15 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

I’m just looking for a little guidance. Are the ping values to my router alright?

I’m using Windows 10 (64bit). Internet is working fine. 

My (new) computer is directly connected to my router via ethernet. When I ping it, the first value is always <1ms. The rest is 1ms.

Motherboard: GA-B250M-DS3H (rev. 1.0)

 

C:\>ping 192.168.0.1 -t

Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
    Packets: Sent = 8, Received = 8, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 1ms, Average = 0ms

 

Then I used a live CD to check if the problem was with Windows / cable / router. I'm using the latest driver, which might be the problem? Do I just let it go?

 

Pic.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check your Network Adapter properties for any settings related to Energy Efficent Ethernet or Power saving and turn it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Energy Efficent Ethernet is off. Green Ethernet is off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about it... unless you're getting poor performance on you LAN.  ICMP is unimportant to the TCP/IP stack (with regards to traffic)... right? ICMP should be used as evidence of network issues... but not by itself point to issues (if that makes sense?). I personally see nothing wrong with those times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1ms is perfectly fine, I don't think it can display a time less than that anyway, as long as it doesn't show any packet loss.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Whenever I have pinged any of mine, or my families home networking equipment - it's always produced a result of 1ms. Only in work or on other enterprise network devices have I seen the results consistently come back as <1ms. So you have nothing to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On my older computer, or on my laptop when connected to the router via ethernet, it was always <1ms.

This is a new computer, so I expected it to be the same.

Laptop values:

Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

It's not a big deal, but it would be nice to know why it's no longer '<1ms'.

Edited by uberjon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's clearly a driver issue since the live CD is fine and we all know this is not normal on a working Windows install. It's typically <1 ms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It's out of my hands then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can grab say hrping which can report sub ms times.

https://www.cfos.de/en/ping/ping.htm

 

As mentioned ping is going to be low priority for your router to answer.  When you booted your live cd your using linux which sure ping can report less than 1ms times.  Windows likes to round the times and doesn't report the sub 1ms other than < sign.

 

But normally anything around 1ms on a lan is fine..  Now if you were seeing multiple ms constantly then you might want to look deeper to why.. is it just the router taking its time to answer or does the connection have other traffic causing the delay, etc.

 

here is my windows box to my router.  And the router is VM by the way on my esxi host

 

Budman@I5-WIN D:\Dropbox\tools
$ hrping 192.168.9.253
This is hrPING v5.06.1143 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.9.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=ac16
Pinging 192.168.9.253 [192.168.9.253]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.9.253: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=64 ID=c7c4 time=0.644ms
From 192.168.9.253: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=64 ID=1ed9 time=0.552ms
From 192.168.9.253: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=64 ID=3a79 time=0.687ms
From 192.168.9.253: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=64 ID=1a73 time=0.633ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.501694 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.552 / 0.629 / 0.687 / 0.048
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.159, rcvd=0.159

 

And I was remote desktop into my windows machine from work via vpn..

 

here is via just normal windows ping

 

Budman@I5-WIN D:\Dropbox\tools
$ ping 192.168.9.253

Pinging 192.168.9.253 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.9.253:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 1ms, Average = 0ms

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Alright.

 

This is hrPING v5.07.1148 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.0.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=3001
Pinging 192.168.0.1 [192.168.0.1]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

setsockopt IP_HDRINCL failed: Error 10013: An attempt was made to access a socket in a way forbidden by its access permissions.
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=64 ID=5dd0 time=1.114ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=64 ID=5dd1 time=1.470ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=64 ID=5dd2 time=1.471ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=64 ID=5dd3 time=1.509ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.515060 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 1.114 / 1.391 / 1.509 / 0.160
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.158, rcvd=0.158

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so see how ms was rounding it ;)

 

But you prob want to run that as admin - see the error you got..

 

So ping something other than your router.. Ping another wired box on your network.. Or if a managed/smart switch its IP..

 

So for example here is my esxi host

Budman@I5-WIN D:\Dropbox\tools
$ hrping 192.168.9.40
This is hrPING v5.06.1143 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.9.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=3c14
Pinging 192.168.9.40 [192.168.9.40]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.9.40: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=64 ID=aa7a time=0.436ms
From 192.168.9.40: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=64 ID=aa7b time=0.447ms
From 192.168.9.40: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=64 ID=aa7c time=0.395ms
From 192.168.9.40: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=64 ID=aa7d time=0.364ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.515880 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.364 / 0.410 / 0.447 / 0.033
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.158, rcvd=0.158

 

But pinging my cisco sg300 switch.. he doesn't really put much priority on answering ping

 

Budman@I5-WIN D:\Dropbox\tools
$ hrping 192.168.9.252
This is hrPING v5.06.1143 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.9.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=4c1d
Pinging 192.168.9.252 [192.168.9.252]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.9.252: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=64 ID=2d90 time=1.316ms
From 192.168.9.252: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=64 ID=4f40 time=1.285ms
From 192.168.9.252: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=64 ID=cf9a time=1.320ms
From 192.168.9.252: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=64 ID=d0b4 time=1.405ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.501863 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 1.285 / 1.331 / 1.405 / 0.044
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.159, rcvd=0.159

 

Ping can be a very useful tool in troubleshooting latency for sure, and the big one is just plain connectivity ;)  But devices don't always drop everything else they are doing and answer a icmp echo req.. 

 

Here is another VM on my esxi host

$ hrping 192.168.9.8
This is hrPING v5.06.1143 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.9.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=c40a
Pinging 192.168.9.8 [192.168.9.8]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.9.8: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=128 ID=4e88 time=0.725ms
From 192.168.9.8: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=128 ID=4e89 time=0.617ms
From 192.168.9.8: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=128 ID=4e8a time=0.887ms
From 192.168.9.8: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=128 ID=4e8b time=0.683ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.501503 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.617 / 0.728 / 0.887 / 0.099
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.159, rcvd=0.159

 

Try pinging other devices.. Are you in the 1 ms ballpark?  If so then your fine.. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks BudMan.

 

Desktop <-->Router<-->Laptop

Laptop is connected to router via ethernet for this test.

 

Desktop to Laptop.

hrping 192.168.0.107
This is hrPING v5.07.1148 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.0.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=7426
Pinging 192.168.0.107 [192.168.0.107]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.0.107: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=128 ID=5447 time=2.055ms
From 192.168.0.107: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=128 ID=5448 time=2.295ms
From 192.168.0.107: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=128 ID=5449 time=2.513ms
From 192.168.0.107: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=128 ID=544a time=1.979ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.515912 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 1.979 / 2.210 / 2.513 / 0.210
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.158, rcvd=0.158

---

Laptop to Desktop

hrping 192.168.0.100
This is hrPING v5.07.1148 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.0.107; using ICMP echo-request, ID=181f
Pinging 192.168.0.100 [192.168.0.100]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.0.100: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=128 ID=5905 time=1.802ms
From 192.168.0.100: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=128 ID=5906 time=2.232ms
From 192.168.0.100: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=128 ID=5907 time=2.069ms
From 192.168.0.100: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=128 ID=5908 time=1.954ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.513820 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 1.802 / 2.014 / 2.232 / 0.157
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.158, rcvd=0.158

---

Laptop to router

hrping 192.168.0.1
This is hrPING v5.07.1148 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.0.107; using ICMP echo-request, ID=3804
Pinging 192.168.0.1 [192.168.0.1]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=64 ID=2a93 time=0.642ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=64 ID=2a94 time=1.202ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=64 ID=2a95 time=1.191ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=64 ID=2a96 time=1.162ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.514412 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.642 / 1.049 / 1.202 / 0.235
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.158, rcvd=0.158

---

Laptop to Router using the usual windows ping

ping 192.168.0.1

Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

---

Then I went to Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network Connections

Ethernet>Properties>Configure>Advanced.

Interrupt Moderation was 'Enabled'. I selected 'Disabled'.

hrping 192.168.0.1
This is hrPING v5.07.1148 by cFos Software GmbH -- http://www.cfos.de

Source address is 192.168.0.100; using ICMP echo-request, ID=0c1a
Pinging 192.168.0.1 [192.168.0.1]
with 32 bytes data (60 bytes IP):

From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0001 TTL=64 ID=369d time=0.525ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0002 TTL=64 ID=369e time=0.988ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0003 TTL=64 ID=369f time=0.950ms
From 192.168.0.1: bytes=60 seq=0004 TTL=64 ID=36a0 time=0.999ms

Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0.0% loss) in 1.514511 sec
RTTs in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 0.525 / 0.865 / 0.999 / 0.197
Bandwidth in kbytes/sec: sent=0.158, rcvd=0.158

 

ping 192.168.0.1

Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=64

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms

 

Well, looks good! But, do I need to re-enable 'Interrupt Moderation'?

Edited by uberjon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2017 at 9:13 AM, uberjon said:

Well, looks good! But, do I need to re-enable 'Interrupt Moderation'?

No normally you wouldn't need that enabled..

 

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/network/interrupt-moderation

"when interrupt moderation is enabled, receiving a packet does not generate an immediate interrupt and therefore the perceived round-trip time for a particular packet becomes larger than the average time."

 

Unless you seeing issues with too many interrupts?  For sure having that enabled could increase your perceive pings ;)   When your talking less than ms measurements, etc..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright. I'll leave it disabled. It's all about perception! Thanks again BudMan.

Looks like my 'problem' is solved.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.