[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Tim Nelson <tnelson at rockbochs dot com>
 To:  Chris Buechler <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
 Cc:  m0n0wall <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] SMB over IPSEC...
 Date:  Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:44:16 -0500 (CDT)
I think the large variance in latency is due to some of the other services at one location randomly
choking the connection(video conferencing...). Time to look at shaping again...

Tim Nelson
Systems/Network Support
Rockbochs Inc.
(218)727-4332 x105

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Buechler" <cbuechler at gmail dot com>
Cc: "m0n0wall" <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:20:17 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [m0n0wall] SMB over IPSEC...

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Tim Nelson <tnelson at rockbochs dot com> wrote:
> I just can't believe that with all the improvements and new developments in the network world that
someone hasn't come up with a broadband technology that can be run over tin cans and string yet
still have 1-2ms of latency!!!
>

Dang physics and that pesky speed of light.  ;)


> Seriously though... I can see the latency being a huge issue here. I just did a constant ping and
the latency is varying between 90ms  and 240ms... ouch. I'll continue to do some tweaking. Thank you
all for the great ideas and assistance!
>

Ouch!  Yeah there you go, that's going to have a very serious impact.
I'd see why it is that it's that terrible, are the upstream or
downstream on either side getting maxed out, or is it just a poor
connection between the two otherwise fine Internet connections.

-Chris

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch