Speed Testing and Throughput testing
jason at biel-tech.com
Tue Nov 3 06:49:05 CST 2009
Linux always worked best for us as well, was easy running a livecd with
laptops. We found that two windows XP machines, same identical hardware and
OS load yielded different registry settings (or lack thereof) for TCP Window
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Bret Clark <bclark at spectraaccess.com> wrote:
> True, we usually find Linux based machines work better running IPerf
> then Windows (at least out of the box) because of the TCP window
> size....well Windows XP at least, don't know about Vista or 7.
> Jason Biel wrote:
> Please take note with using iperf that you'll want to make sure the
> appropriate TCP Window Size has been negotiated. We recently did some
> testing with systems that had decided to pick less than optimal window
> and in turn had to manually set the size within iperf options.
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Benoit VANNIER <benoit.vannier at apog.net
> Iperf is pretty good at this ... It s free
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Mark Urbach [mailto:mark.urbach at pnpt.com]
> Envoyé : lundi 2 novembre 2009 22:57
> À : nanog at nanog.org
> Objet : Speed Testing and Throughput testing
> Anyone have a good solution to get "accurate" speed results when testing at
> 10/100/1000 Ethernet speeds?
> Do you have a server/software that customer can test too?
> Mark Urbach
> PinPoint Communications, Inc.
> 100 N. 12th St Suite 500
> Lincoln, NE 68508
> 402-438-6211 ext 1923 Office
> 402-660-7982 Cell
> mark.urbach at pnpt.com
> [cid:image003.jpg at 01CA5BD5.1A5CEE20]
> 1. mailto:benoit.vannier at apog.net
> 2. mailto:mark.urbach at pnpt.com
> 3. mailto:nanog at nanog.org
> 4. mailto:mark.urbach at pnpt.com
> 5. cid:image003.jpg at 01CA5BD5.1A5CEE20
More information about the NANOG