Re: Linux still surfs slower than Windows

From: Chris Carlen (crcarle_at_BOGUS.sandia.gov)
Date: 02/21/05 

Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:01:09 -0800

Shadow_7 wrote:
> I seemed to have missed the original post. But there are some latency
> issues on slow connections because MTU defaults to 1500 byte packets in
> linux and more like 256/552 on windows. This results in faster queing of
> packets, but more overhead on downloads for windows. Keep in mind that 40
> bytes of these packets are tcp/ip header information. Although probably
> only an issue on 56K type connections these days.
>
> If your issue is dns, you can verify or at least work around it by
> accessing the page by it's IP. Or putting it's <IP> <hostname(s)> in your
> /etc/hosts file. If this cures the problem, you can be pretty sure it's a
> dns issue. Just bear in mind that many popular sites distribute page
> content over several hostnames. Such as login.site images.site
> profile.site my.site and others just for one page of content. Which means
> you might be doing several DNS requests for one page.

Yes, that is why it is difficult to make comparisons on complex pages
between the two OSes.

Do you know if it is possible to use some tool to determine all of the
hosts that would be used to render a given web page? For instance, I
can do the command:

> host www.cnn.com

to find the IP of that page, but the other servers called upon when I
actually browse to www.cnn.com are not revealed by that single host lookup.

Is there some command or method by which I can enter a URL, and the tool
or method will spit out a list of ALL servers that need to be contacted
to obtain the data needed to completely render the page?

Thus, with that complete list I could put it into /etc/hosts and be able
to perform a true page rendering with direct IP address accesses (or
more precisely, locally resolved hostnames).

> Also the DNS IP's your ISP might have given you, may not be the ones
> windows is using. winipcfg or ipconfig /ALL on windows. cat
> /etc/resolv.conf in linux. If you're not using the same ones on both
> you're comparing apples to oranges. And there's always the IPv4 / IPv6
> thing. Not to mention DNS caching with bind/named, dns_masq, squid, ...

As I mentioned in the OP,

"The LAN hosts have static IPs on subnet 192.168.1.0 and statically
configured DNS server addresses set to the values shown by the router.
These DNS addresses are always the same: 63.203.35.55
and 206.13.28.12 ."

"The Windows host also has a static IP and manually configured DNS
servers. Also, there is a Win2k VMware machine on each Linux box with
bridged networking and static IP and DNS configurations. "

So I am confident the Windows boxes, both real and virtual are
configured the same. Unless there is any possiblity that Windows can
somehow change its "running" DNS configuration despite being hand
configured with manual DNS server IPs? I doubt even Windows could be
this bonkers. To do so it would seem to require that some special
software be running, such as software that the ISP would provide, but
which *we are not using* because the Win boxes are on a LAN behind a
router, not connected directly to the ISP.

Nonetheless, I will be interested in checking to make sure that the Win
boxes are truly using the DNS config I manually provided. So I will
check this.

Ah, indeed I see no tricky business goes on. When manual DNS servers
are specified, then C:>ipconfig /all in Win2k reveals that those are the
DNS servers actually being used.

So it is confirmed that the Win and Linux machines are using the same DNSes.

Good day! 

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________
Christopher R. Carlen
Principal Laser/Optical Technologist
Sandia National Laboratories CA USA
crcarle@sandia.gov -- NOTE: Remove "BOGUS" from email address to reply.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Group Policy and performance during logon procces from client
    ... Note that there are some problems regarding to the use of FW in the Windows XP machine, make sure that the FW are configured correctly with GPO. ... Assuming DNS AD Integrated Zone ... Do not place the ISP DNS server or any other DNS on the client or DNS Server NIC properties, ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • RE: In-place upgrade to AD 2003
    ... point to itself as the primary DNS server. ... During the upgrade, name the internal DNS name different from Public DNS ... When you set up a new Windows 2003 DC and transfer the FSMO roles, ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.migration)
  • Re: DNS cache poisoning?
    ... Windows DNS and thanks to numerous others for reporting. ... On Windows 2000 SP3 and above, the DNS server DOES protect against DNS ... BIND4 and BIND8 forwarders will not filter the cache poisoning attack to ...
    (Incidents)
  • RE: ADMT Migration Error
    ... incorrect DNS settings in the TCP/IP settings. ... sure that the client computers in Windows NT domain use the Windows 2003 ... domain DNS server as the preferred DNS server and can resolve the Windows ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.migration)
  • Re: Upgrading from Windows NT4 Domain to Windows 2003 Domain.
    ... If DNS isn't configured already then how are you doing the DNS ... address of the box that you're upgrading. ... >Upgrade to Windows 2003 Domain the clients will still continue to use Static ... >> As for workstation configurations you can use DHCP scopes to make them ...
    (microsoft.public.exchange.misc)