RE: Iperf Issues.
Never had anything along those lines occur in my environment. I've had Iperf on Win2k Pro or Server, with SP1, SP2, SP3, and SP4 at different times during the testing and rollout of Iperf in that environment. Unless by some fluke I missed one, I pretty sure I tested from each workstation/server to each workstation/server, and no hitches that weren't related to bad/cruddy NIC or a duplexing issue... Once those were eliminated, no hitches...
Sorry this isn't the most helpful thing, but it is my experience...
Andy Ogan
K-12 Data Center
Madison, South Dakota
-----Original Message-----
From: Mitch Kutzko [mailto:mitch --at-- ncsa.uiuc.edu]
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 8:10 AM
To: Iperf Users
Subject: Iperf Issues.
>From: Craig Marshall <Craig.Marshall --at-- ospreynet.co.uk>
>To: "'dast --at-- nlanr.net'" <dast --at-- nlanr.net>
>Subject: Iperf Issues.
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:23:57 +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>X-MD5SUM: 7a42425cf2a28bfa729ec9da270e5006
>
>Can you tell me if there are any issues with using IPERF on different
>Service Pack levels of Windows 2000?
>
>I have 2 Servers which I am testing a Gigabit Ethernet switch. One server is
>Running service Pack 2, and one is running Service Pack 3.
>
>I run the IPERF server on the SP2 box with the following command: iperf -s
>-u -i 1
>Then run the client from the SP3 box with the following command: iperf -c
><ip address> -b 1000m -w 128k
>The bandwidth that is reported as around 50MB
>
>When I run the test the opposite way around (with the SP3 box as the server)
>the bandwidth is reported as upwards of 200MB.
>
>I'm running IPERF v 1.7.0
>
>Thanks
>
>Craig Marshall
>Osprey Network & Communications
>Suit 4, Tower House
>High Street
>Aylesbury
>Buckinghamshire
>HP20 1SQ
>Tel: +44 7880746645
>Email craig.marshall --at-- ospreynet.co.uk
--
Mitch Kutzko | mitch --at-- dast.nlanr.net | mitch --at-- ncsa.uiuc.edu | 217-333-1199
http://hobbes.ncsa.uiuc.edu/