Cablenut - problem with settings

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Mon Jun 02, 2003 6:16 pm

With CableNut:
Downstream 477 Kbps (59.6 KB/sec) 515 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 155 Kbps (19.4 KB/sec) 167 Kbps (inc. overheads)

Without CableNut:
Downstream 477 Kbps (59.6 KB/sec) 515 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 247 Kbps (30.9 KB/sec) 266 Kbps (inc. overheads)

Tried several files e.g., XP DSL PPPoE 512 256.ccs but no real improvement.

Got 512k 256k ASDL PPPoa USB connection and used a variety of tweak tools and sites. Dial Up (RAS) MTU of 1430 (TTL 48) seems to work well instead of 1458 (UK BT ASDL recommendation). There's a game I play where server is in Italy so need to have some tolerance to packet loss/fragmentation but yet to fathom out best settings for it.

Any pointers would be appreciate. Ta.

mccoffee · Post by **mccoffee** » Mon Jun 02, 2003 6:41 pm

Take a tcip anyalzer cut and paste everything below ip information

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 2:44 am

TCP options string = 0204056e01010402
MTU = 1430
MTU is not fully optimized for broadband. Consider increasing your MTU to 1500 for better throughput.
MSS = 1390
MSS is not fully optimized for broadband (although it might work well for slower connections). Consider increasing your MTU value.

Default Receive Window (RWIN) = 13900
RWIN Scaling (RFC1323) = 0 bits
Unscaled Receive Window = 13900

RWIN is a multiple of MSS
Other values for RWIN that might work well with your current MTU/MSS:
511520 (MSS x 46 * scale factor of 8)
255760 (MSS x 46 * scale factor of 4)
127880 (MSS x 46 * scale factor of 2)
63940 (MSS x 46)
bandwidth * delay product:

Your RcvWindow limits you to: 556 kbps (69.5 KBytes/s) @ 200ms
Your RcvWindow limits you to: 222.4 kbps (27.8 KBytes/s) @ 500ms
Consider increasing your RWIN value to optimize TCP/IP for broadband.
MTU Discovery (RFC1191) = ON
Time to live left = 36 hops

TTL value is ok.
Timestamps (RFC1323) = OFF
Selective Acknowledgements (RFC2018) = ON
IP type of service field (RFC1349) = 00000000

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 2:52 am

dslreports:

Your Tweakable Settings:
Receive Window (RWIN): 13900
Window Scaling: off
Path MTU Discovery: ON
RFC1323 Window Scaling: OFF
RFC1323 Time Stamping: OFF
Selective Acks: ON
MSS requested: 1390
TTL:
(less any hops behind firewall)
54
TTL remaining: 36

Notes and recommendations:
RWIN is in range
Looking good

Example 146000 byte download
Actual data bytes sent: 146000
Actual data packets: 106
Max packet sent (MTU): 1430
Max packet recd (MTU): 1430
Retransmitted data packets: 0
sacks you sent: 0
pushed data pkts: 18
data transmit time: 2.412 secs
our max idletime: 195.8 ms
transfer rate: 47141 bytes/sec
transfer rate: 377 kbits/sec
This is not a speed test!
transfer efficiency: 100%

Notes and recommendations:
Good data stream (no/few rexmits)

ICMP (ping) check
Minimum ping: 92 ms
Maximum ping: 95 ms
Ping stability:
94 95 93 94 93 94 93 95 94 92

Notes and recommendations:
Looking good

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 7:48 am

First you need to set your MTU properly, it should be 1480. Try the following fix from Bob Carrick:

1) Download this file http://www.carricksolutions.com/XP_MTU.reg
2) Right click the file and choose "Merge"
3) Click "Yes"
4) Go to "Start" -> Click on "Run" -> Type in "Regedt32.exe" -> Click "OK"
5) Go to this Reg Key "[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\ SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\ Services\NdisWan\ Parameters\Protocols\0]"
6) Double click on "Protocol MTU"
7) Click on "Decimal" -> Enter your desired value (I.E.: Anything less then 1480.) Use 1480
8) Click "OK"
9) Done!

Once you set it properly use the following settings in CableNut:

DefaultReceiveWindow = 65536
DefaultSendWindow = 32768
DisableAddressSharing = 1
InitialLargeBufferCount = 200
InitialMediumBufferCount = 480
InitialSmallBufferCount = 640
LargeBufferSize = 819200
MaxFastTransmit = 64000
MediumBufferSize = 150400
PriorityBoost = 0
SmallBufferSize = 12800
TransmitWorker = 32
FastSendDatagramThreshold = 1024
EnableFastRouteLookup = 1
EnablePMTUDiscovery = 1
IgnorePushBitsOnReceive = 0
GlobalMaxTcpWindowSize = 17520 or 32120
MaxFreeTcbs = 8000
MaxHashTableSize = 16384
MaxNormLookupMemory = 5000000
SackOpts = 1
SynAttackProtect = 1
Tcp1323Opts = 0
TcpLogLevel = 1
TcpMaxDupAcks = 3
TcpMaxHalfOpen = 100
TcpMaxHalfRetried = 80
TcpRecvSegmentSize = 1440
TcpSendSegmentSize = 1440
TcpTimedWaitDelay = 30
TcpUseRFC1122UrgentPointer = 0
TcpWindowSize = 17520 or 32120
MaxConnectionsPer1_0Server = 10
MaxConnectionsPerServer = 8
DefaultTTL = 64
DisableUserTOSSetting = 0
TcpMaxDataRetransmissions = 6
DefaultTOSValue = 90

VERY IMPORTANT TO DO THE FOLLOWING

1. Under your LAN connection - properties - general tab, uninstall all the protocols there that you do not need.

2. Open IE and select tools - internet options - connections - LAN settings, make sure NOTHING there is checked.

3. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your NIC from the manufacturer. Set your NIC duplex mode to 10mb half duplex for Cable, for DSL it is ISP dependent unless you are using a router, if so then set it to 100mb full duplex for both Cable & DSL (the instructions are in my Help & Tips link). If you are using a router make sure you have the latest firmware.

4. Clear your temporary internet files.

5. Power cycle your modem, unplug it for atleast 15 seconds.

6. Download and update then do a scan with SpyBot 1.2 & Ad Aware 6.0 to remove any spyware then install and update SpywareBlaster 2.5.3 to stay spyware FREE. YOU MUST USE BOTH AD AWARE & SPYBOT TO ENSURE YOU ARE SPYWARE FREE SINCE ONE FINDS WHAT THE OTHER MISSES.

7. Make sure you do the faster web page tweak in my Help & Tips link.

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:27 pm

Did the changes but ...

Downstream 445 Kbps (55.6 KB/sec) 480 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 158 Kbps (19.8 KB/sec) 170 Kbps (inc. overheads)

TCP options string = 020405a001010402
MTU = 1480
MTU is optimized for Windows XP PPoE DSL broadband. If not, consider raising MTU to 1500 for optimal throughput.
MSS = 1440
MSS is optimized for Windows XP PPPoE DSL broadband. If not, consider raising MTU to 1500 for maximum throughput.

Default Receive Window (RWIN) = 17520
RWIN Scaling (RFC1323) = 0 bits
Unscaled Receive Window = 17520

For optimum performance, consider changing RWIN to a multiple of MSS.
Other values for RWIN that might work well with your current MTU/MSS:
506880 (MSS x 44 * scale factor of 8)
253440 (MSS x 44 * scale factor of 4)
126720 (MSS x 44 * scale factor of 2)
63360 (MSS x 44)
bandwidth * delay product:

Your RcvWindow limits you to: 700.8 kbps (87.6 KBytes/s) @ 200ms
Your RcvWindow limits you to: 280.32 kbps (35.04 KBytes/s) @ 500ms
Consider increasing your RWIN value to optimize TCP/IP for broadband.
MTU Discovery (RFC1191) = ON
Time to live left = 52 hops

TTL value is ok.
Timestamps (RFC1323) = OFF
Selective Acknowledgements (RFC2018) = ON
IP type of service field (RFC1349) = 00000000

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:42 pm

With MTU 1430 I get and undoing the changes:

Downstream 477 Kbps (59.6 KB/sec) 515 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 247 Kbps (30.9 KB/sec) 266 Kbps (inc. overheads)

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:55 pm

Sorry my mistake, change the following:

GlobalMaxTcpWindowSize = 17280 or 31680
TcpWindowSize = 17280 or 31680

Try both of those values and see what works the best.

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 1:30 pm

Tried both values but ...

(this is the higher one)
Downstream 429 Kbps (53.6 KB/sec) 463 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 162 Kbps (20.3 KB/sec) 174 Kbps (inc. overheads)

mnosteele52 · Post by **mnosteele52** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:29 pm

The difference you are showing is negligible, I would suggest leaving the settings with the larger value and using them for a few days and see what you think.

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 03, 2003 5:20 pm

hmnnnn ....

With the new Cablenut changes:
Downstream 429 Kbps (53.6 KB/sec) 463 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 162 Kbps (20.3 KB/sec) 174 Kbps (inc. overheads)

Without Cablenut changes:
Downstream 477 Kbps (59.6 KB/sec) 515 Kbps (inc. overheads)
Upstream 247 Kbps (30.9 KB/sec) 266 Kbps (inc. overheads)

Upload difference seems quite large to me. Must be missing something but may give it a go.

p.s. Pipex (ISP) ASDL dial-up uses ISDN 64k digital with the 1394 Network Adapter. The 1394 Adaptor I assume is associated with the OCHI Compliant IEE 1394 Host Controller. Been wondering whether this means I got a Network Controller and that a tweak (http://www.winguides.com) I've seen for activitating it in XP would be good idea. Tried the system.ini IRQ tweak on USB and then the Controller but doesn't seem to make a difference.

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 12:44 pm

The explanation why MTU of 1430 is better in the UK is given at:

http://www.pengbo.dsl.pipex.com/ppages/tweaks.shtml

there is a link to it on:

http://www.adslguide.org.uk

Andrzej · Post by **Andrzej** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 3:17 pm

on May 2003 was similar discusion
welz400 Location: Leeds, UK also Pipex ISP
thread MTU in UK...clarification?
MTU in UK...clarification? (https://www.speedguide.net/forums/ ... did=115188) link
unfortunately due to SG server failure most of posts
(whole week) dissapeared...

but if you need

1. USB connection to modem|router is NOT recomended method
for tweaking TCP/IP
NIC is strongly recomended.

2. MTU settings in registry for UK pipex.net
should be MTU=1458 see below
MTU Adjustment for Optimal DSL Performance
http://www.adslguide.org.uk/guide/mtu.asp
BT Wholesale recommend an MTU (Maximum Transmission Unit)
setting of 1458
IMVHO reduction of MTU (& similar tales)
is NOT the methode of tweaking hehehe

3. yours The explanation why MTU of 1430 is better in the UK is given at:
http://www.pengbo.dsl.pipex.com/ppages/tweaks.shtml
there is a link to it on: http://www.adslguide.org.uk link

thank you for both links
in first link authore
compare: speed results win2k+NIC with diferent settings
note NIC connected (Network Internal Card) not USB connection
> default win2k settings
> MTU=1458; MSS=1418; RWIN=12762 (is 9*MSS) = BT settings
> MTU=1430; MSS=1390; RWIN=13900 (is 10*MSS) = THE link settings
:2cool: explanation above results are simple:
default 2k - too big MTU must be fragmented hehehe
better results with biger RWIN 13900(10*MSS) > 12762(is 9*MSS) - OK

so ask the authore of mentioned firs link
http://www.pengbo.dsl.pipex.com/ppages/tweaks.shtml
1. why compare speeds with "reduced" RWIN in 1458mtu (9*MSS)?
2. why compare speeds with "biger" RWIN in 1430mtu (10*MSS)?
3. is it possible to have better results with both MTU?
4. latency during measurements?

ask also welz400 Location: Leeds, UK also Pipex ISP
my advice - do not ask him about Leeds United hehehe

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Fri Jun 06, 2003 7:41 pm

Ta. Tried MTU 1458 previously with a variety of settings and speed was reduced so will probably be sticking to 1430 for the mo.

Use of a router may help I heard (increase by 10ms) so may give it a try but not sure whether need to change my connection with pipex though. An upgrade to a better processor is also on the cards as the game I play is processor intensive and I'll be able to use AGPX8 for the Radeon card I have. Would a network adapter card help and if so are there any implications I need to consider?

p.s. I'm a newbee in this area.

Andrzej · Post by **Andrzej** » Sat Jun 07, 2003 5:04 am

yours: ...Use of a router may help I heard (increase by 10ms)
dissagree - routers can slow down connections !
my router add to ping 1-2ms (exelent result)
sugested by you ...10ms... add to your ping - NOT a good router

RE : routers
"are ONLY" for internet connection sharing (also security reason)
if you have 2 or more PCs to the same internet access (WAN);
local net (LAN);
or need access (stockets) in diferent rooms (wired vs wireless)

RE : hdw upg for gaiming - none simple answer...
In internet connections the most important is ISP plan (service)
CAPS = dwl / upl (both kbps)

OTOH : compartion: CAPS vs SpeedTest results
IMVHO hierarchy of importance is as follow:
>>PC avialable free resources (depends on CPU up to 500MHz)
>>OS w2k>wxp
>>swichOFF not neccessary prgs - apparent & hiden activity
(particulary: VoIP; Kaza; Communicators; Chats; OLVideo; ect)
it means reduction quantities of ikons on:
-SystemTry = close to clock
-TaskBar = The Lowest Stripe
>>RAM (to 512MB)
>>fastHDD (to 8MBcache)
>>router (eg add Ping; VNP can reduced) - see for recomendations
>>TCP/IP tweaking (w2k; wxp but for 95;98;SE;ME is more important)

BTW & OTOH :

LOBO had become sceptical for both:
tweaking & speed tests but also for advices

IMVHO not such important - mean vvvvv.similar
>>NeworkCard (NIC>>PCMCIA {bit 32>>>16}) - see for recomendations
(but USB; COM - strongly not recomended)
>>modem

Andrzej · Post by **Andrzej** » Sun Jun 08, 2003 4:48 am

RE : hdw upg:
Corvette easier upg for race than track or Trabant (DDR car)

pay attention - still nothing about your grafic card

RE : NIC card
my meaning similar in importance in speed test results
NOT mean the same: RR; Merc; BMW

OldStoneCat SG net GURU
explained some cheap categores net devices as a one year devices
for one year use (if is it possible, at all - hehehe) & NEVER again.

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Mon Jun 09, 2003 5:36 pm

DrayTek Vigor 2200USB Review

Response Times and Connection Speed
The Vigor2200USB improved response times by about 10ms (from 30/40ms to 20/30ms) to my ISPs network. Connection speed was not affected and file downloads continued to run at 60KB/s downstream, 28 to 30KB/s upstream

[url]http://www.adslguide.org.uk/hardw ... 200usb.asp[/url]

Not sure what the bloke is saying and the review is a bit old (2001) i.e., would ping be better though upload/download capacity the same?

p.s. Plain english would help as not a techno bod in this field.

Andrzej · Post by **Andrzej** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 4:11 pm

Thank you for your above link
Vigor2200USB Router for ADSL USB Modems
UK; L179.00 (excluding delivery and VAT) – DrayTek Vigor2200USB
...Compatible with ADSL & RADSL lines at up to 512kb/s Downstream
10/100BaseT Autosensing 4-Port Ethernet Switch for your LAN
Host USB port for direct connection to USB ADSL modem
Compatible with the ADSL USB modems shown...

Review http://www.adslguide.org.uk/hardware/re ... 200usb.asp by Jeremy Ainsworth
..The product will be on the market October 5th 2001...

had written before item was on market
it will be interesting read opinions from users (more than one year experience)

in the same place also:
Specyfication: http://www.draytek.co.uk/products/vigor2200usb.html Provider (ISP) Compatibility
...The Vigor2200USB has been tested with and is compatible with the following Internet Service Providers.
It should also be compatible with most other ISPs who use BT Ignite
as the ADSL line provider, on regular 512Kb ADSL
and also RADSL (Rate Adaptive) lines in the UK, excluding AOL : ...

FAQ http://www.adslguide.org.uk/qanda.asp?f ... dware#Q157 DrayTek Vigor 2000 Series
(Places to buy; How to setup)

BTW on paralel FORUM you can read
:2cool: Posted by YeOldeStonecat on 06-07-03 04:52 PM: USB NIC vs PCI NIC
USB vs NIC https://www.speedguide.net/forums/ ... did=116067 thread
...For hardcore gamers who insist on the lowest ping and the best performance,
a quality PCI NIC with good hardware controllers onboard,
such as a 3COM or Intel, can't beat those...

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Tue Jun 10, 2003 5:20 pm

ta for the links.

Andrzej · Post by **Andrzej** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:58 am

so continued, follow your sugestion ...without tech. details...
from your link DrayTek Vigor2200USB
Review http://www.adslguide.org.uk/hardware/re ... 200usb.asp by Jeremy Ainsworth
had written before item was on market (...will be on the market October 5th 2001...)
below as THE link
...Response Times and Connection Speed
The Vigor2200USB improved response times
by about 10ms (from 30/40ms to 20/30ms) to my ISPs network.
Connection speed was not affected
and file downloads continued to run
at 60KB/s downstream, 28 to 30KB/s upstream...

follow YeOldeStonecat tread USB NIC vs PCI NIC
such result ...Vigor2200USB improved response times
by about 10ms (from 30/40ms to 20/30ms)...
agree - can possible BUT with weak PC (CPU << P4)
when resources had been eaten by USB modem - no data on the link
& router free CPU from an oppressor (USBmodem) hehehe
but also can depends on win OperatingSystem - no data on the link
such effects are NOT important with:
1. CPU~P4 or more - YeOldeStonecat thesis (mentioned thread)
2. PCI NIC - but only if you rrrrr.realy need read about good NICs... a few items
review http://www6.tomshardware.com/network/20 ... index.html We Take The Lid Off NICs
From 3Com, Intel And SMC - TOO sofisticated items (too many options)
- ask for recomendations

OTOH see above in YOUR thead: comparsion: CAPS vs SpeedTest results
CAPS vs results https://www.speedguide.net/forums/ ... ost1028568 link
so had been written P2 ~ CPU > 500MHz - edge with NIC modem
but YeOldeStonecat was written P4 ~ CPU ~1000MHz - edge with USB modem

BTW

OUR SGTweakingForum advaces' targets are:
:2cool: reach internet connection: stable (firm); minimum 90% CAPS
(optimum goal... even more... {a few have even more than CAPS hehehe})
compare to CAPS(download/upload) were sold as 100%
from the link...file downloads continued to run
at 60KB/s downstream, 28 to 30KB/s upstream...
so CAPS vs speed explained as "the best results" in the link are ONLY acceptable
in SGTweakingF criteria
I guess CAPS in the link: dwl 512kbps (64KB/s) & 256 kbps (32KB/s)
dwl:60KB/s = 480kbps (93.75% dwl)
upl: 30-28KB/s = 240-224kbps (93.75-87.5% upl)

...choices are yours...

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:32 pm

Link contains batch file code for turning off 'unnecessary' services:

http://www.overclockersclub.com/windowsxpservices.shtml

Quick test indicated no difference in ping/speed.

anonusr · Post by **anonusr** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:33 pm

Removing QoS seemed to help but had to remove it from multiple places until I did got xp hanging when I disabled it.

Andrzej · Post by **Andrzej** » Thu Jun 12, 2003 11:54 am

if you need...
start-up problems links
http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_content.htm HOW CAN I DISABLE
THEM FROM RUNNING AT START-UP?
http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_pa ... p_full.htm Start-Up Applications
Last update 30th May, 2003 2735 items listed
http://www.answersthatwork.com/Tasklist ... sklist.htm TASK LIST PROGRAMS
http://www.aumha.org/a/loads.php STARTUP PROGRAM LOADING
Last updated June 8, 2003 (Version 3.3)
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treevi ... l_dxth.asp System Configuration Utility wXP