prot opt source destination > TCPMSS tcp -- anywhere anywhere tcp > flags:SYN,RST/SYN TCPMSS set 1460 So you're clamping TCPMSS at 1460? What if the MSS needs to be lower, i.e. your MTU has d

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Adam Hardy on 19/10/10 23:16, wrote: My version of traceroute also has the --mtu option, which tries to determine the MTU for the route being traced. It looks perhaps like the firewall for interactivebrokers (IP 208.192.181.62) *may* be blocking too many ICMP control message types - including the

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Chris Davies on 19/10/10 16:24, wrote: Adam Hardy wrote: I have a question about traceroute that might be relevant. I haven't figured out the traceroute options because on lenny, my traceroute doesn't complete. The last hop to mktgw1.ibllc.com doesn't show - it just counts stars up to 30. But o

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Adam Hardy wrote: > I have a question about traceroute that might be relevant. I haven't > figured out the traceroute options because on lenny, my traceroute > doesn't complete. The last hop to mktgw1.ibllc.com doesn't show - it > just counts stars up to 30. But on windows it does complete at 23 -

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Ron Johnson on 19/10/10 12:46, wrote: On 10/19/2010 04:30 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: Ron Johnson on 19/10/10 00:25, wrote: On 10/18/2010 04:54 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: [snip] I'm running a windows app to monitor it called 'ping plotter' which charts the ping responses and flags up the packet loss, an

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On 10/19/2010 04:30 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: Ron Johnson on 19/10/10 00:25, wrote: On 10/18/2010 04:54 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: [snip] I'm running a windows app to monitor it called 'ping plotter' which charts the ping responses and flags up the packet loss, and one server out there in particular lo

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Ron Johnson on 19/10/10 00:25, wrote: On 10/18/2010 04:54 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: [snip] I'm running a windows app to monitor it called 'ping plotter' which charts the ping responses and flags up the packet loss, and one server out there in particular loses 15% of pings: 213.120.176.62 Maybe n

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Ron Johnson on 19/10/10 00:25, wrote: On 10/18/2010 04:54 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: [snip] I'm running a windows app to monitor it called 'ping plotter' which charts the ping responses and flags up the packet loss, and one server out there in particular loses 15% of pings: 213.120.176.62 Maybe n

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Chris Davies on 18/10/10 13:15, wrote: Adam Hardy wrote: I tried lowering the MTU to 1400 but it made no difference. So ping -s 1372 failed? I thought you said it worked up to -s 1472 (packets of 1500 bytes)? When you drop your MTU to 1400, that means that your local data packets are fragmen

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On 10/18/2010 04:54 AM, Adam Hardy wrote: [snip] I'm running a windows app to monitor it called 'ping plotter' which charts the ping responses and flags up the packet loss, and one server out there in particular loses 15% of pings: 213.120.176.62 Maybe not as fancy, but I find that mtr is *re

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Adam Hardy wrote: > I tried lowering the MTU to 1400 but it made no difference. So ping -s 1372 failed? I thought you said it worked up to -s 1472 (packets of 1500 bytes)? When you drop your MTU to 1400, that means that your local data packets are fragmented as necessary to stay within the maxim

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Chris Davies on 17/10/10 23:08, wrote: Adam Hardy wrote: Thanks for all the info. I guess it tells me there's nothing definitely wrong. MTU is a per-link value, and the smallest MTU determines the MTU for all hops that the packet travels between client and server. If something between the cli

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Adam Hardy wrote: > Thanks for all the info. I guess it tells me there's nothing definitely > wrong. MTU is a per-link value, and the smallest MTU determines the MTU for all hops that the packet travels between client and server. If something between the client and server eats the ICMP messages t

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Dne, 17. 10. 2010 19:11:34 je Adam Hardy napisal(a): OK, I have ditched BT's DNS and switched over the OpenDNS. Hopefully that will help. After a bit of faffing I even have ddclient working although I guess that's unnecessary. Quite. This snippet will update your OpenDNS account just as wel

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Camaleón on 17/10/10 13:02, wrote: I have a bizarre problem with the server at 208.245.107.9, which is an internet broker whose server keeps disconnecting when making data requests. Their support is blaming the problem on me. I cannot load that site (208.245.107.9) on a web browser :-? s...@st

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

ow...@netptc.net on 17/10/10 16:30, wrote: I thought I knew enough to keep my own home LAN going but I'm stuck on this one and I can't work out what to do next. In fact I thought everything was fine until I tried pinging with big packet sizes. ping -s 1472 www.bbc.co.uk ping -s 1472 208.245.

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Anticept . on 16/10/10 21:20, wrote: On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Adam Hardy wrote: I have a bizarre problem with the server at 208.245.107.9, which is an internet broker whose server keeps disconnecting when making data requests. Their support is blaming the problem on me. 208.245.107.9 i

RE: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

> > > > Original Message >From: adam@cyberspaceroad.com >To: debian-user@lists.debian.org >Subject: RE: ping packet loss when size gt 1500 >Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:11:46 +0100 > >>I thought I knew enough to keep my own home LAN going but I'm

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:11:46 +0100, Adam Hardy wrote: > I thought I knew enough to keep my own home LAN going but I'm stuck on > this one and I can't work out what to do next. In fact I thought > everything was fine until I tried pinging with big packet sizes. > > ping -s 1472 www.bbc.co.uk > pin

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Morgan Gangwere on 16/10/10 21:14, wrote: On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:11:46 +0100 Adam Hardy <> wrote: [stuff] Nope you're not the only one: ( 4:~ )%ping -s 1473 208.245.107.9 PING 208.245.107.9 (208.245.107.9) 1473(1501) bytes of data. ^C --- 208.245.107.9 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Morgan Gangwere on 16/10/10 21:14, wrote: ( 7:~ )%ping 208.245.107.9 PING 208.245.107.9 (208.245.107.9) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 208.245.107.9: icmp_req=1 ttl=118 time=150 ms 64 bytes from 208.245.107.9: icmp_req=2 ttl=118 time=147 ms 64 bytes from 208.245.107.9: icmp_req=3 ttl=118 tim

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Anticept . on 16/10/10 21:20, wrote: On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Adam Hardy wrote: I have a bizarre problem with the server at 208.245.107.9, which is an internet broker whose server keeps disconnecting when making data requests. Their support is blaming the problem on me. 208.245.107.9 i

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

Morgan Gangwere on 16/10/10 21:14, wrote: On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:11:46 +0100 Adam Hardy <> wrote: [stuff] Nope you're not the only one: ( 4:~ )%ping -s 1473 208.245.107.9 PING 208.245.107.9 (208.245.107.9) 1473(1501) bytes of data. ^C --- 208.245.107.9 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 10/16/2010 03:20 PM, Anticept . wrote: > [snip] >> >> Use ... google DNS. > > So instead of "just" knowing everything you search, and all of your email, > they also know everywhere you surf? > > -- > Seek truth from facts. > I'm not concern

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On 10/16/2010 03:20 PM, Anticept . wrote: [snip] Use ... google DNS. So instead of "just" knowing everything you search, and all of your email, they also know everywhere you surf? -- Seek truth from facts. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Adam Hardy wrote: > I have a bizarre problem with the server at 208.245.107.9, which is an > internet broker whose server keeps disconnecting when making data requests. > Their support is blaming the problem on me. > > 208.245.107.9 is used by a huge number of clie

Re: ping packet loss when size gt 1500

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:11:46 +0100 Adam Hardy <> wrote: [stuff] Nope you're not the only one: ( 4:~ )%ping -s 1473 208.245.107.9 PING 208.245.107.9 (208.245.107.9) 1473(1501) bytes of data. ^C --- 208.245.107.9 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 3022ms

Re: ping hostnames ala windows ping.exe?

On Sat,11.Oct.08, 18:57:40, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 08:31:45AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > > $ host bixi > > bixi has address 192.168.77.76 > > This only resolves host names through DNS. e.g. ignores your hosts file. Ah, it works on my machine because I have a local

Re: ping hostnames ala windows ping.exe?

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 08:31:45AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > $ host bixi > bixi has address 192.168.77.76 This only resolves host names through DNS. e.g. ignores your hosts file. You can ask libc's name resolver directly: $ getent hosts bixi $ getent hosts yahoo.com 206.190.60.37 yahoo.c

Re: ping hostnames ala windows ping.exe?

2008/10/10 Andrei Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Fri,10.Oct.08, 15:08:56, Lachlan wrote: >> i've started using lenny for my work pc and there's a feature of the >> windows ping.exe that i'm trying to find in linux. >> >> something in windows i've used a lot is pinging by hostname to find >> the

Re: ping hostnames ala windows ping.exe?

On Fri,10.Oct.08, 15:08:56, Lachlan wrote: > i've started using lenny for my work pc and there's a feature of the > windows ping.exe that i'm trying to find in linux. > > something in windows i've used a lot is pinging by hostname to find > the ip of the pc i'm looking for. If you want to have th

Re: ping hostnames ala windows ping.exe?

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:08:56 +1000 Lachlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i've started using lenny for my work pc and there's a feature of the > windows ping.exe that i'm trying to find in linux. - You have inetutils-ping and iputils-ping packages in lenny to have the ping utility. > > some

Re: ping MAC address

Ter, 2008-10-07 às 19:24 +0200, Gilles Mocellin escreveu: > Le Tuesday 07 October 2008 16:26:22 Achim Stumpf, vous avez écrit : > > Ron Johnson schrieb: > [...] > > On etch this does not work. Does anyone know what's the story with arping > > on etch? > > > > Options on etch: > > > > # arping > > U

Re: ping MAC address

Le Tuesday 07 October 2008 16:26:22 Achim Stumpf, vous avez écrit : > Ron Johnson schrieb: [...] > On etch this does not work. Does anyone know what's the story with arping > on etch? > > Options on etch: > > # arping > Usage: arping [-fqbDUAV] [-c count] [-w timeout] [-I device] [-s source] > dest

Re: ping MAC address

Ron Johnson schrieb: On 09/25/08 07:01, Achim Stumpf wrote: Hi, I have looked around, and I have found on the net that once arping could ping mac addresses, but it turns out that it is not possible anymore with newer version of arping. Does anyone know a tool which is able to ping a mac add

Re: ping MAC address

On 09/25/08 07:01, Achim Stumpf wrote: Hi, I have looked around, and I have found on the net that once arping could ping mac addresses, but it turns out that it is not possible anymore with newer version of arping. Does anyone know a tool which is able to ping a mac address? arping: # arpi

  1   2   3   >