Re: 8-10% packet error/loss is normal wired network?

[Flako <subforos () gmail com>]

Hello Jim
Counting only "tcp.analysis.retransmission" I'm from 0.95% to 1.21%, a
value more
enjoyable. :)

I think it's despicable for further research .. but I get the question if
this value is normal :)
In a wireless link, a loss of 1% is acceptable, but in a network cableda?

Something strange I have in the network, because making you ping ip of the
printer, lost packets (8 of 10 330). A value despreciale but should not
happen.




2012/7/10 Jim () agdatasystems com <Jim () agdatasystems com>

> No, 8 to 10% is not normal, but your display filter is grossly
> over-counting the packet loss. To start with, by showing both the packet
> with the "previous segment lost" message and also the retransmission,
> you're counting each lost packet twice. And then, a single lost packet
> requires at least three duplicate ACKs before a fast retransmission is
> generated.
>
> Try filtering on retransmissions only. This will give you a more accurate
> count of lost packets. By the way, tcp.analysis.retransmission includes
> fast retransmissions, so you don't have to include
> tcp.analysis.fast_retransmission as a separate display filter condition.
>
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Flako" <subforos () gmail com>
> To: <wireshark-users () wireshark org>
> Subject: [Wireshark-users] 8-10% packet error/loss is normal wired network?
> Date: Tue, Jul 10, 2012 6:04 AM
>
>
> Hello
>      I am analyzing the network with wireshark :) and found 8-10% of lost
> packets (filter: malformed | | tcp.analysis.lost_segment | |
> tcp.analysis.retransmission | | tcp.analysis.fast_retransmission | |
> tcp.analysis.duplicate_ack ) between various Linux desktop and an HP 2420n
> (network printer)
>
>      The printer is connected to switch A (100Mbit) and dektop are
> connected to the switch B (1Gbit), where A and B swich are interconnected.
>      The printer was replaced (otherwise error) and the new printer keeps
> happening the same.
>      I can only see wiring issues.
>
>      On if my question is if this% is "normal" (hard word) in a wired
> network scheme (it seems to me much)
>      Is there any way to look at something else, to know that it also
> occurs to a statistic on the filter showing up?
>
>
>    Thanks for reading. and sorry for using google translate.
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users () wireshark org>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
>              mailto:wireshark-users-request () wireshark org
> ?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users
             mailto:wireshark-users-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe