<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Kristof Provost <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kristof@sigsegv.be" target="_blank">kristof@sigsegv.be</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 2013-10-28 17:32:43 (+0530), Robert Clove <<a href="mailto:cloverobert@gmail.com" target="_blank">cloverobert@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Kind of Packets :- *UDP*<br>
> How are you generating them? :-* Packeth (<br>
> <a href="http://packeth.sourceforge.net/packeth/Home.html)*" target="_blank">http://packeth.sourceforge.net/packeth/Home.html)*</a><br>
> kernel version : uname -r - *2.6.32-358.18.1.el6.x86_64<br>
> *<br>
> Are you *SURE* you're sending 1000? - *ya checked through packeth status<br>
> bar and also through ifconfig command*<br>
<div>> I have connected them through LAN cable (cat 6) back to back.<br>
><br>
> Changed cable but no use.<br>
> What should i do?<br>
><br>
</div>Break down the problem. Get that smart switch to tell you if the packets<br>
are lost by the sender of the receiver.<br>
<br>
Test if it's bidirectional (i.e. does it still happen if the switch the<br>
sender and receiver)?<br>
<br>
Does it still happen if you send only 100 packets? Do you still lose 30%<br>
then, or do you lose more or less?<br>
<br>
Perhaps try a kernel that isn't nearly five years old too.<br>
<br>
Also, don't top-post.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Kristof<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra">Hey Sir,<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I just want to know are there any driver or kernel parameters that we can adjust to get the better packet capture?<br>
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Thanks<br></div></div>
</div><br></div>