Hi, Chris!
Thanks - I am not even using VNC as I gave up after the network went down
yesterday... it seemed to work fine before that happened, but it seemed
really slow, so I gave up (now I think it was because the network was so
slow, not because of VNC, so I wil go back to it at some point).
I am simply ssh-ing into blast05 for now, and it seems the network has
somewhat recovered... I only asked in case somebody knew (or was doing)
anything...
Thanks again,
Adrian
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Chris Crawford wrote:
> Hi Adrian,
> It could be that the memory on blast05 is full and it is constantly swapping
> back and forth. Maybe talk with Chi about how to move your VNC x-server to
> one of the buds using the -via tunnelling option.
> --Chris
>
> Adrian T Sindile wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>> Any idea why the connection is so shaky lately? It seems extremely slow and
>> when checking (by ping) I get at least 25% packet loss:
>>
>> <adrian@veksler> ping blast05.lns.mit.edu
>> PING blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110) 56(84) bytes of data.
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=0 ttl=246
>> time=276 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=1 ttl=246
>> time=260 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=3 ttl=246
>> time=261 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=4 ttl=246
>> time=249 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=5 ttl=246
>> time=322 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=7 ttl=246
>> time=226 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=8 ttl=246
>> time=98.6 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=10 ttl=246
>> time=251 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=11 ttl=246
>> time=221 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=13 ttl=246
>> time=260 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=14 ttl=246
>> time=221 ms
>>
>> --- blast05.lns.mit.edu ping statistics ---
>> 15 packets transmitted, 11 received, 26% packet loss, time 14007ms
>> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 98.686/240.905/322.410/52.609 ms, pipe 2
>> <adrian@veksler> ping blast05.lns.mit.edu
>> PING blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110) 56(84) bytes of data.
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=1 ttl=246
>> time=264 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=2 ttl=246
>> time=262 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=4 ttl=246
>> time=203 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=5 ttl=246
>> time=112 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=6 ttl=246
>> time=217 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=7 ttl=246
>> time=229 ms
>> 64 bytes from blast05.lns.mit.edu (198.125.163.110): icmp_seq=9 ttl=246
>> time=235 ms
>>
>> --- blast05.lns.mit.edu ping statistics ---
>> 10 packets transmitted, 7 received, 30% packet loss, time 9000ms
>> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 112.721/217.853/264.103/47.584 ms, pipe 2
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Adrian T Sindile wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>> Is there any work being done on blast05? I can ping it, but my connection
>>> froze and I cannot ssh into it anymore (neither can Pete from here at
>>> UNH)...
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Adrian
>>>
>>> -------------------------------
>>> Adrian Sindile
>>> Research Assistant
>>> Nuclear Physics Group
>>> University of New Hampshire
>>> phone: (603)862-1217
>>> FAX: (603)862-2998
>>> email: asindile@unh.edu
>>> http://einstein.unh.edu/~adrian/
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--------------------------------- Adrian Sindile Research Assistant Nuclear Physics Group University of New Hampshire phone: (603)862-1217 FAX: (603)862-2998 email: asindile@unh.edu http://einstein.unh.edu/~adrian/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:32 EST