Although we now know that it's a problem with TT's ISP, this bring up an
interesting subject...
There's been much discussion in the past year about the "MaxMTU" TCP/IP
registry entry in Win95 (and in WinNT). If I remember right, info on
MaxMTU and other TCP/IP related Win95 registry keys was released by MS
last April on their Knowledge Base. It looks like they updated the
article on 2/11/98 to include new keys used in Win98. The article
number is Q158474, if you want to look it up on the Knowledge Base.
Basically, the MaxMTU defines the maximum packet size Win95 uses for
TCP/IP. The internet "standard" is 576, but some servers or routers may
use larger values. This may cause delays because larger packets will
have to be broken up into smaller packets to fit the MaxMTU of any
particuar router (and/or vice versa) along the way. This can make a
website seem "slow", even "dead", and it's more noticable on dial-up
connections when using a modem.
I've run across some websites were I couldn't even get past the "waiting
for reply" message in the status box of my browser (Netscape).
Strangely enough, one of these sites was...Netscape. Another was 3COM.
I always thought the sites were just endlessly busy...couldn't be
anything on my end here at work because we're spoiled with dual-T1's in
and a T3's out. But, last June, we discovered article Q158474. Soon
after, trade magazines and websites started proclaiming "get higher
throughput, guaranteed by tweaking your registry", but this involved
manually editing the registry with REGEDIT...not something the weary
should do.
Then came along a GREAT freeware utility called "MTUSpeed". MTUSpeed
not only allowed you to easily tweak the MaxMTU, but also allowed you to
optimize most TCP/IP related settings in the registry. I tried it on my
work system and after rebooting, I was able to get to the sites I was
not able to reach before. And, as "promised", Internet throughput
seemed faster. Over the past year, we've played with various settings
and have decided that 1152 (2 x 576) works best for us on our LAN/WAN.
576 increases traffic because of the smaller packet size, and the next
multiple of 576 is larger than the largest physical Ethernet packet
size. It's primarily Token-Ring around here, so a larger MTU size would
have reduced traffic even more (max packet of 4736), but we're moving
towards E-net, so 1152 was it. It's made a world of difference around
here...no more clients complaining of not being able to reach a specific
webpage.
The MTUSpeed utilility can be found at http://www.mjs.u-net.com. Click
on the "Upgrade" link. Faqs and links related to MTU and other TCP
related keys can also be found on this page.
Sorry for bandwidth, but it seemes appropriate right now. I have no
affiliation with MTUSpeed besides being a satisfied user. MTUSpeed is
"optionware", send $$$ only if you think it's worth it.
73,
- Aaron Hsu, KD6DAE
athsu@unistudios.com
dae@pacbell.net
- Aaron Hsu
Sr. Configuration Analyst
I.T. Support Services
Universal Studios Information Technology Group
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|