 | | Re: GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Erm... binutils, perhaps? And try the Cygnus distro whilst you're at it.... Cheers, Roger (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | GNU pkg for ping, traceroute, etc. (Was: Sluggish nntp performance)
|
|
(...) Which GNU package do I get ping and traceroute and host, etc. from? They're not in inetutils; they doesn't seem to be anywhere... Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 14-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | www.routersim.com ?
|
|
Just taking a chance here that someone might have used the product these people sell... I want to get my CCNA after I finish my MCSE but while I may get some good hands-on experience working with switches in our labs I probably won't get to play (...) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) Yeah. It's probably an OC3, which is about 155.52 megabits/second. (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) Oof. I shoulda seen that one! :-, What does the 115M mean? 155 megabits per second? Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) nslookup. It's prettier than 'host', but tells you basically the same thing. I got the 155M out of the hostname. It's nice when people name their routers meaningfully. :) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
Sorry, bad choice of words in that last post. I knew that the problem wasn't at your end. -- Scott Smallbeck scotts@contactics.com (URL) Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:3804b7b9.795349...net.com... (...) now (...) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) It's not LUGNET's NNTP performance that you're having touble with. It's some net clog problem somewhere. Maybe multiple problems. --Todd (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) What tool do you use for that? whois comes up with a blank, and host (1) just says "pos3-1-155M.cr1.JFK...nter.net". Anyway, my packets don't even see that network -- they get stuck somewhere between: 6 <10 ms 10 ms <10 ms (...) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) Yeah, exactly. Most likely one of the routers is overloaded -- if one checks the dns for the gateways at 8 & 9, one finds the phrases "155M" and "622M", which seems like a lot of bandwidth to me. (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) Oh, I've been a manager... but I stopped. Didn't like it and neither did any of the people I was managing. *no idea* why, really. LOL... <snipped excellent explanation> (...) Lemme see if I got it then, in this example the problem lies either (...) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
Tonight everything is running fast again! It has been a week since I have had normal LUGNET NNTP performance but now it seems to be fine. -- Scott Smallbeck scotts@contactics.com (URL) (25 years ago, 13-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Sluggish nntp performance
|
|
(...) If I were talking to a manager, I'd say: don't worry, we'll take care of it. *grin* But: IP packets have a property called Time-To-Live. It's a counter, and each time a packet goes through a gateway, it's decremented. (By default, most packets (...) (25 years ago, 12-Oct-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Which telnet emulator for Win32?
|
|
Sproaticus <jsproat@io.com> wrote in message news:37F93F6D.EA670D...@io.com... (...) my (...) surprising (...) currently (...) worse (...) anyone got one for windows ce P/PC while there at it? I really gotta be able to check my e-mail and read (...) (25 years ago, 12-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: web surveys
|
|
(...) You are pretty close to the mark. Here's some snippets from what I heard back from the licensing guys at MySQL: Michael Widenius wrote: (...) That last paragraph is pretty interesting -- theyopenly admit they're using the sales of the Win32 (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Personal web database of sets...
|
|
Hi everyone, Has anyone ever tried to put their collection of sets on the web? I'm trying to, but having a problem doing it. I want to create a site where the user is able to choose a set (preferably from a drop-down menu) in the left frame and have (...) (25 years ago, 10-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: web surveys
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote (...) I am aware. What I'm doing is read-only so that's not really an issue. All I want is SQL-type queries on a huge mound of text data, so MySQL seems suitable. Moz (25 years ago, 10-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Inventory Database (Access)
|
|
(...) others from Lugnet. I will add you to the email list for discussion. I think that if we all work together, it will be very nice. I am working out a plan for allowing updates to the dat files to be sent out that will add new pieces and new set (...) (25 years ago, 10-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: web surveys
|
|
Just be careful with MySQL. It currently supports NO transaction or concurrency control whatever. If you're good and you're careful, that's OK but you need to be aware. There are other solutions out there for about the same per seat cost that do (...) (25 years ago, 9-Oct-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
