|
|
|
@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ Some details about echoping
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
echoping is a debugging tool. It is not a "end user" tool. For
|
|
|
|
|
instance, HTTP testing takes host names, not URLs as parameters (if
|
|
|
|
|
you want to test in a more HTTPish way, use wget). Also, when
|
|
|
|
|
you want to test in a more HTTPish way, use wget or curl). Also, when
|
|
|
|
|
connecting to a server which has both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses,
|
|
|
|
|
echoping does not try every address in turn like most user-oriented
|
|
|
|
|
programs do. If you want to test only the IPv4 address, use the
|
|
|
|
@ -11,13 +11,13 @@ address, not the host name (or use the -4 option).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
echo service:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
echoping assumes the remote host accepts such connections. Experience
|
|
|
|
|
show that most Internet routers do and many hosts also. However, some
|
|
|
|
|
Unices are not shipped with this service enabled and, anyway, the
|
|
|
|
|
administrator is always free to close it (I think they
|
|
|
|
|
shouldn't). echoping has therefore less chance to succeed than ping or
|
|
|
|
|
bing. (On a typical Unix box, "echo" service is configured in
|
|
|
|
|
/etc/inetd.conf but see the CERT advisory
|
|
|
|
|
echoping by default assumes the remote host accepts such
|
|
|
|
|
connections. Experience show that most Internet routers or hosts could
|
|
|
|
|
do it but do not by default. Most Unices are not shipped with this
|
|
|
|
|
service enabled and, anyway, the administrator is always free to close
|
|
|
|
|
it (I think they shouldn't). echoping has therefore less chance to
|
|
|
|
|
succeed than ping or bing. (On a typical Unix box, "echo" service is
|
|
|
|
|
configured in /etc/inetd.conf but see the CERT advisory
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-96.01.UDP_service_denial.html>.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What does it measure?
|
|
|
|
@ -49,12 +49,17 @@ To measure performances on the Internet you can also see:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unix:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- bing, a bandwidth measurement tool <ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/networking>
|
|
|
|
|
- bing, a bandwidth measurement tool
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.freenix.fr/freenix/logiciels/bing.html>
|
|
|
|
|
- patchchar or pchar <http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Software/pchar/>,
|
|
|
|
|
a bandwidth measurement tool
|
|
|
|
|
- ping, probably available with your system
|
|
|
|
|
- traceroute, idem (otherwise, see <ftp://ftp.ee.lbl.gov/>)
|
|
|
|
|
- ttcp, the best measurement tool but it needs some control over the
|
|
|
|
|
two machines <ftp://ftp.arl.mil/pub/ttcp> (nothing to do with
|
|
|
|
|
the T/TCP protocol)
|
|
|
|
|
- Netpipe, it needs some control over the
|
|
|
|
|
two machines <ftp://ftp.scl.ameslab.gov/pub/netpipe/>
|
|
|
|
|
- treno (evaluates available bandwidth for TCP)
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.psc.edu/~pscnoc/treno_info.html>
|
|
|
|
|
- spray is a tool which I dont't know very well. It is available on some
|
|
|
|
@ -71,11 +76,12 @@ I've also heard of but never tried:
|
|
|
|
|
Macintosh:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- TCP Watcher, a very nice "swiss-army knife" tool, to test ping, DNS, echo.
|
|
|
|
|
It includes an echo server. Available on Info-Mac in "comm/tcp".
|
|
|
|
|
It includes an echo server. Available on Info-Mac in "comm/inet".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MS-Windows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(I have little knowledge of that environment and I tested nothing.)
|
|
|
|
|
(I have little knowledge of that environment and I tested nothing. The
|
|
|
|
|
references here are quite old and should be checked.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- WSNUTIL. Seems to be an echo client and server.
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.ccs.org/winsock/xref-e.html#echo_clients>
|
|
|
|
@ -92,14 +98,17 @@ Panel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Web clients:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- You can ping or traceroute on the Web. See
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.freenix.org/cgi-bin/traceroute.iphtml>,
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.tracert.com/> or
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.fr.net/internet/trace.html>.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- You can ping or traceroute on the Web. See
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.traceroute.org/>.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Use all of them with care, the result is not obvious to interpret.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you are interested in Internet measurements, there is an Internet
|
|
|
|
|
Engineering Task Force Working Group, IPPM (IP Performance Metrics)
|
|
|
|
|
which produces many fine RFC that are really good to read. See
|
|
|
|
|
<http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ippm-charter.html> for a full
|
|
|
|
|
list. I appreciate RFC 2330 and 3148.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And don't forget to read RFC 1470 ("Tools for Monitoring and Debugging
|
|
|
|
|
TCP/IP Internets and Interconnected Devices"), specially its
|
|
|
|
|
"Benchmark" section and the W. Richard Stevens' books (all of them),
|
|
|
|
|