Recommended Posts

Im with Circaflex here - see half of what I was paying for would be call to isp... Unacceptable!!!  Even if was prime time...  One test ok - but if best you could get is half of what your paying for.. I would be on the phone with them.. Your not paying for 50, your paying for 100.. 90% of that ok sure.. But 50 - no sorry something is wrong!

  • Like 2

@BudManI looked at this guide supplied by Circaflex: http://www.linuxandubuntu.com/home/how-to-use-wireshark-to-inspect-network-traffic

 

And I added the group permissions, but it still says:

 

Couldn't run /usr/bin/dumpcap in child process: Permission denied

 

When I ran it as root:

 

Lua: Error during loading:
 [string "/usr/share/wireshark/init.lua"]:44: dofile has been disabled due to running Wireshark as superuser. See https://wiki.wireshark.org/CaptureSetup/CapturePrivileges for help in running Wireshark as an unprivileged user.

Edit: OK, it seems to work now...

 

Edit2: What information am I looking for?

30 minutes ago, Mindovermaster said:

@CircaflexSometimes, it is slower, some days it is higher. Know anything about fluctuation? And that was only ONE scan to ONE server. I just did it once to prove a point.

Dude don’t bite the hand that feeds you. He is trying to help you out. Denial is just going to hinder progress. 

1 minute ago, adrynalyne said:

Dude don’t bite the hand that feeds you. He is trying to help you out. Denial is just going to hinder progress. 

you see my last to 2nd post?

Just now, Mindovermaster said:

you see my last to 2nd post?

Yes but I’m also talking about your general attitude towards people trying to help you. One of the best some ways to turn people away from you is ask for help and then proceed to tell them how wrong they are.

3 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

Yes but I’m also talking about your general attitude towards people trying to help you. One of the best some ways to turn people away from you is ask for help and then proceed to tell them how wrong they are.

Hard to do that when you are half-arsed... :rofl:

 

But, anyway, to my last question, what am I looking for in Wireshark?

 

Edit: OK Budman.

Not going to be able to explain it to you ;) your going to have to post it so I can look..   PM it to me if you don't want to put it up for public consumption.

 

Do you really want to get into what tcp retrans is and looking for response time to your syn.. ie how long it takes for the syn,ack to come back, etc. etc.  Could write a book on looking at sniffs for what is wrong ;)

Here's one, this was on going to Gmail. it, again, was just sitting there for a few seconds. Then it went on its merry way.

 

I ran Wireshark, then immediately stopped it after it was fully loaded:

 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/mm5i15m84g9c6io/gmail.pcapng

 

Edit: You've helped me enough, BudMan. ;)

Ok first thing that jumped out at me is this...

 

whoisthisIP.thumb.png.9c6a02e5dcb47bfff04388c0103a3974.png

 

What is this.. Its crap traffic...  IP is owned by

 

NetRange:       104.193.176.0 - 104.193.183.255
CIDR:           104.193.176.0/21
NetName:        MCPROHOSTING

 

Its the largest conversation in your sniff at over 5800 packets...  Running ###### like that in the background sure not going to help..

5 minutes ago, BudMan said:

Ok first thing that jumped out at me is this...

 

<snip>

 

What is this.. Its crap traffic...  IP is owned by

 

NetRange:       104.193.176.0 - 104.193.183.255
CIDR:           104.193.176.0/21
NetName:        MCPROHOSTING

 

Its the largest conversation in your sniff at over 5800 packets...  Running ###### like that in the background sure not going to help..

I had minecraft running, sorry about that. Forgot I had it on. The "MCPROHOSTING" server is in Toronto, Canada.

 

Let me run another sniff with it off..

I don't see anything going on in the sniff that points to problems - response to syn, very quick..

 

opentogmail.thumb.png.a2b336bc9379ee55becde38098bd4efe.png

 

Other than the ###### ton of that other conversation.. There is nothing that jumps out as wrong.  Your dns queries are quick.. there are not retrans - so no lost packets, etc.

23 minutes ago, Mindovermaster said:

Have any idea what the culprit could be? Bad cable? Bad Eth0 port? Bad Router? Bad modem? Bad ISP?

Do some trial and error.

 

By cable, are you referring to the ethernet cable you use to directly connect, or are you talking the actual coax from TWC? If you are referring to the ethernet cable, I would find that unlikely, considering your father has the same issues on another device.

 

Bad Eth0 port, doubtful, see previous reply.

 

Bad router - possible, one way to be sure would be remove it from the equation. Hardware directly to the cable modem and browse as usual. If the issue goes away, probably the router. If the issue still persists, could be the modem but you might want to call your ISP and have them do a line test.

13 minutes ago, Circaflex said:

Do some trial and error.

 

By cable, are you referring to the ethernet cable you use to directly connect, or are you talking the actual coax from TWC? If you are referring to the ethernet cable, I would find that unlikely, considering your father has the same issues on another device.

 

Bad Eth0 port, doubtful, see previous reply.

 

Bad router - possible, one way to be sure would be remove it from the equation. Hardware directly to the cable modem and browse as usual. If the issue goes away, probably the router. If the issue still persists, could be the modem but you might want to call your ISP and have them do a line test.

The Ethernet, yeah.

 

I'll try connected just to modem tonight, after she goes to bed, so my Mom doesn't go screaming that the wireless Internet doesn't work...

Very Very Very weird...

 

I just now switched ports on our router. 3 to 4. And it's back up to where I was normal. Just... weird? I had Ethernet ports on routers go out on me before...

 

The apocalypse all over again? :cry:

so your saying its normal now.. From your 2nd sniff I saw not real issue that could explain your problem.. There were a few what looked like dupe acks.. But there was nothing to suggest a problem with the ethernet connection.  Such a problem would be clearly obvious in lots and lots of retrans, etc.

49 minutes ago, BudMan said:

so your saying its normal now.. From your 2nd sniff I saw not real issue that could explain your problem.. There were a few what looked like dupe acks.. But there was nothing to suggest a problem with the ethernet connection.  Such a problem would be clearly obvious in lots and lots of retrans, etc.

Yeah, I asked a friend, and he says some acks are acting up, too. But that should not slow me down by any means. So we are double sure now. :)

 

It's not "normal", but it is a lot faster than it was...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Researchers claim Microsoft's quantum breakthrough is flawed by basic Python errors by Karthik Mudaliar Microsoft's aggressive roadmap to deliver a commercial quantum supercomputer by 2029 has now hit a bit of a snag, and it's not because of a complex sub-zero dilution refrigerator, but rather because of a few lines of basic Python code. A new critique published in the scientific journal Nature argues that simple software errors effectively manufactured the breakthrough that Microsoft's foundational research claimed back in 2025 into Majorana-based topological qubits. Topological quantum computing, the path that Microsoft chose for its research, relies on creating and controlling "Majorana zero modes." These are exotic quasiparticles that theoretically offer vastly superior error resistance compared to the highly sensitive superconducting qubits currently being championed by rivals like Google and IBM. However, physically proving you have created these particles requires sifting through massive amounts of complex electrical conductance data to isolate a specific "topological gap." Because of the sheer volume of data, physicists rely heavily on custom software pipelines to process the results. This is where the Python scripts come in. Now, according to the critique, Microsoft’s data processing software contained fundamental programming errors that ultimately skewed the published results. By mishandling data arrays or deploying incorrect logic within the Python script, the software supposedly discarded "noisy" or contradictory data. Which is why it only highlighted the specific electrical measurements that supported the topological-gap claim. The researchers behind the critique argued that this makes the findings invalid, suggesting the heralded "quantum leap" was actually a false positive generated by bad code and not a product of groundbreaking physics. However, Microsoft is pushing back hard against these allegations. The Redmond giant has formally rejected the criticism, saying that it's just a minor anomaly rather than a fatal flaw. According to the company, while there may have been a minor oversight in the data parsing scripts, it does not alter the fundamental reality of their physical experiment. Just weeks ago, Microsoft unveiled the Majorana 2 quantum processor, a milestone so significant that the company boldly accelerated its timeline for a commercial quantum supercomputer from 2035 down to 2029. But the new software allegations reopen an old wound. Microsoft's quantum division faced a remarkably similar crisis when a landmark 2018 paper on Majorana particles was famously retracted in 2021 after independent physicists discovered the data had been inappropriately cropped. That historical baggage makes the current Python-related allegations particularly sensitive. If the foundational math and data processing for the 2025 breakthrough are genuinely flawed, the highly anticipated 2029 commercial timeline could easily be delayed or, worse, cancelled.
    • Because of what they have done to VMware I will never buy anything Broadcom again.
    • AMD releases hotfix for driver install issues on Windows 10 PCs by Taras Buria Earlier this week, AMD released an important graphics driver update. Version 26.6.2 brought AMD FSR 4.1 support to the previous-gen Radeon lineup, the RX 7000 series, giving users better upscaling tech that was previously locked to the newest GPUs. However, the driver turned out to be a little buggy, with users reporting installation issues on systems still running Windows 10. AMD quickly acknowledged the bug and today released a hotfix to resolve the problem. The AMD 26.6.3 Hotfix update is now available for download from the official website. Given that it is a hotfix release, it has only one change in its release notes: AMD announced the update on its official X account and added that a WHQL driver update with the necessary fixes would be released next week. Meanwhile, users can apply the hotfix or roll back to the previous driver using the official AMD Cleanup Utility. You can download AMD Software: Adrenalin Edition 26.6.3 Hotfix Preview Driver from the official website here. It is compatible with all currently supported graphics cards and 64-bit Windows 10 and 11. Full release notes are available on the same page.
    • With Microsoft now listening to its core audience and acting upon received feedback, fans can finally expect a much better version of Windows 11 than what was available five years ago. Here is to five more years, Windows 11! I guess we all need a good laugh now and again...
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
    • One Year In
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      465
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      123
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!