NIC or Modem Problem?

[Arkaic]

First off I doubt this is a driver problem, even though I'm not well educated about Linux. The problem is my internet is being extremely spott (like approximately 40% to 65% of the time it drops out. That for me is unnacceptable! I have a 5Mb/s downstream with a 1Mb/s upstream. However its not my speed that is the problem it is that it just won't work. This is a consistency problem that has gone cross-OS. Windows 7 and OpenSUSE 11.1 Have both had this problem. So I am lead to believe its hardware not software; however, the dropout is hovering at 20% within Windows and at least it seems that a page will load in Opera 10 (for linux) or Konquerer when it wont load for 10 minutes in Firefox. I am soooooooo frustrated!!!! :angry: :angry: :angry: Sorry if there is a similar topic, but I tried searching and said forget it after 10minutes loading time. It took me approximately 15 minutes to load this page. Could it be a botched OpenSuse install perhaps? Anyways specs below:

Motorola SB4100

Realtek RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet

[cybertimber2008]

Ping tests please. Maybe google, neowin, and yahoo. 20 pings each test.

Then 20 pings to your gateway (which should be your router or modem), and 20 pings to another computer on your network.

I want to check your internet and then physical medium.

[jimbo11883]

- Make sure you are not connected with both the Ethernet cable AND the USB cable. This can cause problems.

- If possible, try and secure a cheap NIC PCI card to test and see if your (onboard?) NIC is faulty.

- Try rebooting your SurfBoard Modem.

- It may be possible that your modem has gone bad, and you will need a replacement.

[Arkaic]

@cybertimber2008:

This is my home computer, connected directly to the internet with the modem. Unless I'm missing something else regarding the computer on the network. I'll have to get access to another NIC in the next couple days. Anyways results.

PING google.com (74.125.53.100) 56(84) bytes of data.

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=97.1 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=2 ttl=47 time=96.5 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=3 ttl=47 time=97.7 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=4 ttl=47 time=97.2ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=5 ttl=47 time=96.5ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=6 ttl=47 time=96.9ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=7 ttl=47 time=96.8ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=8 ttl=47 time=96.8ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=9 ttl=47 time=96.7ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=10 ttl=47 time=97.0 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=11 ttl=47 time=97.6 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=12 ttl=47 time=97.8 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=13 ttl=47 time=96.5 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=14 ttl=47 time=96.2 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=15 ttl=47 time=97.3 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=16 ttl=47 time=96.9 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=17 ttl=47 time=98.9 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=18 ttl=47 time=96.7 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=19 ttl=47 time=97.0 ms

64 bytes from pw-in-f100.1e100.net (74.125.53.100): icmp_seq=20 ttl=47 time=96.4 ms

--- google.com ping statistics ---

20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19092ms

rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 96.205/97.072/98.986/0.726 ms

PING neowin.net (209.124.63.219) 56(84) bytes of data.

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=50.2 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=2 ttl=52 time=46.0 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=3 ttl=52 time=46.4 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=4 ttl=52 time=47.9 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=5 ttl=52 time=46.3 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=6 ttl=52 time=46.3 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=7 ttl=52 time=46.6 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=8 ttl=52 time=46.6 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=9 ttl=52 time=49.0 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=10 ttl=52 time=46.8 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=11 ttl=52 time=47.1 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=12 ttl=52 time=47.9 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=13 ttl=52 time=47.0 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=14 ttl=52 time=50.7 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=15 ttl=52 time=48.9 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=16 ttl=52 time=46.9 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=17 ttl=52 time=46.1 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=18 ttl=52 time=47.5 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=19 ttl=52 time=48.8 ms

64 bytes from 219.63.124.209.sfldmi01.utropicmedia.net (209.124.63.219): icmp_seq=20 ttl=52 time=47.1 ms

--- neowin.net ping statistics ---

20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 28167ms

rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 46.087/47.567/50.718/1.342 ms

PING yahoo.com (209.131.36.159) 56(84) bytes of data.

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=91.1 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=2 ttl=49 time=91.6 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=3 ttl=49 time=90.6 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=4 ttl=49 time=91.3 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=5 ttl=49 time=90.1 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=6 ttl=49 time=92.0 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=7 ttl=49 time=90.1 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=8 ttl=49 time=90.7 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=9 ttl=49 time=90.1 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=10 ttl=49 time=91.9 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=11 ttl=49 time=90.0 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=12 ttl=49 time=91.2 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=13 ttl=49 time=89.9 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=14 ttl=49 time=90.9 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=15 ttl=49 time=90.4 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=16 ttl=49 time=90.1 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=17 ttl=49 time=91.2 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=18 ttl=49 time=89.9 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=19 ttl=49 time=90.9 ms

64 bytes from b1.www.vip.sp1.yahoo.com (209.131.36.159): icmp_seq=20 ttl=49 time=92.4 ms

--- yahoo.com ping statistics ---

20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19097ms

rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 89.936/90.868/92.426/0.832 ms

PING 192.168.100.1 (192.168.100.1) 56(84) bytes of data.

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2.69 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2.61 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=2.42 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=2.40 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=2.55 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=2.42 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=2.40 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=2.40 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=2.41 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=2.44 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=2.41 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=2.44 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=2.50 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=2.44 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=2.72 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=2.39 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=2.42 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=2.50 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=2.40 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.100.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=2.47 ms

--- 192.168.100.1 ping statistics ---

20 packets transmitted, 20 received, 0% packet loss, time 19087ms

rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 2.394/2.476/2.725/0.099 ms

@jimbo11883:

- Only ethernet plugged in to NIC

- Tomorrow or day after. (and yes it's onboard.)

- Hard and software reboots done.

- Ok can replace them. I just don't know which one (modem/nic) needs replacing if its not software problem (doubt it).

Edited November 9, 2009 by Jelly Beans

[Anibal P]

I'd say it's your Modem

I do this daily at work, and it's your outdated modem, if your ISP has any get a Motorola 5XXX series or higher if possible while you're at it

[jimbo11883]

Yea, usually it is the modem... I've seen Surfboards crap out all the time.

[+BudMan MVC]

When you say it drops out? Can you not ping your gateway?

Or it could be just a DNS related issue?

Since your directly connected to your modem -- look at the output of ipconfig /all in windows this will show your your ISP gateway.. When you have the problem ping that.. Does it work or fail? Route -n in linux will show you the IP of your gateway. When your having the problem -- try pinging ISP gateway! Or the host your having problems with page coming up.. does it resolve?? Does it not answer.. Do a traceroute to the sites IP.. If its not resolving - you have dns related issue not a connectivity problem.

BTW -- that seems like a pretty ****ty response from your modem for response time.

This is from a VM running on machine connected to the modem through a router - and still like 1/3 the reponse time to modem that your seeing.

--- 192.168.100.1 ping statistics ---

18 packets transmitted, 18 received, 0% packet loss, time 17018ms

rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.730/0.868/1.153/0.111 ms

But those pings are pretty much useless, unless they are during when your saying your having the issue?

[rednekcowboy]

Hey Budman,

Not trying to offend you or anything as I am pretty much network handicapped when it comes to this kind of thing, but if it was DNS related wouldn't he have to ping yahoo and google by IP?

That being said, wouldn't the fact that he is pinging them by name say that it is not a dns issue otherwise he would get no response at all??

Like I said, I'm not much good at networking, so am just asking.

[+BudMan MVC]

Well if he was having the issue at the time when he did the pings then yeah your right.. But its also possible he had those records cached from before he had the problem. If it was dns related.

Just because you can ping a host name does not mean dns is currently working.. Your machine will keep it cached, your router could be caching it, etc. So some sites will work that you have cached, but parts of it might not if on another host, say images.somedomain.net for example vs www.somedomain.net -- depending the TTL of the records, etc.

Just look at your local cache and you will see the TTL of the records.

www.neowin.net

----------------------------------------

Record Name . . . . . : www.neowin.net

Record Type . . . . . : 5

Time To Live . . . . : 292

Data Length . . . . . : 4

Section . . . . . . . : Answer

CNAME Record . . . . : neowin.net

www.neowin.net

---------------------------------------

Record Name . . . . . : www.neowin.net

Record Type . . . . . : 5

Time To Live . . . . : 273

Data Length . . . . . : 4

Section . . . . . . . : Answer

CNAME Record . . . . : neowin.net

If DNS does not answer fast enough, then it can be cached as bad - and now you have to wait for the timeout before the machine will even query dns for it again..

Again just because you can resolve a hostname does not mean your not having dns related problems. Quite often they show up with taking a long time for pages to load, or some pages work, others do not, etc. Because it answer one time, but not the next, etc. But once you have the record cached local you will not have to query dns again until the ttl expires.

BTW no offense taken your question was actually a very good one!! Which sometimes can be very rare around here ;)

Edited November 9, 2009 by BudMan