Re: Ping do WP - Grupy dyskusyjne w eGospodarka.pl

eGospodarka.pl › Grupy › pl.internet.polip › Ping do WP › Re: Ping do WP

Path: news-archive.icm.edu.pl!news2.icm.edu.pl!not-for-mail
From: kriZb <k...@n...no>
Newsgroups: pl.internet.polip
Subject: Re: Ping do WP
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 23:13:30 +0100
Organization: http://news.icm.edu.pl/
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <hcnlit$779$1@achot.icm.edu.pl>
References: <8...@w...net> <hcngi7$kcv$1@news.task.gda.pl>
<m...@m...lodz.pl>
Reply-To: k...@n...no
NNTP-Posting-Host: 91-204-154-111.x-com.pl
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: achot.icm.edu.pl 1257200029 7401 91.204.154.111 (2 Nov 2009 22:13:49 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: a...@i...edu.pl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:13:49 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
In-Reply-To: <m...@m...lodz.pl>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Xref: news-archive.icm.edu.pl pl.internet.polip:90617
[ ukryj nagłówki ]
Łukasz napisał(a), dnia pięknego 2009-11-02 22:12:
> K pisze:
>> Lukasz Olesiejuk pisze:
>>
>>> Witam,
>>> Ktorys raz z kolei u nas sie to powtarza, macie to samo?
>>>
>>> Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev
>>> 1. 83.142.222.161 0.0% 3 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.1
>>> 2. WP.plix.pl 0.0% 3 415.4 488.0 415.4 540.8 65.1
>>> 3. do-r4.rtrd1.adm.wp-sa.pl 0.0% 3 425.0 420.7 413.7 425.0 6.2
>>> 4. www.wp.pl 0.0% 3 424.6 421.7 418.8 424.6 4.1
>>>
>>> Pozdrawiam,
>>>
>>
>> najsmieszniejsze jest to, ze z atmana przez ac-x:
>>
>> HOST: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst
>> StDev
>> 2. wp.ac-x.pl 0.0% 10 349.8 337.6 324.2
>> 349.8 9.3
>> 3. do-r2.rtrd1.adm.wp-sa.pl 0.0% 10 331.7 336.6 329.5
>> 352.3 6.9
>> 4. www.wp.pl 10.0% 10 331.3 341.7 330.4
>> 360.5 10.1
>>
>>
>> przez netie via atman (ac-x):
>>
>> HOST: xx.xxx.xx.xx Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst
>> StDev
>> 2. StarH001RT01.inetia.pl 10.0% 10 2.9 6.6 2.6
>> 37.1 11.4
>> 3. StarH001RT03-StarH001RT06.in 0.0% 10 4.2 7.5 3.8
>> 36.6 10.2
>> 4. StarH001rt06-ToruH001rt05.in 0.0% 10 13.5 14.2 12.5
>> 15.5 1.0
>> 5. ToruH001rt05-WarsC001rt06.in 0.0% 10 11.0 11.1 10.6
>> 11.7 0.4
>> 6. ??? 100.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0
>> 0.0 0.0
>> 7. WarsH002RT22-WarsB010RT06.in 0.0% 10 15.3 15.0 12.6
>> 16.4 1.2
>> 8. m320-pl-4-1-0-800.atman.pl 0.0% 10 10.9 11.7 10.7
>> 13.8 1.0
>> 9. wp.ac-x.pl 0.0% 10 12.0 53.7 11.2
>> 160.1 60.8
>> 10. do-r2.rtrd1.adm.wp-sa.pl 0.0% 10 12.6 11.9 11.1
>> 12.6 0.4
>> 11. www.wp.pl 0.0% 10 11.7 12.4 11.6
>> 13.7 0.6
>>
>> z tasku:
>>
>> HOST: xx.xx.xx Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst
>> StDev
>> 2. area1-jra.10ge.task.gda.pl 0.0% 10 0.9 1.0 0.7
>> 1.3 0.2
>> 3. wp-jra.task.gda.pl 0.0% 10 0.8 1.0 0.7
>> 1.4 0.2
>> 4. do-r2.rtrd1.adm.wp-sa.pl 0.0% 10 1.1 1.1 0.8
>> 1.3 0.2
>> 5. www.wp.pl 0.0% 10 1.2 1.4 1.0
>> 2.0 0.3
>>
>>
>
> via TKT
>
> ADDRESS STATUS
> 1 82-160-115-129.tktelekom.pl 1ms 1ms 1ms
> 2 pkp-jra.10ge.task.gda.pl 5ms 6ms 5ms
> 3 wp-jra.task.gda.pl 6ms 6ms 6ms
> 4 do-r2.rtrd1.adm.wp-sa.pl 5ms 6ms 6ms
> 5 www.wp.pl 6ms 6ms 6ms
>
> Lukas
>
>
Nie gadaj, bo 2h temu via TkTelekom->TASK wp.pl ICMP walil po 500ms'ow.
Teraz tez mam grosze msekund. via PLIX bylo to samo, przerzucone via
PLIX i walil po 400, wiec co za roznica 500 vv 400? Wirtualna Polka
zabila swoje gniazdko, albo ruscy pakuja ddosem. Whateva'; jes niefajnie ;)