How fast?
Jeff W. Boote
boote at bierstadt.scd.ucar.edu
Fri Sep 7 04:56:56 AEST 1990
From: boote at iron_nipple.scd.ucar.edu (Jeff W. Boote)
Path: iron_nipple.scd.ucar.edu!boote
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: How fast?
Expires:
References:
Sender:
Reply-To: boote at ncar.ucar.edu (Jeff W. Boote)
Followup-To:
Distribution: world
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Keywords: ping
I got some really interesting results when pinging a 6000 at it self:
<sunset:/u/boote[31]> ping sunset
<PING sunset: (128.117.8.71): 56 data bytes
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=0. time=-3. ms
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=1. time=1. ms
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=2. time=1. ms
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=3. time=1. ms
<^C
<----sunset PING Statistics----
<4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss
<round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = -3/0/1
While the idea of a machine that can average 0ms is appealing it doesn't
hardly seem possible. Notice it took -3ms for the first packet. Has
anyone else seen this? It's not a real big deal but it makes you wonder
what other bugs are just waiting to show themselves.
Jeff W. Boote
NCAR/SCD
boote at ncar.ucar.edu
From: boote at iron_nipple.scd.ucar.edu (Jeff W. Boote)
Path: iron_nipple.scd.ucar.edu!boote
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: How fast?
Expires:
References:
Sender:
Reply-To: boote at ncar.ucar.edu (Jeff W. Boote)
Followup-To:
Distribution: world
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Keywords: ping
I got some really interesting results when pinging a 6000 at it self:
<sunset:/u/boote[31]> ping sunset
<PING sunset: (128.117.8.71): 56 data bytes
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=0. time=-3. ms
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=1. time=1. ms
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=2. time=1. ms
<64 bytes from 128.117.8.71: icmp_seq=3. time=1. ms
<^C
<----sunset PING Statistics----
<4 packets transmitted, 4 packets received, 0% packet loss
<round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = -3/0/1
While the idea of a machine that can average 0ms is appealing it doesn't
hardly seem possible. Notice it took -3ms for the first packet. Has
anyone else seen this? It's not a real big deal but it makes you wonder
what other bugs are just waiting to show themselves.
Jeff W. Boote
NCAR/SCD
boote at ncar.ucar.edu
More information about the Comp.unix.aix
mailing list