It depends on the type of connection, really. PPPoE needs an MTU of 1492 (standard value), while PPPoA 1500. Packet fragmentation issues generally lead to performance decrease, but in most cases this decrease can be barely noticeable since network appliances (including nics or OSes handling nics) generally do a good job at reassembling packets. For sure it's some added strain, however, that can be easily monitored with Wireshark (which does a good job at identifying packet fragmentation and reassembly).

If the BT Home Hub is half a serious router, it should give the possibility of adjusting MTU too. Generally this would be needed only to lower it down to 1492 if PPPoE is used, or if - for whatever reason - the provider uses non-standard values. In Italy Tele+ needs some adjusting of this sort for some business users since they use a traffic shaping technique that needs lower MTU values.

So the BT dorks aren't using the correct term

Quote from Jakg :

Ok, so this second PC is now timing out ocassionly when pinging 192.168.1.254 (the home hub).

I had a Cable Tester in here and all of the wires worked, but i only tested it for about 30 seconds.

This is bloody wierd.

Hubs don't have IP addresses. Maybe you're not using the correct term.

A simple cable tester doesn't help, really. I doubt it's a cable problem, but unless you use a Time Domain Reflectometer you're not going to really see if the cables are fit for network traffic or not.

Whatever the network appliance having IP address 192.168.1.254 is, it shouldn't time out with pings unless there's a really heavy network traffic, or a nic jamming it (or, again, if it's faulty): it happened to me, for instance, when I used a single STP-FTP on a 3com Superstack 3300: all the network traffic slowed down to a crawl, even if all the other UTP cables were fine. The cable tester didn't complain about the cable.

I doubt you have a problem with cables, but if you test with pings some network appliance ensure you only have the testing pc connected. The simpler things are, the faster you'll recognise the faulty equipment. So, once you know something is good, write it off: experiment combinations later.

Also try to meter your network , you may have a nic generating extremely high traffic.

Last edited by Albieg, Mon 24 Sep 2007, 11:24.

for basic diagnostic, use nslookup, tracert and ping.
To rule out dns problems, have nslookup resolve www.google.com to an address and then try pinging the address, both numeric and alphabetic. When the problem comes again, do the same thing.
Again, TCPView can give you some hints. Wireshark is optimal to understand if and where there's a trouble.
Check points of passage one at a time. When you have the problem, does the router respond? Does the gateway assigned to the router respond? Does an external host respond? Try to identify correctly the point of failure first.
Anyway, if you use ping as a basic diag instrument, remember that not all hosts respond to ping or ICMP messages in general.
Try also pingplotter, it could help.

I've had acceptable results with Panorama Maker, but you really need good sources. Anyway the Tips and Tricks section for Panorama Maker can give some good hints.

Edit: Don, excellent job! I see hugin official pages also have a lot of tutorials. I suppose they are a good place for a start.

Last edited by Albieg, Sat 22 Sep 2007, 18:55.

I've been watching this thread for a few days, unable to make up my mind. How to perform such tasks is common knowledge and I would help you if you had legitimate reasons, but I can't see anyone really good at the moment. The fact that it would be you (and not me) to have complete responsibility for an action that you may do doesn't help.

I'd leave the computer as is, in this case. You may not like the idea but I don't have any good reason to question your father's authority or to suggest a complete solution to your "problem".

Anyway suggesting to change passwords is a bad idea. There are methods that don't involve password changing and that leave no obvious traces because you can undo them all. How to perform such an easy task is a complete different matter that won't be discussed in this thread, at least by me.

Quote from xaotik :

LFS in particular is amazing at doing just this without busting my balls in the process via horrendously long loading times and a clunky interface.

The reason above is perfectly valid for me too. Maybe someone thinks that appreciating a neat piece of software or hardware is more stupid than appreciating a car. But there will always be someone who judges the world exclusively by his own meter because he's unable to evaluate simple differences between human beings.

Is it so difficult to accept that a race sim can be appreciated from different points of view and for reasons that may be different from "I'm frustrated because I cannot be a race driver so I'm a sim race driver?"

Once again the answer is obvious, except for those who feel horrendously deprived of some opportunity.

Quote from xaotik :

And for those who like them for what they are.

Exactly. LFS, as most (good) sims, attracts a very wide range of persons.
I mean, such a sim could be appreciated also by computer geeks who rarely give a damn about checking the oil level of their cars.

There's nothing wrong in appreciating a neat piece of software that has so many qualities in it, without missing real life racing. LFS is a simulator, but that doesn't mean 'replacement' for me. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that I might want to be something different than a race car driver in my life?

Last edited by Albieg, Sat 22 Sep 2007, 00:39.

When I read the thread title I said "Oh no not again". I guess I'm not alone.

Excellent poster for a less than excellent movie.

I played samorost 1 when it came out (being a flabber.nl addict helps), and up to date is one of the best web efforts I've ever seen for a flash game, along with the excellent Submachine series, but the design is far better. Eastern Europe cartoonists rule.

Is it this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6dwe_4YPrw

What did you do wrong... let's see. Information were way too generic and the topic title really sucks.

Steps for a research:

Identify the song: put "rocky I hate to say" as Google research. Identify the song as Rocky by Dog Eat Dog. Open Youtube, search with "rally dog eat dog". Otherwise search for "rally crashes" if the video isn't the one you want.

Yes, I can see his point. I just had to read the piece of news:

She gave Peres a volume of "The Book of Splendor," the guiding text of Kabbalah, inscribed "To Shimon Peres, the man I admire and love, Madonna," the Yediot Ahronot daily reported.

Although my point of view - for both obvious and subtle reasons - can't be sympathetic to the comment you're quoting, I can easily understand the reasons underlying, and agree to a certain extent. But don't believe the rest of the world is lucky, you'll see the same stuff almost everywhere.

Edited out an interpretation that's possibly wrong. No, not possibly wrong, completely wrong

Once Aphex Twin was asked by Madonna, whose better quality is as a businesswoman, to remix a song. He asked he would do it only if Madonna agreed to sound like a pig in that song. Madonna didn't reply, and she didn't have her remix.

Last edited by Albieg, Tue 18 Sep 2007, 12:30.

The issue is probably related to graphic adapter drivers. Identify your VGA, search the forum to see if you find additional info and try another set of drivers.

I'd also open my PC and see if there are problems with the VGA chipset fans.

That's because when you connect to the other servers you have an outgoing connection which are generally always authorised in firewall/router default setups, while in this case you are accepting incoming connections.

The incoming connections, if you use a router, have to be explicitly defined because of NAT issues, but there's more, of course, depending on your setup. Refer to the excellent sticky post by the angry angel for additional information, you'll find most of the stuff about how to run an LFS server there.

They've sniffed too much glue, not petrol.

Edit: and that's not lighthearted, it's just clueless.

Last edited by Albieg, Tue 18 Sep 2007, 12:34.

From what I understand visiting the site, this could be a download service offering more than 800 million games online... 800 millions?

Anyway you would probably end up with the demo version of LFS. I wouldn't say it's illegal if you pay for a (needless) download service, but both the advertisement and the homepage are dodgy since there's no significant additional info about the offer. You're left in the dark until you submit your email address (which, for the record, I won't do) .

Stay away.

Quote from xaotik :

The T1 thing mentioned above (if you're curious) and Kubica's performance are worth watching really, mostly the latter - he provided the only show.

It was a good performance from a talented and fair racer.
Kubica has the added advantage to be at the moment one of the few likeable drivers in F1: he's not arrogant, he's not secretive and he likes speaking clearly, at least in Italian. His interviews are insightful because he tells things just how he sees them. Unfortunately this is a rare quality.

Quote from StewartFisher :

Well, I don't know enough about IP law to say whether it's legal to receive free information from an employee.

It's extremely simple, or better, it is obvious. If those information are protected (that's why we call such things intellectual property) you're not allowed to use them as you like. This right can only be held by the owner of the property, and in this case it's not McLaren, it's not Stepney. It's Ferrari. Those information are far from being free.

And again, if someone steals your car because you left your keys in it you're not responsible for the theft. It's always the thief who's criminally responsible. Your insurance could have something to say, but not a judge.

Last edited by Albieg, Sun 16 Sep 2007, 18:11. Reason : mistakes.

No matter how you see it, Dennis handed what happened in a disastrous way. And he has (at least) three rogue employees, and those were in charge of:

- developing a car
- testing a car
- driving a car.

Yes, he must have been really taken off guard since he was asleep. Or lying. Choose the answer you like best.

Yes, Mosley is clearly at unease (but not angry or annoyed) when the BBC reporter asks him about driver points not being taken away because he would have stripped them. All the lawyers in the council thought the same thing. But the outcome of the vote went in the opposite direction, and since that vote counts, driver points were not stripped.

Quote from StewartFisher :

No, I specifically mentioned that if pressure had been put on Stepney to provide the information (or financial reward), then it would be wrong.

And since there was no pressure on Stepney it should be right?
If I stole the source code of the company I work for and gave it to the chief developer of another company I'd be guilty of intellectual property violations, and the other company would be guilty too. I'd just be fired and prosecuted, with perfectly good reasons. And I'd be convicted, no matter if I saw any money or if I was pressured.

Things just work this way.

Edit: and no, Ferrari isn't at fault. Not even slightly. This unauthorised flow of information went from Ferrari to McLaren, so Ferrari has been damaged while not being guilty of any wrongdoing. Such things shouldn't be even discussed, or mentioned. They are obvious for me and they are obvious for lawyers and judges.

Last edited by Albieg, Sun 16 Sep 2007, 17:12.

Quote from ajp71 :

Driving opponents off and parking on the track - well a certain Ferrari driver did that occasionally, look at the vids to decide if you want to side with him.

I don't side with anyone, and certainly not with Schumacher. But it seems that a lot of people are completely unable to cope with the seriousness of what McLaren did, so they minimise it, imagine conspiracies, point the finger somewhere else and even insult opposing teams and supporters (I'm talking generally, not referring to one particular McLaren supporter or to you).

I don't like team orders and cheating, everything should be punished, but there's a lot of difference between the things you mention and what McLaren did, otherwise the sponsors wouldn't talk about revisiting contracts and there wouldn't be all this fuss. It's another matter of fact. McLaren supporters and Ferrari haters may feel hurt, but they choose the wrong targets in my opinion: they should blame McLaren, not the rest of the world. Or, at least, they should blame the guilty people inside McLaren, and - again - these people are important in McLaren. No minimising or finger pointing could convince me that what McLaren did was right, and I'm not talking as a current or former Ferrari supporter.

Edit: There's an interesting 10 minutes interview with Mosley on BBC. He quickly and efficiently recollects what happened, then gives his opinion on the judgement. It seems an honest interview.

Last edited by Albieg, Sun 16 Sep 2007, 08:43.

Quote from StewartFisher :

Can anybody tell me what's wrong with what McLaren did?

Just reverse the facts: imagine that what McLaren did was done by Ferrari and everything will be instantly clear, and extremely serious.

Glad to know your PC is working again as it should.

As I said, if nothing has changed in your PC this could be tracked to a lot of stuff... But something WAS changed in your PC, isn't it?