Re: Speed Testing and Throughput testing

[Jason Biel]

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
setting.

Jason

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Bret Clark <bclark@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
> sizes
> and in turn had to manually set the size within iperf options.
>
> Jason
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Benoit VANNIER [1]<benoit.vannier@apog.net
> >wrote
> :
>
>
> Hello,
>
> Iperf is pretty good at this ... It s free
>
>
> Ben
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Mark Urbach [[2]mailto:mark.urbach@pnpt.com]
> Envoyé : lundi 2 novembre 2009 22:57
> À : [3]nanog@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?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mark Urbach
> PinPoint Communications, Inc.
> 100 N. 12th St  Suite 500
> Lincoln, NE 68508
> 402-438-6211  ext 1923  Office
> 402-660-7982  Cell
> [4]mark.urbach@pnpt.com
> [[5]cid:image003.jpg@01CA5BD5.1A5CEE20]
>
> References
>
>   1. mailto:benoit.vannier@apog.net
>   2. mailto:mark.urbach@pnpt.com
>   3. mailto:nanog@nanog.org
>   4. mailto:mark.urbach@pnpt.com
>   5. cid:image003.jpg@01CA5BD5.1A5CEE20
>



-- 
Jason Biel