*** Please 'vote' only if you have/have had dedicated servers or ran private servers.

Hello,

I've had a server for a while now on a small line (256kbps only - but that was all we needed). While it wasn't that fast compared to the dedicated servers that can be found everywhere, it often seems to me that it's faster than what I've got actually, mostly due I think to a packet loss problem I have now on my server that can't seem to be fixed.

So I'm wondering... what would you all accept as a reasonable level of packet loss? Maybe I'm expecting too much from my current dedicated :confused:..

Thanks

There shouldn't be any packet loss - never.Ugh... Typical WHT response. (Cringes) :D

I guess nobody understands that there actually is a such thing as acceptable packet loss.

Packet loss 9 times out of 10 implies an overloaded network or congestion, if the packet loss is occuring on the hosts network then I would deem that not acceptable. Yes it does happen ocasionally but the key word is ocasionally. Any long term signs of packet loss show improper planning for growth if the packet loss is related to an overloaded network.

On a solid multi-homed connection, unless something is wrong you should not be seeing much packet loss, especially over 1%. It also depends on how far packets are traveling, # of hops etc. as well.

-Brendan

This is under normal network conditions between us and VDI.

--- vdi.net ping statistics ---
122635 packets transmitted, 121014 packets received, 1% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/mdev = 7.350/9.987/123.411/2.503 ms

-Brendan

Originally posted by prime
*** Please 'vote' only if you have/have had dedicated servers or ran private servers.

Hello,

I've had a server for a while now on a small line (256kbps only - but that was all we needed). While it wasn't that fast compared to the dedicated servers that can be found everywhere, it often seems to me that it's faster than what I've got actually, mostly due I think to a packet loss problem I have now on my server that can't seem to be fixed.

So I'm wondering... what would you all accept as a reasonable level of packet loss? Maybe I'm expecting too much from my current dedicated :confused:..

Thanks

Prime,

If your server is capped at 256kbps, you will always have packet loss if the usage tries to exceed 256kbps. This is pure TCP, which tries to 'buffer' packets until they get through the pipe. But if the pipe can't handle the load, the packets can return a timeout. I would install MRTG on this box to see if the load often reaches 256kbps.

Carl

0%

Okay granted, packet loss may come up from time to time, but in that case it's acceptable as long as it's resolved within a reasonable time frame. Also bear in mind that your packet loss may be originating somewhere else.

Originally posted by Mango


Prime,

If your server is capped at 256kbps, you will always have packet loss if the usage tries to exceed 256kbps. This is pure TCP, which tries to 'buffer' packets until they get through the pipe. But if the pipe can't handle the load, the packets can return a timeout. I would install MRTG on this box to see if the load often reaches 256kbps.

Carl

It's my old server that's capped @ 256kbps, and that has no packet loss, while the new one is on a 100mbit link, has packet loss and ends up being slower than the 256kbps one.

The new server is about oh 10x better too... so it's not a server hardware issue.

where is this new server @ and on what bandwidth providers?

I'd say 1% is acceptable.

No packet loss is impossible. Losing a packet or two out of every thousand is quite normal. I'd say up to 1% is acceptable.